Was Pele Overrated?

Zeki Zico

Full Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2013
Messages
388
It may sound absurd but hear me out. Let's look at it this way, before Neymar moved to Barcelona from Santos he was being heralded as being almost on the same level as Messi simply because he was tearing it up in the Brazilian league. Once he moved to the Nou Camp, although still being a very good player, he was not performing anywhere near the level he was while being at Santos.

The reason I bring that up is because you can see the difference European football presents. It's a lot more tougher to be a great player in Europe that it is in any other continent. Now as many of you probably know, Pele never played in Europe. He continued to stay where he felt most comfortable and that was Santos. Now if Neymar had done the same thing and carried on tearing it up would he be considered as one of the greats as Pele is?

Obviously the biggest factor in all this is the 3 World Cups that was won by Brazil which starred Pele. Now for me personally when it comes to the greatest players in the history of football, there's only 2 that sit at the very top of the pile and that would be Messi and Maradona, in no particular order. The reason being is because their natural talents was/is like nothing else I've ever seen, but also they were/are players who could win you a game simply by themselves due to a moment of magic. Maradona showed this when he won the World Cup with Argentina in 1986 and Messi has shown the same thing countless times while at Barca. Of course Pele winning 3 World Cups definitely makes him a great player, but you also have to understand that the Brazil team within that period was simply immense. Pele aside, they had some of the best players in the world at the time. Point I'm trying to make is that it would have been a lot easier to win a World Cup playing for that Brazil team at that time than any other Brazil team in history.

So to conclude I'm not disregarding Pele's legacy and everything he achieved. No doubt he is up there with the greats. But when it comes to the greatest players in history, I personally don't believe he ever had the same unique talents that Messi and Maradona possess/possessed.
 
I doubt anybody on here has seen enough of Pele actually playing (not youtube) to actually know. Maybe a few of us might have watched full world cup matches from that era (most likely Brwnd) but I'll be amazed if anybody has watched 1970s Brazilan state league.
 
How can you diminish Pele's achievements by the strength of his team and not Messi's? Messi has played in one of the greatest club sides in football history.
 
Every player has been overrated at some point by someone. Certainly the two big fishes Pele and Maradona.

Having said that during Pele's time there wasn't as much of a difference between the Brazilian Leagues and Top European Leagues. I have actually heard that the Brazilian League was better as they had many foreigners plying there trade over there. How many foreigners were playing in England 40-50 years ago? I could be wrong though.
 
Watch some footage of the 17-year-old Pele at the 1958 world cup.
 
Pele didn't need to play in Europe to prove himself at club level because he already played for the best club team on the planet. They trashed Benfica in Lisbon in the inter-continental cup and he scored a hat trick. It's different now and we can all accept that the European clubs are the top dogs.
 
No.

I didn't want to argue more about this, because it's pointless, but I simply can't resist the urge - you're saying that Pele isn't one of the greatest ever because he played with Rivellino, Didi etc? Nothing like Messi, who played with such sub-par players like Xavi and Iniesta? It's a bad point to try and judge about the player's level by his teammates.

His record against European teams (club/national) is also ridiculous
 
Couple of points, I'll disagree with you...

Zeki Zico said:
It may sound absurd but hear me out. Let's look at it this way, before Neymar moved to Barcelona from Santos he was being heralded as being almost on the same level as Messi simply because he was tearing it up in the Brazilian league. Once he moved to the Nou Camp, although still being a very good player, he was not performing anywhere near the level he was while being at Santos.

The reason I bring that up is because you can see the difference European football presents. It's a lot more tougher to be a great player in Europe that it is in any other continent. Now as many of you probably know, Pele never played in Europe. He continued to stay where he felt most comfortable and that was Santos. Now if Neymar had done the same thing and carried on tearing it up would he be considered as one of the greats as Pele is?

Obviously the biggest factor in all this is the 3 World Cups that was won by Brazil which starred Pele. Now for me personally when it comes to the greatest players in the history of football, there's only 2 that sit at the very top of the pile and that would be Messi and Maradona, in no particular order. The reason being is because their natural talents was/is like nothing else I've ever seen, but also they were/are players who could win you a game simply by themselves due to a moment of magic. Maradona showed this when he won the World Cup with Argentina in 1986 and Messi has shown the same thing countless times while at Barca. Of course Pele winning 3 World Cups definitely makes him a great player, but you also have to understand that the Brazil team within that period was simply immense. Pele aside, they had some of the best players in the world at the time. Point I'm trying to make is that it would have been a lot easier to win a World Cup playing for that Brazil team at that time than any other Brazil team in history.

So to conclude I'm not disregarding Pele's legacy and everything he achieved. No doubt he is up there with the greats. But when it comes to the greatest players in history, I personally don't believe he ever had the same unique talents that Messi and Maradona possess/possessed.
Click to expand...

1) At that time Brazilian league was as good as European league, if not better. They were the giants in football, so we can assume he was shining in a very good league.
2) As for staying in Santos, you've condemned most of 'one club' men. Is Giggs overrated because he stayed in his comfort zone at United?
3) As you say, the Brazil team was star studded. Being a talisman in such a team is far more difficult, surely? Pele did it in 3 different world cups with 3 different set of star players.
4) His own star team mates, legends from other countries he played against all have praised him. Surely a 'overrated' star would not have such universal acclaim?
 
Even if Pele wanted to go to Europe (he had no reason to), he wouldn't have been allowed to. The president declared him a national treasure that couldn't be exported.
 
next up: Michael Jordan. He had pippen and luc longley, man. Magic and bird had retired, he just took advantage. The East were useless.
 
Some points and counter points:

-To reaffirm what others have said, the Brazilian league was not weaker than top European leagues back then. If anything, his Santos team were considered the best club side in the world during some of his career.

-He didn't actually dominate or win 3 world cups by himself. He was young and not the best player in '58, and was injured during most of '62. '70 however was his crowning glory, just like Maradona and '86.

-Having said both these things, he is still overrated, as is Maradona. They're two of the best players to have played the game, but the view that they're thousands of miles ahead of anyone else in history is as much a product of marketing as of their quality.
 
Timdbro said:
They're two of the best players to have played the game, but the view that they're thousands of miles ahead of anyone else in history is as much a product of marketing as of their quality.
Click to expand...
17 years old, so young and bold....

 
How many people here were even alive to see his prime? I have seen a bunch of things to say his goal totals were a bit inflated(they counted goals he scored in friendlies/scrimmages etc) but, I remember seeing something on Sport Science that Pele in his prime would still be as fast as the fastest players in today's game.
 


Seriously, he was just so freaking good and some of the dribbles he executes makes you go :eek::eek::eek:
 
Keeps It tidy said:
How many people here were even alive to see his prime? I have seen a bunch of things to say his goal totals were a bit inflated(they counted goals he scored in friendlies/scrimmages etc) but, I remember seeing something on Sport Science that Pele in his prime would still be as fast as the fastest players in today's game.
Click to expand...

I saw him in 1966 when he scored a cracking free kick against Bulgaria. I saw him hobble off the pitch after being roughly handled by the Portuguese defenders at Goodison. I was a young lad and it made me sad to see him limp away. My dad was livid about it and he and my uncle went on about it all the was down the East Lancs Road. Pele in 1970 was unplayable in that side. I dunno about the 1000+ goals but the testimony of his contemporaries is pretty conclusive: Pele was the best there was.
 
1970 was his crowning glory and by then the world cup went out globally on TV. Ironically, of his 3 most memorable goal attempts in the tournament none of them went in. There was the shot from the half way line against Czechoslovakia (?), the Banks save, and the step over in the final against Italy.
 
Yes. But it's a generational thing, a bunch of YouTube clips and a bunch of great stories aren't going to cut it, some people told me he was a god,some told me he was just the golden boy popularised by the media and he was carried by his teammates in 3 world cups, I've watched documentaries,read books,seen highlights and i haven't witnessed the 'god' people talk about - I guess one man in short shorts running circles round defences which consist of old/average looking players in short shorts in a black and white or terribly coloured background doesn't have the same impact on me... Perhaps my grand kids will feel the same way when I'm telling them about/showing videos of the god that is Lionel Messi....I doubt it though.
 
I watched Pele in 1970 (yes, I'm that old), by which time he was already 30. He was simply incredible. It's always hard to say who was "the best" but it's not hard to conclude that Pele belongs in that elite few footballers who can be considered the best.

The combination of his speed, power, technique and vision was astonishing. I wish there was more footage of his play in 1958.

It's really down to Pele, Maradona and Messi for me (never saw Edwards) and right now I'd give the edge to Messi, but let's see what he can do when he's 30.

Winning the World Cup has never been the decisive factor (team game, etc.) but the fact that Pele played a major role in winning two World Cups (58 and 70), was Brasil's best player in 1962 but was out with injury and was Brasil's best player in 1966. That's a run we've never seen from anyone else before or since.
 
I am not impressed by some of the videos posted of him in this thread. He looks incredibly average and I am not really surprised by that because current footballing athlete has evolved since his time. I am honestly not even impressed by most footballers that played when we only had two colors on the t.v, just for the fact that the footballing standard now is more tasking, tactical and challenging.
 
@Zeki Zico
So to conclude I'm not disregarding Pele's legacy and everything he achieved. No doubt he is up there with the greats. But when it comes to the greatest players in history, I personally don't believe he ever had the same unique talents that Messi and Maradona possess/possessed.

You can't say that at the end when what you did in the entire essay is exactly that. You can't know for sure if you didn't watch the guy. He's still one of two players to ever score a hattrick in a world cup final and he did it at 17. You're totally, totally biased with the Messi comparison. You say Pele played with great Brazilian teams...hasn't Messi been playing with great Barcelona teams in a league totally manipulated by them and Real Madrid? Would Messi have scored as many career goals in England or even Italy where defending is better?
 
Gannicus said:
I watched Pele in 1970 (yes, I'm that old), by which time he was already 30. He was simply incredible. It's always hard to say who was "the best" but it's not hard to conclude that Pele belongs in that elite few footballers who can be considered the best.

The combination of his speed, power, technique and vision was astonishing. I wish there was more footage of his play in 1958.

It's really down to Pele, Maradona and Messi for me (never saw Edwards) and right now I'd give the edge to Messi, but let's see what he can do when he's 30.

Winning the World Cup has never been the decisive factor (team game, etc.) but the fact that Pele played a major role in winning two World Cups (58 and 70), was Brasil's best player in 1962 but was out with injury and was Brasil's best player in 1966. That's a run we've never seen from anyone else before or since.
Click to expand...

Good post, but I don't understand why you brought Edwards into this.
 
I'm sorry but if you didn't actually witness Pele play and you're basically describing him as the second coming off Highlights and legendary stories then you're overrating him.
 
Nope, best player ever. Zagallo said when ronaldo(the freakish phenomenon) came up he knew he was going to be a great player, not pele, but a great player nontheless. That in truth should tell you all you need to know if you had seen that lad play football.

Watch pele goals and you'll see something different in him. He's more unpredictable than todays stars, he's ambidextrous, he can shoot for fun, and he's a great athlete. Very good technically too, flicks balls over defenders for fun in the box(who does that today), creates as much as he scores. Basically a significantly better version of luis suarez.

You can't say messi is better cause pele had great teammates. Messi had eto'o, henry, busquets, xavi, villa, neymar, suarez all who'll go down as all time legends as teammates. Especially the midfield that decimated all before it, take that away from him you get the messi we see for argentina. Take brazil from pele, you get a player that'll make benfica's defence(euro champs at the time) look like chumps.

Football has never been about who's the most talented technically, its about who's the most effective and frankly, no one has come close to pele levels since then.
 
RooneyLegend said:
Nope, best player ever. Zagallo said when ronaldo(the freakish phenomenon) came up he knew he was going to be a great player, not pele, but a great player nontheless. That in truth should tell you all you need to know if you had seen that lad play football.

Watch pele goals and you'll see something different in him. He's more unpredictable than todays stars, he's ambidextrous, he can shoot for fun, and he's a great athlete. Very good technically too, flicks balls over defenders for fun in the box(who does that today), creates as much as he scores. Basically a significantly better version of luis suarez.

You can't say messi is better cause pele had great teammates. Messi had eto'o, henry, busquets, xavi, villa, neymar, suarez all who'll go down as all time legends as teammates. Especially the midfield that decimated all before it, take that away from him you get the messi we see for argentina. Take brazil from pele, you get a player that'll make benfica's defence(euro champs at the time) look like chumps.

Football has never been about who's the most talented technically, its about who's the most effective and frankly, no one has come close to pele levels since then.
Click to expand...

Same one that took them to the world cup final? same one that has more goals than Maradona ? same one that'll retire as their highest goal scorer?
 
I love a great Ronaldo Messi debate like the next 'yard, but when push comes to shove only one of them qualifies to be in the GOAT debate, and that is based on what I have seen with my own eyes. I'd like to think I'd give my grandkids the straight truth.

So when older folks tell me that Pele was up there with Maradona, I tend to take their word for it.
 
Have you seen a whole match of Pelé without being World Cup?. Although Santos was the best team and according to people the Brazilian league was very competitive I think he should have played in Europe
 
Amadaeus said:
I am not impressed by some of the videos posted of him in this thread. He looks incredibly average and I am not really surprised by that because current footballing athlete has evolved since his time. I am honestly not even impressed by most footballers that played when we only had two colors on the t.v, just for the fact that the footballing standard now is more tasking, tactical and challenging.
Click to expand...

Well I wonder what people will be saying about your Messis and Ronaldos 50 years from now. You'll probably have to educate some kids then. Pele would've been a beast even today. His dribbling ability, passing, ball control, first touch, shooting, two footed-ness, great aerial ability for his stature, agility, low center of gravity and strength on the ball were very, very good. He was ahead of his time and a total athlete. To cap it off he was also a dead ball specialist with very good vision and footballing intelligence. He had all the physical attributes you want in a complete footballer. The combination of Messi and Ronaldo, everything they have and lack Pele had it all.

Freekicks


Dribbling skills


Left (weak) footed goals


Headers


Headers, left footed goals, freekicks, dribbling skills and pace. Bow down to the Goddamn God
 
Zeki Zico said:
It may sound absurd but hear me out. Let's look at it this way, before Neymar moved to Barcelona from Santos he was being heralded as being almost on the same level as Messi simply because he was tearing it up in the Brazilian league. Once he moved to the Nou Camp, although still being a very good player, he was not performing anywhere near the level he was while being at Santos.

The reason I bring that up is because you can see the difference European football presents. It's a lot more tougher to be a great player in Europe that it is in any other continent. Now as many of you probably know, Pele never played in Europe. He continued to stay where he felt most comfortable and that was Santos. Now if Neymar had done the same thing and carried on tearing it up would he be considered as one of the greats as Pele is?

Obviously the biggest factor in all this is the 3 World Cups that was won by Brazil which starred Pele. Now for me personally when it comes to the greatest players in the history of football, there's only 2 that sit at the very top of the pile and that would be Messi and Maradona, in no particular order. The reason being is because their natural talents was/is like nothing else I've ever seen, but also they were/are players who could win you a game simply by themselves due to a moment of magic. Maradona showed this when he won the World Cup with Argentina in 1986 and Messi has shown the same thing countless times while at Barca. Of course Pele winning 3 World Cups definitely makes him a great player, but you also have to understand that the Brazil team within that period was simply immense. Pele aside, they had some of the best players in the world at the time. Point I'm trying to make is that it would have been a lot easier to win a World Cup playing for that Brazil team at that time than any other Brazil team in history.

So to conclude I'm not disregarding Pele's legacy and everything he achieved. No doubt he is up there with the greats. But when it comes to the greatest players in history, I personally don't believe he ever had the same unique talents that Messi and Maradona possess/possessed.
Click to expand...


Really doubt people were comparing Neymar to Messi in earnest, and even if they were, the Campeonato Brasileiro was much stronger in the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s in contrast with now. These days almost every good Brazilian talent leaves for Europe once he develops to a certain level and the league has been stripped down in terms of quality. If you look at the current national team, almost all of the starters are playing outside of Brazil. Before the trend began (late 80s-early 90s), they had the likes of Friedenreich, Gilmar, Guia, Ademir, Carlos Alberto, Djalma, Nilton, Falao, Pereira, Jairzinho, Garrincha, Jorginho, Gerson, Vava, Bellini, Zagallo, Zico, Tostao, Socrates, Mauro, Rivellino etc playing in Brazil for the bulk of their careers. A lot them coincided with Pele's time in Santos.

The difference between the current standards (or when Neymar was there) in European football vs Campeonato Brasileiro is massive, no doubt about it. But as mentioned before, the league was a different beast in Pele's time and there were a lot of top quality Brazilian internationals who chose to stay in their homeland instead of signing for European clubs, thus elevating the quality of competition in the league. These days even average players join CSKA, Spartak, Sporting Club and further bring down the median level. Also if we're holding comfort at Santos against Pele, why not bring up a similar argument for say Messi (I love him mind, not to diminish his accomplishments) who has only played in the same system for Barcelona at senior level. And just like Pele has help around him, Messi had Xavi and Iniesta and Puyol and Eto'o at various periods in his career.

The Santos team with Pele was one of the strongest club sides in the history of football and he played the biggest part in their dominance, but because of a lower amount of limelight it doesn't always get recognized as such. eg. Benfica was at the pinnacle of European football, one of the 3 or 4 strongest teams in in the mid 50s to 60s, won 2 European Cups on the trot, and consistently reached the latter stages of the tournament including the final vs United. They had Eusebio, someone who's considered to be one of the Top 10 footballers of all time, apart from the likes of Simoes, Augusto, Aguas, Coluna, Santana. But Santos dismantlement them in the 1962 Intercontinental Championship by a margin of 8-4 with Pele scoring 5 goals in just 2 fixtures home and away.

To put it in perspective, in the 1961 European Cup final - Benfica had beaten a Barcelona team with Kubala (Barcelona's highest competitive goalscorer ever before Messi broke his record), Suarez (one of the greatest playmakers of all time, thrice ranked in the Top 3 Ballon D'Or rankings, and a key component of Herrera's Grande Inter team), Czibor (one of the best wingers of all time and a key component for the Mighty Magyars), Kocsis (Hungary's greatest player behind Puskas). In 1962 they beat Madrid in the final, a team that had won the first five European Cups on the trot and had the likes of Di Stefano, Puskas, Gento, Santamaria, Del Sol. And that Benfica team had no answers for Pele, he could really cut his mustard against the best of them.

Pele was the original king of football and perfectly capable of producing moments of decisive magic from a very young age, starting with the winner vs Wales in the quarterfinals and further 2 in the World Cup finals vs Sweden in 1958. He didn't always run 50 yards with the ball like Diego could, but some of the goals he scored and things he executed with the ball kind of even defied gravity and rules of physics as they're applicable to mere mortals. And while in the interest of fairness, Maradona had a lot of superior natural skills in terms of dribbling, close control ability and so forth, football are judged by a very diverse spectrum of qualities. Pele's uniqueness was arguably his stature as the most complete footballer ever - an improved version of Johan Cruyff or Di Stefano as it were. He could shoot with both feet - long range or in the box with either finesse or overwhelming power, superb header of the ball and dangerous on set pieces, extremely cerebral and anticipated patterns that others didn't, great timing in and around the box, gifted athlete for that era, a very good tackler and played in a collective as a team oriented footballer.

His dominance was supreme - Sao Paulo league top scorer for 11 times, Copa Libertadores top scorer, Copa America top scorer, 92 club hat-tricks, helped Santos to 10 state championships, 5 Brazilian Cups, 2 Intercontinental Cups, 3 World Cups victories with 10 assists and 12 goals in just 14 matches and an overall international record of almost a goal per game - the bigger the stage the better he performed, and kind of changed the way football is officiated - the genesis of yellow and red cards are linked with the roughhousing tactics in 1966. Things fade with time - but he was really a pioneer for his era in terms of his briiliance, and individual or collective accomplishments, and the influence he had on the game are kind of unparalleled. IMO Pele's presence helped and motivated some of his illustrious teammates more than their presence helped him. Best player ever IMO, even though I deeply admire both Maradona and Messi.
 
Last edited:
Zeki Zico said:
It may sound absurd but hear me out. Let's look at it this way, before Neymar moved to Barcelona from Santos he was being heralded as being almost on the same level as Messi simply because he was tearing it up in the Brazilian league. Once he moved to the Nou Camp, although still being a very good player, he was not performing anywhere near the level he was while being at Santos.

The reason I bring that up is because you can see the difference European football presents. It's a lot more tougher to be a great player in Europe that it is in any other continent. Now as many of you probably know, Pele never played in Europe. He continued to stay where he felt most comfortable and that was Santos. Now if Neymar had done the same thing and carried on tearing it up would he be considered as one of the greats as Pele is?
Click to expand...

I don't think comfort had anything to do with it TBH. Santos was a great star-studded team and actually spent a big part of the year touring Europe and sizing up against the very best Europe had to offer. I wouldn't call them meaningless frinedlies, I doubt the defenders presented with the prospect of stopping/beating Pelé regarded them as meaningless.

Back then the Intercontinental Cup was brilliant: Real, Benfica, Santos and Peñarol had some memorable 2-leg battles (3rd game if tied, no away goals or penalty bollocks). It's a bit disingenious to assume that because Europe is THE place to play these days things have always been the same. They weren't, it was only in the 70s that it started becoming clear that European football would be largely setting the pace and agenda for football globally.

Obviously the biggest factor in all this is the 3 World Cups that was won by Brazil which starred Pele. Now for me personally when it comes to the greatest players in the history of football, there's only 2 that sit at the very top of the pile and that would be Messi and Maradona, in no particular order. The reason being is because their natural talents was/is like nothing else I've ever seen, but also they were/are players who could win you a game simply by themselves due to a moment of magic. Maradona showed this when he won the World Cup with Argentina in 1986 and Messi has shown the same thing countless times while at Barca. Of course Pele winning 3 World Cups definitely makes him a great player, but you also have to understand that the Brazil team within that period was simply immense. Pele aside, they had some of the best players in the world at the time. Point I'm trying to make is that it would have been a lot easier to win a World Cup playing for that Brazil team at that time than any other Brazil team in history.

So to conclude I'm not disregarding Pele's legacy and everything he achieved. No doubt he is up there with the greats. But when it comes to the greatest players in history, I personally don't believe he ever had the same unique talents that Messi and Maradona possess/possessed.
Click to expand...

And Pelé didn't turn games with a moment of magic? What a load of crap.

I'd agree Maradona was better, not because he could win a game single-handedly with his magic (Pelé also could, clearly) but because he had a knack of making decent but ordinary players around him perform like world beaters. It's harsh on Pelé that he was usually surrounded by great players too, but Messi? He never turned lead into gold like Maradona did.
 
dirtygringo said:
How can you diminish Pele's achievements by the strength of his team and not Messi's? Messi has played in one of the greatest club sides in football history.
Click to expand...

And has also won absolutely nothing with his national team. Yeah, that small matter of winning three World Cups... :lol: I'll hand you '62, but Brazil wouldn't have won '58 or '70 without him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.