So where is Modric rated in best CM’s of all time ?

The original post has it all wrong when asking how good Modric was, then mentioning everything he has won as part of a collective team in a team sport.

Then you have so many posters saying Modric is arguably the best CM ever, based mainly on the stuff he has won at Madrid.

Marcelo, Casemiro, Bale, Carvajal, Benzema all wonthe same amount of club trophies as him at Madrid. Whilst Varane and Kroos also have the same club trophies at Madrid but also have a World Cup trophy as well. Not to mention everything Ramos won at Madrid then also winning 2 European Cups and a World Cup with Spain.

Football is a team sport and Madrid winning 4 CL trophies in that incredible run was due to so many top players peaking at the same time, whilst also having Ronaldo in the team, who is one of the top 5 greatest players of all time, which clearly helps massively.

To conclude, people are over rating Modric based on accolades.
 
I've always said Xavi's the best I've ever seen, but Modric is up there now. Xavi's vision is still unmatched, but Modric is the more complete player. His resume is insane as well. What a player.
 
Talking about Modric and Xavi

Someone said Xavi needed a system(tiki-taka) to support his talent or someone says he was a one dimensional player. I would say yes and he needed some excellent players who really had great football iq and really knew about movements and intelligence of the game. However, when he had all of those components that can maximize his strengths or team built around him and used him in a proper way. The result was he was the most dominant central midfielder that I've ever seen in my life, when platform was perfect to him he could control the game and possession like no one else have ever done before. Not only Xavi played well the rest of them were elevated by Xavi's performances and skills. Barcelona and Spain during 2008-2012 represented my words.

Modric, Luka is a different breed for me, he has some similar traits to Xavi. On the other hand, he has some different traits too. Some specialist skills Xavi was better and some Modric is better. Modric is better than Xavi in term of adaptable in any tactics and manager. You could put him easily on an offensive minded team and he will show his abilities, on the other hand, you could put him on defensive minded team and he will probably play well too. He could adapt to manager that has offensive-minded or defensive minded depends on what do you want. Both have similar one thing that both play best in 4-3-3 system, although Modric played well in 4-2-3-1 during world cup 2018 or a lot of matches with 4-4-2 in Spurs, on Xavi side, he played well during Euro 2008 in 4-4-2 or 3-4-3 during Guardiola's system. Modric probably has a better longevity at highest level than Xavi too and he probably has a bit better complete skillsets than Xavi too. However, when both have the best systems that could support both to highest levels performances as could as they can, I choose Xavi as a better person in this department. He was a more dominant player that could control the game in his hand. In term of peak, I think it's not far, it's probably close called but if I choose I still choose peak Xavi over peak Modric although Modric got a Ballon d'Or 2018 . In term of their skillsets , Modric is more complete skillsets than Xavi but Xavi despite being less complete he still had better skillsets than Modric, despite being less complete.

I would say that both play in the right teams, systems and time. Xavi was probably a better fit for Guardiola's Barcelona for sure and Modric for me is a better fit for Madrid's system for sure. Madrid's system is different from Barcelona as they have played more counter-attacking football, more direct, more transition game by using wingers on both side to do a great counter-attack ( Anchelloti and Zidane like this way of playing when they faced big-teams in Uefa Champions League), lower defensive line and less depending on system and focus more on adaptable on opponents ( Zidane's is great in this department) and Modric is more appropriate player for Madrid and their different styles of playing from both teams have represent their different characteristics and characters between Xavi and Modirc too.

For me, I would choose Xavi as a better player and career than Modric. Although, it's not that far probably very close. I feel like he was a more dominant player on the pitch and could control the game in his own hand like no other central midfielders have done before. On compare Xavi with Matthaus or Rijkaard are different stories and circumstances and if we want to compare, it will be in another way of comparing.

The last one about Modric vs Xavi is peak Xavi is more consistent in league system than peak Modric too. That's similar to their team characteristics that Xavi's Barcelona was more consistent and better in league system due to their solid systems but Modric's Madrid is better adaptable team and has performed very solid in Champions League (2014-present).

146517283.0.jpg
 
Last edited:
Wish we had gotten him and Berbatov from Spurs in a double package. What a player. Was it @Ekeke on the Caf that was absolutely obsessed with Modric (or was it Carrick?) at that point of time? I can’t really remember but we should have believed the poster
 
Modric has a wider skillset than Xavi and I also like his style better but I'd rate them at more or less the same the level on their peak because Xavi was indeed on of the most dominant midfielders ever.
 
My ranking would go something like this, bearing in mind I’m classifying him as a genuine central midfielder (defensive/box to box) rather than an attacking midfielder/10 (and so excluding the likes of zidane, iniesta, zico, Platini etc from this list).

Tier 1
matthaeus
riijkaard
bozsik
didi
falcao

Tier 2
xavi
neeskens
ocwirk
van hanegem
masopust

Tier 3
breitner
luis monti
modric
coluna
tardelli
 
A superb player, improved throughout his career, and I always love a CM who can run with the ball, just elevates that player. I was talking to an Arsenal fan today and they said that Modric was the player that Tomas Rosicky should have been if he had had avoided injuries.

That Madrid team that won the 4 CL has to be the most stacked teams ever. Kroos, Casemiro, Modric, Ronaldo, Benzema, Pepe, Marcelo Ramos and Bale, all at their peak together, crazy stuff.
 
It’s hard to quantify a ranking amongst midfielders. You’ve got defensive midfielders, creative midfielders, all action etc

I like the debate regarding Xavi vs Modric, if I had to build a side for why decade or If had to choose one to have for 10 years+, I’d take Modric, he is more flexible and can adapt to different systems.
 
It’s hard to quantify a ranking amongst midfielders. You’ve got defensive midfielders, creative midfielders, all action etc

I like the debate regarding Xavi vs Modric, if I had to build a side for why decade or If had to choose one to have for 10 years+, I’d take Modric, he is more flexible and can adapt to different systems.

Not really. He's always played for countering attacking teams, Spurs, Madrid and even Croatia are largely teams that play on the counter. I don't know where this he can adapt to any system actually comes from especially since at RM he's largely shined under Carlo and Zidane who play very similar style. not to mention he was wide regarded a flop under Mou system in his first season at Madrid.

Xavi himself played different roles in midfield, under Aragones he played an advance midfield role and that Spain side in 2008 was much more direct. Under Pep he played as deep lying/CM, del Bosque played him as 10 at times, Busquets/Alonso played as double pivots with Xavi playing behind David Villa largely at the WC10.

I think many here are really sleeping on how good Xavi was, he was much more adoptable then people give him credit for. Xavi would be the CM I would choose every time regardless of style.
 
Who was the manager who played him at left back at Spurs ?
Must be the worst manager of all times.
 
Not really. He's always played for countering attacking teams, Spurs, Madrid and even Croatia are largely teams that play on the counter. I don't know where this he can adapt to any system actually comes from especially since at RM he's largely shined under Carlo and Zidane who play very similar style. not to mention he was wide regarded a flop under Mou system in his first season at Madrid.

There is a huge difference between being a counterattacking team and being a team that can play on the counter. Real Madrid were the second type but extremely flexible on their approach because they counted on players and managers to adapt to many sorts of circumstances.

For instance the style of Madrid under Ancelotti in his first season is more associated to quick transitions, the second one was tending to the pause with a lineup typically counting on Kroos, Modric, James, Isco in midfield and Benzema and Ronaldo upfront in many games and played extremely pleasant to the eye football until Modric got injured. Madrid's Zidane in his first half season relied on the defensive performance and hammering qualities of the BBC (when available) but the one in his second season tended more to the pause with a diamond midfield and Isco playing on the hole in the most important games.

Regarding what you said about managers and styles if someone really wants to have quick look at styles between different periods and not spend too much time, a shortcut would be to watch Real Madrid-Atletico in Copa in 2013-14, Real Madrid-Borussia Dortmund in 2013-14, Liverpool-Madrid in 2014-15, Real Madrid-Villarreal in 2015-16 and Real Madrid Juventus in 2016-17.
 
Not really. He's always played for countering attacking teams, Spurs, Madrid and even Croatia are largely teams that play on the counter. I don't know where this he can adapt to any system actually comes from especially since at RM he's largely shined under Carlo and Zidane who play very similar style. not to mention he was wide regarded a flop under Mou system in his first season at Madrid.

Xavi himself played different roles in midfield, under Aragones he played an advance midfield role and that Spain side in 2008 was much more direct. Under Pep he played as deep lying/CM, del Bosque played him as 10 at times, Busquets/Alonso played as double pivots with Xavi playing behind David Villa largely at the WC10.

I think many here are really sleeping on how good Xavi was, he was much more adoptable then people give him credit for. Xavi would be the CM I would choose every time regardless of style.
I think that is the issue with most of the Barcelona players. They were versatile but in their system and never really got tested in any other. All three Xavi, Iniesta and Messi played in multiple roles which were different than the ones they had in their earlier career, middle career and so on. Xavi was outstanding under Rijkaard until he got injured, but people will pick one line from Xavi's interview and forget about his performances under Rijkaard, when he won the best Spanish player of the year. Iniesta had two very different roles in Spain and Barcelona, but since the style was possession based, people thought both are similar and anybody can do it. People thought every side pass merchant can do the job Xavi and Iniesta do. Even Iniesta couldn't replace what Xavi did in the midfield. Fabregas who was regarded as god's gift, the best midfielder in the world by Arsenal fans and English pundit, looked like Fred when he was in Barcelona, unfit in the middle so he had to be moved ahead as false striker or advance midfielder bullshit, whatever they did with him at Barcelona and than shipped him, as they found out he is not the one to succeed as Xavi's successor.
 
Modric is better tackler, better dribler, better drive with the ball then Xavi. Passing is probably equal.
Xavi was a better creator and during his peak a tad bigger(just a tad) bigger goal threat than Modric from central midfield though while still playing the midfield general role. And the difference in the number of assists is simply huge. And it is not like Xavi played with Messi can be an argument, given who was with Modric. So Xavi wasn't just the metronome but also a fair creator. On another level compared with other CMs of his time, apart from Pirlo who was equally prolific in his peak.
 
I think that is the issue with most of the Barcelona players. They were versatile but in their system and never really got tested in any other. All three Xavi, Iniesta and Messi played in multiple roles which were different than the ones they had in their earlier career, middle career and so on. Xavi was outstanding under Rijkaard until he got injured, but people will pick one line from Xavi's interview and forget about his performances under Rijkaard, when he won the best Spanish player of the year. Iniesta had two very different roles in Spain and Barcelona, but since the style was possession based, people thought both are similar and anybody can do it. People thought every side pass merchant can do the job Xavi and Iniesta do. Even Iniesta couldn't replace what Xavi did in the midfield. Fabregas who was regarded as god's gift, the best midfielder in the world by Arsenal fans and English pundit, looked like Fred when he was in Barcelona, unfit in the middle so he had to be moved ahead as false striker or advance midfielder bullshit, whatever they did with him at Barcelona and than shipped him, as they found out he is not the one to succeed as Xavi's successor.
Pre2008 Xavi was not even "best La Liga player" tier, let alone "best player in the world" tier. And La Liga at the time wasn't very good, unlike his latter years where Liga had become by far the most dominant league thanks to the likes of him, Messi, Ronnie, Modric, Simeone's minions etc.
 
Having watched the game again, honestly he was pretty mediocre in the first half. And even in the second until the subs. Only really started putting his stamp on the game once he moved up in a more typical CAM role, behind Benzema. Was awesome in the last 30 minutes, took over the game physically, technically and mentally. He was 1 second ahead of everyone else, to the point he was even telling people what to do :lol:
 
Last edited:
Modric is easier on the eye but Xavi was generally better and more dominant. Even when Modric won the Balon Dor there were so many who complained that he wasn't even that good etc. Madrid have never been dominant domestically because they have a lot of great players who turn it on different moments. Which works in the CL but none of those players consistently dominate whereas collectively they get the job done. Even in the CL while Madrid had the best midfield they often struggled to control games bur their sheer quality across the team and on the bench would get them through ties rather than a midfield which was just considerably better than any other.

So yeah, if I want to be entertained then Modric but if I want to build the best team then clearly Xavi (Or Iniesta but he's never different).
 
There is a huge difference between being a counterattacking team and being a team that can play on the counter. Real Madrid were the second type but extremely flexible on their approach because they counted on players and managers to adapt to many sorts of circumstances.

For instance the style of Madrid under Ancelotti in his first season is more associated to quick transitions, the second one was tending to the pause with a lineup typically counting on Kroos, Modric, James, Isco in midfield and Benzema and Ronaldo upfront in many games and played extremely pleasant to the eye football until Modric got injured. Madrid's Zidane in his first half season relied on the defensive performance and hammering qualities of the BBC (when available) but the one in his second season tended more to the pause with a diamond midfield and Isco playing on the hole in the most important games.

Regarding what you said about managers and styles if someone really wants to have quick look at styles between different periods and not spend too much time, a shortcut would be to watch Real Madrid-Atletico in Copa in 2013-14, Real Madrid-Borussia Dortmund in 2013-14, Liverpool-Madrid in 2014-15, Real Madrid-Villarreal in 2015-16 and Real Madrid Juventus in 2016-17.

I don't disagree with you here perhaps I should've used the term more direct football rather than counter attacking, but that further questions other people take in Xavi not being more or as adaptable as Modric here? As I mention above Xavi played under different circumstance to, he played different roles and under various different set up. He largely played behind Torres at the Euros, where Spain would switch up different line-up formation sometimes a midfield 3, 4 or 5. Under del Bosque at the WC10 Alonso/Busi played as double pivot with Xavi in the centre of them, sometimes del Bosque would play a 4-3-3 other times he'd play 4-2-3-1, in various different roles. Under Pep he largely played as CM along side Busi, while Inesita was an advance midfielder. Aragones, del Bosque and Pep were different too in this regards they made various different changes and also reacted to different circumstances, where Xavi was made to adapt too.

For me Xavi is as adaptable as any other CM out there, but what differentiates him from other CM is that you could make him into a damn system, hence why I think myself many rate him as the greatest midfield for this reason.
 
Modric is easier on the eye but Xavi was generally better and more dominant. Even when Modric won the Balon Dor there were so many who complained that he wasn't even that good etc. Madrid have never been dominant domestically because they have a lot of great players who turn it on different moments. Which works in the CL but none of those players consistently dominate whereas collectively they get the job done. Even in the CL while Madrid had the best midfield they often struggled to control games bur their sheer quality across the team and on the bench would get them through ties rather than a midfield which was just considerably better than any other.

So yeah, if I want to be entertained then Modric but if I want to build the best team then clearly Xavi (Or Iniesta but he's never different).
Not true, Modric was as consistent as it gets, he didn't turn it on over moments, he was a constant.
Top 3 most important Madrid players in this era have been Ronnie, Modric and Ramos. Then there are the rest like Marcelo, Kroos etc.

If the league was the only barometer, we know that Pep has replicated the same dominance, if not more, with inferior midfielders at City and Bayern (relative to Xavi/Iniesta/Busquets). Yet even at his peak Barca, he always struggled immensely at away CL matches during KOs, a trend that has mostly continued since. I guess that's on Xavi too?

The answer is no, as it's mostly about the system and your style of play, it's not a one-man job. Xavi couldn't do the same at his own team(s) before Euro 2008, he sure as heck couldn't be put at Madrid and get even half the output, the other Madrid players wouldn't have been suited to his style either (in terms of positioning, making the same runs etc. to complement Xavi's play), unless a stubborn manager (Pep) came in and forced them to do so, and at the same time, sacrificed the other aspects that made the team special.
 
Not true, Modric was as consistent as it gets, he didn't turn it on over moments, he was a constant.
Top 3 most important Madrid players in this era have been Ronnie, Modric and Ramos. Then there are the rest like Marcelo, Kroos etc.

If the league was the only barometer, we know that Pep has replicated the same dominance, if not more, with inferior midfielders at City and Bayern (relative to Xavi/Iniesta/Busquets). Yet even at his peak Barca, he always struggled immensely at away CL matches during KOs, a trend that has mostly continued since. I guess that's on Xavi too?

The answer is no, as it's mostly about the system and your style of play, it's not a one-man job. Xavi couldn't do the same at his own team(s) before Euro 2008, he sure as heck couldn't be put at Madrid and get even half the output, the other Madrid players wouldn't have been suited to his style either (in terms of positioning, making the same runs etc. to complement Xavi's play), unless a stubborn manager (Pep) came in and forced them to do so, and at the same time, sacrificed the other aspects that made the team special.
I didn't say it was the only barometer. Xavi excelled at every level whether it be league, CL or international tournaments.
 
I didn't say it was the only barometer. Xavi excelled at every level whether it be league, CL or international tournaments.
Same goes for Modric though? And he has done it over a longer period.

The point was the importance of a system, the dominance (in terms of possession, and getting as many point in the league) wasn't only due to Xavi, every piece had to work for it, Pep has done it again and again with inferior players. It's not in the hands of a Xavi/Modric.
 
Not really. He's always played for countering attacking teams, Spurs, Madrid and even Croatia are largely teams that play on the counter. I don't know where this he can adapt to any system actually comes from especially since at RM he's largely shined under Carlo and Zidane who play very similar style. not to mention he was wide regarded a flop under Mou system in his first season at Madrid.

Xavi himself played different roles in midfield, under Aragones he played an advance midfield role and that Spain side in 2008 was much more direct. Under Pep he played as deep lying/CM, del Bosque played him as 10 at times, Busquets/Alonso played as double pivots with Xavi playing behind David Villa largely at the WC10.

I think many here are really sleeping on how good Xavi was, he was much more adoptable then people give him credit for. Xavi would be the CM I would choose every time regardless of style.
Madrid dominated most games in the 2014-2017 era, they weren’t just a counter attacking team.
 
Think it is very hard to compare since the role of midfielders has changed so much in the past 10-15 years or so. I find it hard to compare somebody like Xavi or Modric with, say, Matthäus. So Modric is as good as it gets for me. It is really hard to rank him, Iniesta and Xavi but these three are definitely the stand out midfielders in the past 15 years.
 


Never seen this match before but around 20 years old against a very good arsenal team. He looks a ridiculous talent then obviously onto spurs but I just don't understand how other top teams weren't on to him then


Think @sherrinford mentioned it one other thread. His performance level hasn't actually dropped throughout the years or it stayed pretty much the same (meaning ridiculously high) from the age of 20.
He struggled just a bit with adaptation in few first months with Spurs and Madrid and that's about it. This here is just an amazing performance against then still a brilliant Arsenal team as a huge underdog. Remember him also running rings against Argentina team at around the same age. It certainly has to be factor in judging him as a player compared to some others. Even if some players maybe had a higher peak, his consistency and overall body of work trumps them in the end (Schweinsteiger just for example).

Still think that as a creative CM, only Xavi goes ahead and would put him alongside Luis Suarez Miramontes. Xavi is that one case where his peak was just too high and longevity can't prevail in such a case imo.
 
Think it is very hard to compare since the role of midfielders has changed so much in the past 10-15 years or so. I find it hard to compare somebody like Xavi or Modric with, say, Matthäus. So Modric is as good as it gets for me. It is really hard to rank him, Iniesta and Xavi but these three are definitely the stand out midfielders in the past 15 years.

It's Modric better than Thiago? ;)
 
I remember when he left Tottenham, and some posters were saying its better not to sign him as he will flop.
 
Think @sherrinford mentioned it one other thread. His performance level hasn't actually dropped throughout the years or it stayed pretty much the same (meaning ridiculously high) from the age of 20.
He struggled just a bit with adaptation in few first months with Spurs and Madrid and that's about it. This here is just an amazing performance against then still a brilliant Arsenal team as a huge underdog. Remember him also running rings against Argentina team at around the same age. It certainly has to be factor in judging him as a player compared to some others. Even if some players maybe had a higher peak, his consistency and overall body of work trumps them in the end (Schweinsteiger just example).

Still think that as a creative CM, only Xavi goes ahead and would put him alongside Luis Suarez Miramontes. Xavi is that one case where his peak was just too high and longevity can't prevail in such a case imo.

Yeah, I feel like I watched the same elite player for Croatia, before signing for Spurs, that dominated at the highest level with Madrid.

Modric is the second best midfielder I have seen (with a player pool going back to the late 90s). His wonderful ability to conduct the play - so patient when necessary, progressive where possible and reasonable, and capable of evading the heaviest pressure or opening up a new angle for a pass with his ridiculous change of pace and direction while always maintaining his composure - is only surpassed by Xavi in my years of watching football. So positionally versatile too.

It changes, but at the time of writing I would probably have him in an all-(my)time eleven.
 
People talking in ‘Tiers’ is so childish. There are just players better than most players of their generation. He’s one of them.

Even allowing for that…. While Perfect for many teams, he’d be a waste of space in others.

This insane need to have an absolute list in an acceptance order is madness. Obviously some players are better than others, but the 100 best midfielders ever are in a totally different order in 100 different formations under 100 different managers.