@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 For me, to score? Muller, for sure
“you don’t see Cruyff” getting this treatment? bro, just search for any video for anybody, he is the greatest player Holland has ever had
but okay, I respect your opinion
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 But the discussion is about being good even when losing, not who was better between both
You just said yourself what he was capable of doing
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 of course it’s important
but that’s not the ONLY important part
But okay, if you don’t consider him to be one of the greatest because of one game then okay
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 this is not being complete
Cruyff wasn’t a center forward and was WAY more important for the clubs he played for
also was more influential to the games, of course Muller was better at scoring, but Cruyff is better in everything else, every other skill
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 He is a more complete and revolutionary player
Muller was bizarre, but comparing them is hard, Cruyff could play anywhere and would play as the great player he was
it’s like comparing Harry Kane, who can play anywhere on the field and Haaland
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 That’s just an example, he really wasn’t that important
My point is: winning is not the only part we should consider for anyone to be the best
Cruyff was much more than that
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 But they’re in my top 10 too, ahead of Cruyff by the way
my top 10:
Pele
Messi
Cristiano Ronaldo
Ronaldo
Maradona
Zidane
Cruyff
Beckenbauer
Maldini
The tenth could be a lot of players, but I’ll pick Di Stefano today
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 it’s not about what’s worthier
If we think like this, players like Matuidi are going to be more remembered than players like Cruyff just because they succeed at the end
that’s insanity, I think you agree
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 yes, he is
just see everybody else’s opinion
I respect if you think he isn’t, that’s okay
But not consider him one of them just because he didn’t win the World Cup doesn’t make any sense
it’s like saying Buffon isn’t one of the best goalkeepers of all time for not winning ucl
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 what’s your point?
of course the cup is the greatest, but this alone speak for everything else?
it’s like, Cruyff didn’t win the cup, so he’s not the best one
football is much more than this
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 you think Di Stefano is a failure? Puskas?
the three times ballon for winner Platini is a failure?
C’mon, you must think Zico was a failure too
madness
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 what more?
Cruyff was a 3 times ballon for winner and 3 times ucl champion, and also has won a lot of national leagues titles
Pele just won titles by Cosmos in the 70s
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 But what does Pele have to do with anything?
He’s from 60s
I’m talking about Cruyff, even us Brazilian, and even Santos fans consider him to be a 60s player
the Greatest of them, also the greatest of all
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 That’s the point of football
And that’s the point about why no specific game should or not be considerate the one to decide whether a player is good or not
@JackMilowh@LucasIsmaelxis@karloss19991 One game doesn’t speak for everything
Maradona beat England by robbing them. Is he good enough then?
I think we should look at what they did, not ONLY to what they’ve won
Although of course it’s important