Would Ronaldo have been so adored if he played football in this current era

[El Jefe]

Except in serie a 97/98 and 98/99 there were 2.7 goals a game on average

https://www.worldfootball.net/stats/ita-serie-a/1/

Pretty much the same as la liga while Messi and Ronaldo played there.

https://www.worldfootball.net/stats/esp-primera-division/1/

The idea it was some defensive nightmare no one could score in doesn't much hold up to scrutiny

You either don't know how to use stats or you're being disingenuous.

In Fenomeno's years in Serie A the top teams averaged between 60-65 goals a season. In the Messi and Ronaldo years Real and Barca were scoring over 100 yearly.

Now I'm not arguing the attack of the top Serie A teams of the late 90s was as good as Madrid or Barca but because they weren't. However the Serie A teams were scoring at the same rate the likes of Valencia, Villareal and Sevilla were despite having far better quality attackers.

You've pretty much just looked at Ronaldo's numbers and accolades on paper and tried to piece a story together.

 

[JPRouve]

These players you are naming are all over the place in terms of era and quality so I don't know how to answer.

But to answer your general point yes I think Suarez, Lewa, Ibrahimovic, Rooney and Rooney would fit perfectly fine in those list of players.

In fact, since 2 strikers isn't really a thing anymore I reckon wide players would also make that list.

I answered to a point made about the 90s and 2000s which is indeed fairly large. And the bolded part was my point, they fit, they are not out of place, they are not clearly superior and in some case not clearly inferior.

Careful Shamans, you sound nostalgic.

 

[jm99]

You either don't know how to use stats or you're being disingenuous.

In Fenomeno's years in Serie A the top teams averaged between 60-65 goals a season. In the Messi and Ronaldo years Real and Barca were scoring over 100 yearly.

Now I'm not arguing the attack of the top Serie A teams of the late 90s was as good as Madrid or Barca but because they weren't. However the Serie A teams were scoring at the same rate the likes of Valencia, Villareal and Sevilla were despite having far better quality attackers.

You've pretty much just looked at Ronaldo's numbers and accolades on paper and tried to piece a story together.

But in the real and Barca years Ronaldo and Messi were scoring 45+ goals in the league at times. While the top scorers in serie a were on around 20. With the goals per game being the same it would suggest that they were largely responsible for the increased goalscoring rather than benefiting from it.

Given that the 18/19 season when Ronaldo left, real dropped from 94 goals to 63 in the league suggests that this is the case as well

In subsequent seasons they scored 69 and 70 and 80 and are on 69 this year, Barca however kept scoring in the 90s until messi left then immediately dropped to two 60 goal seasons, again suggesting that it was Messi resulting in these absurd goal totals, rather than being a beneficiary of them

 

[JPRouve]

And yet when yiu look at the league tables the difference between real and Barca was the same in 96/97 as 14/15. The goals scored by Barcelona was the same apart from the additional 9 that Messi scored that Ronaldo didn't, and the goals per game in the league was the same.

So if there were as many goals per game, with the same points difference between real and Barca and the rest, and Barca scoring the same number of goals, what do you actually have to back up that there was a bigger gap between real and Barca and the rest because none of the stats back up that assertion

I don't really follow your point or where I made any point about Barcelona and Real Madrid. But I'm curious about something, how do you end up with the same goals per games between both seasons when as an example in 14/15 Barcelona scored 110 goals in 38 games while in 96/97 Barcelona scored 102 goals in 42 games?

 

[2 man midfield]

he got subbed after an hour in the first game because of injury and didn’t play in the return leg at all

I rest my case

 

[CrockedRain]

In the case of Messi, I agree. No one is ahead of Messi in my view. Maybe Maradona and Pele are as good but no one is better as far as I am concerned. So we're in agreement there. But CR is lacking in that regard. Ronaldo scoring a brace in a WC final, his hatrick against us at OT, his performance vs Nesta against Lazio are displays that defined huge games. I recall CR producing great moments in big games but really not that many iconic displays where he was the only remaining memory. He lived off moments which is a strength, don't get me wrong, he could produce without much involvment and was a bonafide killer. I am not here using this to downplay what he achieved because what he achieved makes an all time great in his own right. I am only pointing why I think some players enjoy a more universal level of adoration and "warmth".

Cristiano NT career is possibly better than R9. He's the Euro top scorer and 1 off from being the top assister as well, He scored 122 goals, All in competitive matches. His peak performance are as good as any all time great player in the national shirt, Spain 2018, Holland 2012, Sweden 2013 with couple of good/great performance against Germany 2020, Hungary 2016, Czech Republic 2008 (Which was rated 7th in the world before the EURO according ELO, Portugal was 19th btw) and many more in the qualifications (Which always been a problem for a small NT like Portugal).

And something very crucial that nobody seem to mention when this discussion arise, And it's Portugal being a non-contender in every single tournament they played (Except 2022 Worldcap with "past it" Cristiano), In fact, Portugal only qualified for 3 WC's and EURO between 1930-2006, 76 years before Ronaldo debut, Out of possible 36 tournaments, With him they never failed to qualify even once to either. He never had a chance to begin with yet managed to achieve *WAY* above the expectations (Which recently revisionists try to claim Portugal was always elite national team by riding their current impressive squad and success in the past 20 years, Failing to mention that Portugal success is directly a result of Cristiano presence, Ironic).

Also, I don't think R9 ever had the liability of needing to step up and "carry" his team, With Portugal it was "Ronaldo pull a great performance or we lose", At least up until recent years.

At club level it's a non-discussion, Cristiano basically provided better peak seasons, consistency and big game performances than R9 by 2012, And i feel like i'm being generous to R9 here tbh.

 

[jm99]

Actually heres Madrid goal tallies with ronadlo playing

09/10: 102
10/11: 102
11/12: 121
12/13: 103
13/14: 104
14/15: 118
15/16: 110
16/17: 106
17/18: 94

Then Ronaldo leaves and the next season they score 63.

So I'd wager its far less likely that he was benefiting from playing in a super team or that the top talent was stacked at Madrid causing a huge difference between them and the rest of the league, than it was that having one of the best players ever at his peak massively increased their goal tally.

Similarly barcelona don't drop below 85 while Messi is there and immediately drop to 60ish twice in a row when he leaves.

It's odd that these super teams don't destroy the rest of the league in goals scored when those two players aren't there

 

[jm99]

I don't really follow your point or where I made any point about Barcelona and Real Madrid. But I'm curious about something, how do you end up with the same goals per games between both seasons when as an example in 14/15 Barcelona scored 110 goals in 38 games while in 96/97 Barcelona scored 102 goals in 42 games?

The league total, the goals per game scored in each league was 2.7 per game on average from all teams. This gives a good idea as to how defensive a league is

 

[Matt007a]

I think it’s worth pointing out the age difference. R9 effectively peaked at 20/21. The 19 year old R9 was a long way ahead of the 19 year old CR7 and also ahead of the 19 year old Messi.

Neither were scoring a goal a game as teenagers. It stands to reason that by the time he was 27, R9 would have been even better than the player we saw in the late 90s if he’d stayed healthy.

Lewandowski and Suarez are totally comparably to Batistuta and Shearer as world class strikers in their respective times. Ronaldo was on a level that none of them ever reached when he was just 20!

 

[Morty_]

The social media age is rough, brazilian Ronaldo would no doubt have been absolutely hammered today for being an UCL-choker.

 

[JPRouve]

The league total, the goals per game scored in each league was 2.7 per game on average from all teams. This gives a good idea as to how defensive a league is

I see. That includes conceded goals, you noticed that the goal difference between seasons are quite different. Also you are comparing a 20 years old player with two players that were in their prime at 28-29 years old.

And I still don't know where that comparison comes from.

 

[jm99]

I see. That includes conceded goals, you noticed that the goal difference between seasons are quite different. Also you are comparing a 20 years old player with two players that were in their prime at 28-29 years old.

And I still don't know where that comparison comes from.

It's all goals for all teams, not just real and barca so it indicates the defensiveness of the league. Barca scored 68 non Ronaldo goals in 96/97, barca scored 67 non Messi goals in 14/15, suggesting that it wasn't much harder for ronaldo, he scored 9 less goals in a team that scored a similar amount in a league where the goals per game were nearly identical

 

[The Cat]

He would be adored in any era.

He was an unbelievable talent. If he'd not got the injuries he would be in the mix with anyone.

 

[JPRouve]

It's all goals for all teams, not just real and barca so it indicates the defensiveness of the league. Barca scored 68 non Ronaldo goals in 96/97, barca scored 67 non Messi goals in 14/15, suggesting that it wasn't much harder for ronaldo, he scored 9 less goals in a team that scored a similar amount in a league where the goals per game were nearly identical

I still don't understand the point here. So you are saying that a 28 years old Messi was a better player than a 20 years old Ronaldo? Who argued against that?

Also Barcelona had a worse team in 96 than they did in 2014, they also played differently.

 

[jm99]

I still don't understand the point here. So you are saying that a 28 years old Messi was a better player than a 20 years old Ronaldo? Who argued against that?

Also Barcelona had a worse team in 96 than they did in 2014, they also played differently.

I tried to argue that Ronaldo wouldn't be as adored if he played in an era with 2 players who were much better than him. When challenged on this I've backed it up with stats, only to be told ronaldo and Messi benefit from the concentration of talent at real and Barca, even though as soon as Ronaldo left the same Madrid team scored 63 goals, which is odd, and barca dropped off goals wise as soon as Messi left. Some people just don't like the idea that the players they watched growing up aren't the best ever

 

[shamans]

I answered to a point made about the 90s and 2000s which is indeed fairly large. And the bolded part was my point, they fit, they are not out of place, they are not clearly superior and in some case not clearly inferior.

Careful Shamans, you sound nostalgic.

But those players are of the most recent era, so how is it less talented than the previous era? That's my point. They are the latest players to have finished their careers. (BTW add Tevez in there as well)

 

[MexicanCowboy]

I have only watched football since the 90's so I can't really speak about previous players. But for the last 30 years Ronaldo, the fat one, was the only player who was even close to Messi's level. His problem was his fitness, but he was a total monster. If he had played in this era and had enjoyed the level of domestic dominance clubs like Man City and PSG he would have easily outperformed Mbappe and Haaland.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

Well yes, they don't matter in this context.
Trophies are won by teams.
If you are comparing individuals then Ronaldo 96-99, Ronaldinho 03-05, and Messi 09-12 are the absolute peak of football I've witnessed.

Perhaps you don't remember his glory days, maybe you were too little in those years.

There's so much context you don't understand and I'm just 3 years older than you. I won't waste hours giving you arguments and historical facts of the difference in football before and after 2000s.

Pretty much. The season at Barcelona and his first season at Inter were probably the best i've seen in my time from a single footballer. Truly "rub my eyes just to make sure what i'm seeing is real" stuff. It's only surpassed by Messi's summit (the calendar year 2012 within the frame you set), which simply defied all logic.

Back to the Phenomenon, i've never watched a footballer being in such absolute control of the ball while running with it at full speed. The way he would drop deep to receive a pass, use his strength to turn around and his dribbling ability to create space for himself to then attack it with so such aggression was unbelievable.

Against the high lines of today and with his skill to dribble his way out of congested areas, he would still be a force to be reckoned with.

 

[JPRouve]

I tried to argue that Ronaldo wouldn't be as adored if he played in an era with 2 players who were much better than him. When challenged on this I've backed it up with stats, only to be told ronaldo and Messi benefit from the concentration of talent at real and Barca, even though as soon as Ronaldo left the same Madrid team scored 63 goals, which is odd, and barca dropped off goals wise as soon as Messi left. Some people just don't like the idea that the players they watched growing up aren't the best ever

I have Messi as the best ever, so I don't really know who you argued with but I don't share his opinion on that topic. Now I have to say your use of stats is dubious, at 20 years old Messi didn't score 34 goals(scored 10) in the league, a year later he scored 23 goals which is still less than Ronaldo, he matched it at 22 years old though.

 

[He'sRaldo]

As someone who started following football in the 2000's, I feel R9 is overrated by the older generation. That should contribute to the answer I suppose.

Then again in 20 years someone will probably make the same post about Messi so who knows really.

 

[jm99]

I have Messi as the best ever, so I don't really know who you argued with but I don't share his opinion on that topic. Now I have to say your use of stats is dubious, at 20 years old Messi didn't score 34 goals(scored 10) in the league, a year later he scored 23 goals which is still less than Ronaldo, he matched it at 22 years old though.

Right and at 18 Rooney looked like he'd be a better player than either Messi or Ronaldo but it turned out he'd peaked young. Messi was around his peak at 22 or so, however old he was in 2011/12. Maybe r9 would have kept improving but he didn't so we only have what actually happened to go off of, and none of his seasons matched Messi or cristianos peak seasons. So from what actually happened rather than speculation he was a fair bit off both players. If he'd kept improving then yeah maybe, but based on what actually happened, no

 

[MexicanCowboy]

I tried to argue that Ronaldo wouldn't be as adored if he played in an era with 2 players who were much better than him. When challenged on this I've backed it up with stats, only to be told ronaldo and Messi benefit from the concentration of talent at real and Barca, even though as soon as Ronaldo left the same Madrid team scored 63 goals, which is odd, and barca dropped off goals wise as soon as Messi left. Some people just don't like the idea that the players they watched growing up aren't the best ever

Messi was better than fat Ronaldo, but Cristiano wasn't. At least not better than fit Ronaldo. Stats in football are misleading specially when it comes to assist, dribbles and chances created.
Fat Ronaldo was completely unplayable when in form.

 

[Andycoleno9]

As someone who started following football in the 2000's, I feel R9 is overrated by the older generation. That should contribute to the answer I suppose.

Then again in 20 years someone will probably make the same post about Messi so who knows really.

You started to watch in 2000s but you think that he is overrated by generation which actually watched all players in question (Messi, Ronaldo, CR 7, Maradona...)?

 

[jm99]

Messi was better than fat Ronaldo, but Cristiano wasn't. At least not better than fit Ronaldo. Stats in football are misleading specially when it comes to assist, dribbles and chances created.
Fat Ronaldo was completely unplayable when in form.

Cristiano was far better, given his performances in the knockouts of the champions league. Dribbling past players in la liga and still not having seasons anything like as good as cristiano's best isn't really enough. The one area he beats him in is international football, but cristiano never had a team like Brazil 2002

It's funny that all the r9 fans just have to say the stats are wrong and just attribute to some vague notion of he was unplayable, just not in a way that resulted in him scoring more goals or his team winning more trophies, which doesn't make much sense to me, if you're unplayable as a striker, you'd be scoring more goals and your team would win more games.

 

[adexkola]

They weren't. The other teams had similar and better players.

I forgot the question mark... Was just asking

 

[He'sRaldo]

You started to watch in 2000s but you think that he is overrated by generation which actually watched all players in question (Messi, Ronaldo, CR 7, Maradona...)?

That's the thing, I don't think you all watched all these players as extensively as you imply. The same way people in all these GOAT debates could not have possibly watched all the minutes of all these players' careers. And even if you did, I don't think that removes differrent biases like youth vs adulthood, bias towards pretty technique, etc.

Not to diminish R9, but you can't have untouchable status in the modern era. Have you seen the scrutiny the GOATs of this era get? And that's with unheard of stats and accolades.

 

[JPRouve]

Right and at 18 Rooney looked like he'd be a better player than either Messi or Ronaldo but it turned out he'd peaked young. Messi was around his peak at 22 or so, however old he was in 2011/12. Maybe r9 would have kept improving but he didn't so we only have what actually happened to go off of, and none of his seasons matched Messi or cristianos peak seasons. So from what actually happened rather than speculation he was a fair bit off both players. If he'd kept improving then yeah maybe, but based on what actually happened, no

How does that factor into how adored Ronaldo would be today? Statiscally Ronaldo was a far better teenager than Ronaldo or Messi but he had massive knee injuries in his late teenage and early 20s.

If anything Ronaldo is one of the few player that would likely be adored regardless of era, because he was great when fit and because the reason behind his stagnation was injuries that often kill careers but even then he was one of the best goal scorers in the world.

 

[jm99]

How does that factor into how adored Ronaldo would be today? Statiscally Ronaldo was a far better teenager than Ronaldo or Messi but he had massive knee injuries in his late teenage and early 20s.

If anything Ronaldo is one of the few player that would likely be adored regardless of era, because he was great when fit and because the reason behind his stagnation was injuries that often kill careers but even then he was one of the best goal scorers in the world.

Because when he played he was the best player in the world, and he wasn't subject to the same scrutiny players are today, which is why you get people saying he was unplayable even though he couldn't win more than one league title, so being unplayable doesn't equal titles or more goals it's just some feeling. If he was playing when two others were playing that were much better he would not have anything like the same status

 

[shamans]

Messi was better than fat Ronaldo, but Cristiano wasn't. At least not better than fit Ronaldo. Stats in football are misleading specially when it comes to assist, dribbles and chances created.
Fat Ronaldo was completely unplayable when in form.

As was Cristiano and he was "in form" for many, many years more than Ronaldo and even if fat Ronaldo was not injured that doesn't guarantee he would have the longevity.

CR7 at his peak could dance around defenders, score from 40 years, or 5 years, incredible header of the ball, speed, strength, and the craziest stamina I have seen (smoking defenders in 90+ mins).

 

[Andycoleno9]

Because when he played he was the best player in the world, and he wasn't subject to the same scrutiny players are today, which is why you get people saying he was unplayable even though he couldn't win more than one league title, so being unplayable doesn't equal titles or more goals it's just some feeling. If he was playing when two others were playing that were much better he would not have anything like the same status

If he was playing with other two, all these years debate would be Messi or Ronaldo. But not Cristiano.

 

[shamans]

Actually heres Madrid goal tallies with ronadlo playing

09/10: 102
10/11: 102
11/12: 121
12/13: 103
13/14: 104
14/15: 118
15/16: 110
16/17: 106
17/18: 94

Then Ronaldo leaves and the next season they score 63.

So I'd wager its far less likely that he was benefiting from playing in a super team or that the top talent was stacked at Madrid causing a huge difference between them and the rest of the league, than it was that having one of the best players ever at his peak massively increased their goal tally.

Similarly barcelona don't drop below 85 while Messi is there and immediately drop to 60ish twice in a row when he leaves.

It's odd that these super teams don't destroy the rest of the league in goals scored when those two players aren't there

The little nostalgia going on around here will die out soon enough and when objectively looked back, Ronaldo and Messi will truly stand out.

 

[Bobski]

Standard modern approach to judging players, stats without context or understanding of how different the game was.

Ronaldo in his first season for Inter scored 25 in 32 league games. Most top strikers for super-teams hit that in their sleep now, there are so many games against utter cannon fodder to pad the stats, 25 in 32 is almost passe. Ronaldo had to play at an incredible level to hit those numbers, Serie A was probably the deepest league of the modern era at that point, talent was spread instead of being accumulated on a small numbers of teams. Inters next top scorers hit 7, then 6, then 3.

The level of difficulty for him or any other scorer in a major league to hit 25+ was vastly higher than it is now.

 

[jm99]

If he was playing with other two, all these years debate would be Messi or Ronaldo. But not Cristiano.

Thats just ridiculous, r9 had two good seasons, neither of which would break cristiano's top 5. Cristiano has more goals from the semi finals onwards in the champions league than r9 has in total. He has him beat in both longevity and peak, and people saying otherwise are clouded by nostalgia

 

[JPRouve]

I forgot the question mark... Was just asking

It was a literal answer, the other Seria A teams were wild. As an example a similar team in Roma had Cafu, Totti, Konsel, Aldair, Candela, Balbo and I'm probably forgetting some. Inter were the galatico before Real Madrid, Taribo West( ), Recoba, Ronaldo, Kanu, Djorkaeff, Simeone, Zamorano, Pagliuca, Zanetti, Sousa, etc. Milan had Maldini, Costacurta, Weah, Boban, Kluivert and others. Juventus had Zidane, Deschamps, Davids, Conte, Del Piero, Inzaghi or Peruzzi.

 

[jm99]

Standard modern approach to judging players, stats without context or understanding of how different the game was.

Ronaldo in his first season for Inter scored 25 in 32 league games. Most top strikers for super-teams hit that in their sleep now, there are so many games against utter cannon fodder to pad the stats, 25 in 32 is almost passe. Ronaldo had to play at an incredible level to hit those numbers, Serie A was probably the deepest league of the modern era at that point, talent was spread instead of being accumulated on a small numbers of teams. Inters next top scorers hit 7, then 6, then 3.

The level of difficulty for him or any other scorer in a major league to hit 25+ was vastly higher than it is now.

Again, the average number of goals per game in that serie a was the same as the number of goals per game in 2010s la liga,

Madrid and Barca scored a bit more but that had more to do with Ronaldo and Messi than "superteams" as they averaged over 100 every season Ronaldo was there, then 63 the season he left, while the other personnel stayed the same.

 

[Wing Attack Plan R]

And I'm talking about the Brazilian Ronaldo here.

He bursted into the scene as a super striker. He played for a number of great clubs at that time. But this is exactly the issue. He played for very big clubs: Barcelona, Real Madrid, Inter Milan, AC Milan...etc. However during his whole career he only had 1 league trophy to show for it (No Champions League either). If he was born and played in the modern age, would people look at him as a less loyal Harry Kane? People lambasted Ibrahimovic as a small-game player but Ibra won the domestic league at everywhere he went, minus Manchester United. All because he didn't win a Champions League.

Ronaldo arguably had a better international career. He had an exceptional 2002 World Cup. However, even that came as a sort of "redemption" after his flop in the 1998 World Cup Final. Still, I'd rate his international career as a 8/10 at least.

I also don't think modern football fans would take too kindly to the fact that he played for rivals Real/Barca, Inter/AC either. Lukaku got bashed as a mercenary for less. Ronaldo jumping between big rival clubs with very little trophies to show for it would actually fuel even more ridicule towards him from bitter people, actually.

Do you think Ronaldo would have been so adored if he played football in this current era? Instead of the current god-hood status he got among football fans.

Yes. Ronaldo fine-tuned his game to outplay everyone around him, I see no reason he couldn't have adjusted his game the same way had he played in the current era. As in, he isn't adored because everyone trying to get the ball off him was shit; he's adored because he was an insanely talented player.

 

[Andycoleno9]

Standard modern approach to judging players, stats without context or understanding of how different the game was.

Ronaldo in his first season for Inter scored 25 in 32 league games. Most top strikers for super-teams hit that in their sleep now, there are so many games against utter cannon fodder to pad the stats, 25 in 32 is almost passe. Ronaldo had to play at an incredible level to hit those numbers, Serie A was probably the deepest league of the modern era at that point, talent was spread instead of being accumulated on a small numbers of teams. Inters next top scorers hit 7, then 6, then 3.

The level of difficulty for him or any other scorer in a major league to hit 25+ was vastly higher than it is now.

That is why today's stats fans never mention Maradona. His numbers were also lame comparing with players in this era.

 

[Lay]

As someone who started following football in the 2000's, I feel R9 is overrated by the older generation. That should contribute to the answer I suppose.

Then again in 20 years someone will probably make the same post about Messi so who knows really.

That’s the funny thing about it. All these criticisms about past players will happen to Messi and CR7 in 20-40 years time. They’ll be bums compared to whatever cyborgs and Haaland clones are playing

 

[jm99]

That’s the funny thing about it. All these criticisms about past players will happen to Messi and CR7 in 20-40 years time. They’ll be bums compared to whatever cyborgs and Haaland clones are playing

I mean yeah that's fairly likely, you've got continually growing populations so continually increasing pool of players to pick from, with better training, getting picked up younger by top academies meaning they'll start getting the best training younger which is more beneficial for development

It would be incredible if players didn't keep getting better on average and this should be reflected at the top as well

 

[Lay]

I mean yeah that's fairly likely, you've got continually growing populations so continually increasing pool of players to pick from, with better training, getting picked up younger by top academies meaning they'll start getting the best training younger which is more beneficial for development

It would be incredible if players didn't keep getting better on average and this should be reflected at the top as well

I’m sure you’ll still be defending CR7 then too.