With the demi-god criteria of needing an attribute to challenge those above it all gets a bit illogical IMO. I can’t see how you can apply that sort of analysis consistently, and surely it’s heavily weighted towards specialist players. I mean if a player could pass significantly better than Matthaus they should be in the demi-god tier, despite Rijkaard being a better player overall but not moving up. Seems a really strange way of assessing them.
I somewhat agree with this and indeed didn't go about applying it consistently but specifically when faced with tough calls. Bear in mind though it wasn't about "can pass better" but whether they have playing styles/an attribute mix which may be a better fit if building a team. I didn't talk about tackling or passing but more general terms like box-to-box and football brain. If the team is setup in a way that it primarily requires a superb box to box I would pick Breitner, if more creativity is needed without significantly sacrificing defensive bite Neeskens. I didn't see the scenario where a team of all-time greats would require Rijkaard ahead of Matthaus. He does have the advantage that when you see Rijkaard you know exactly what he is meant to be doing, while with Matthaus you wonder which version it is meant to be but that's a consideration for fantasy teamsheets, not rankings.
It is indeed a very fine line and it is important to realise I don't look at it as "one tier or two tiers above" implying a significant difference. I primarily used the demi-god tier as a transitional category not that much an indication of clear distance between them and the greats or incredibly large differentials between those and the gods (let alone comparing quality/impact across positions in a tier, some positions are better stocked than others).
what does Iniesta do that is better than Platini that makes a case for challenging him? What does Baggio do better than Zico?
In that case it wasn't about doing something better, but primarily being evident backups who were better suited as backups than the greats. Think of the Gods as the Kings of a position and the demi-gods as the more likely princes ahead of the greats, it was only in the tight calls (too many potential princes) that the other criteria came into it.
Mind you, it starts sounding incredibly scientific, when in practice it was more a gut-based exercise and some criteria being defined when the gut felt wonky.
Or Henry do better than Ronaldo? On the other hand Keane can tackle far better than Xavi so applying that logic he should be in the demi-god tier
These and Iniesta you are not comparing relative to the ones I did. To me Iniesta was Zidanes understudy, not Platini's (who was more complete and I already indicated I rate higher than either but you can't keep creating tiers for such marginal/subjective differences). Keane challenges Breitner who challenges Matthaus. Xavi is a different type of player, even if a midfielder, Falcao falls under the Xavi playmaking bracket and Neeskens too somewhat shared with Matthaus on the defensive side (precisely the reason he is there). Henry was more relative to a Ronaldinho, not Fat Ronaldo.
The rationale for Keegan was also linked to this. Look at the forwards in the gods tier, now consider you want to partner them with someone else upfront. Some of those partnerships look decidedly weird/clashing/too similar. Zico and his understudy Baggio certainly look like the more complementary/tasty potential partners for most, but Keegan offers a potential partner with significant merits (that very "workhorse" side) that the others simply don't possess, while Dalglish looks like a watered down version of other more classy partners.
Bit whimsical/convoluted I know, but there were two other factors at play: 1. success abroad, a rare commodity for a British footballer, I can count them with the fingers in one hand, 2. the Newcastle link, which I agree with, Geordies and Scousers represented in one go and then you look at the other Geordie and Keegan belongs higher up as well.
Just explaining, it's obviously a matter of opinion and I agree it may well not be shared, which is why I labeled it "My take on it"!
With Rijkaard I don’t think you’ll find any Dutchies who think he’s in the same bracket as Davids instead of Neeskens. There would be nothing between him and Neeskens, whilst he was clearly better than Davids.
That was very clear to me, which is why it was a tough call to demote Rijkaard. If I had gone for the further Very Good Tier as in the op then Davids would have dropped there clearly, but it all becomes even more controversial for every single other position!
I think there is a tendency in these things to under-rank defensive players compared to forwards.
Agree, the fact I start the fullback hierarchy at demi-god is quite telling in itself
You are overlooking the list at the bottom where I list Nasazzi, Da Guia and Figueroa as demi-gods, so there's quite a few CBs there. Passarella himself agreed he was inferior to Figueroa so I'm not going to argue with him. I really rate Nesta, but with Baresi and Maldini setting the pace of great Milan defenders he looked more a great than Maldini-level to me.
Do notice how very few CBs I left in the great tier though, he is effectively alongside Passarella, Rio, Charles and Koeman. I specifically cut Cannavaro off because he didn't belong at the same level. Maybe I should have done the same with Davids
I have to say though, it says something about the weight of your arguments that you've homed in on almost all the cases which were tough calls and thus required some more thinking, which is why it sounds like so much thinking went into it all when it was primarily these few cases that merited it
