** World Cup 2026 - USA, Canada, Mexico Thread **
Saw no thread was active yet while it starts tomorrow so I'd gave it a go
No real time for an extensive write-up but lets
Messi's legacy will only look better in the next 20 years when you see how crap Argentina becomes.
Historically, Argentina is a nation carried by two left-footed midgets, who are the greatest players to ever play the game. 3 World Cup finals with Messi, and 2 with Maradona.
What did they win in the period inbetween their careers? Diddly squat. Not a serious contender. We're talking World Cup quarterfinals exit at best. That is their level when they don't have a GOAT-level player.
I don't know why you would need to disregard everyone else (and 1978) to make them look better.
Many regard Pele as the best (or they did prior to Messi, idk), without shitting on Garrincha, real Ronaldo or whomever
1978 Argentina probably was actually rigged, that's why.
It was under a far-right military dictatorship in Argentina, and Argentina's 6-0 win over Peru was highly questionable, with allegations of bribery and collusion.
Argentina needed to win by at least 4 goals to advance to the final over Brazil, who were scheduled to play before Argentina, so Argentina knew exactly what kind of score they needed.
I am Dutch and we are terrible losers (see slugant), so I know all that.
Doesn't make Kempes, Passarella, Batistuta, Zanetti, Di Maria et al bad players
Many regard Pele as the best (or they did prior to Messi, idk), without shitting on Garrincha, real Ronaldo or whomever
I think Pele is in the same tier as Maradona and Messi.
Messi dominated at the highest level for longer than the other two. And Pele had stronger teammates than either Messi or Maradona, so it was "easier" for Pele to win, relatively speaking.
No disrespect to the late great but I think you're a bit biased lol. I do agree with being thankful football won, Argentinians are bad winners and bad losers but that takes nothing away from the greatness that is Messi.
Oh for sure i am biased in this one. Not even going to argue with that :p
I dont know how many GOATs there can be actually, but since its subjective and personal anyway my GOAT will always be someone who is admirable, not just as a sportsman but as person as well. Thats why over the last 10+ years my favorite player has been Modric, just nothing but class. In tennis its Federer for me. Great sportsmen and great sport personalities. And on a personality level Messi is a fraud. He has been for a while now and its bugging me a lot. And him captaining this argentinian team of thugs just fits perfectly with that. I will not deny his qualities in the past, although I certainly would like to, unfortunately I cant.
But lets not act like he dragged them to a final like Maradona did.
Argentina played 30 minutes of decent football the entire tournament and most of that was versus an England with all their men in their own box.
Carrying a team means deciding a game against the big boys, showing them who's boss.
The best country he scored against this WC was Austria ffs.
I am Dutch and we are terrible losers (see slugant), so I know all that.
Doesn't make Kempes, Passarella, Batistuta, Zanetti, Di Maria et al bad players
Why am I a terrible loser? Because I dislike Messi's behaviour?
We (the Dutch) lost fair and sqaure just like Argentina did, but nothing inside of me made me want to scrap like a mental Paredes
I was equally appalled by Argentina as I was by Paraguay but at least nobody pretended they played decent football
How did he not? Messi had the most goals, assists, successful dribbles, chances created, key passes, etc...
Without Messi, how far do you think 2026 Argentina would have gotten?
Argentina played 30 minutes of decent football the entire tournament and most of that was versus an England with all their men in their own box.
Carrying a team means deciding a game against the big boys, showing them who's boss.
This is where I have a problem.
I agree with you that Argentina were quite mediocre, or even crap, for a lot of the tournament.
Given that Argentina were pretty crap, and still made it to the final somehow, must mean that credit must go somewhere for them reaching that far.
You can't have it both ways and say that both Argentina and Messi weren't good.
That's illogical hate.
Given their run of opponents I would they the final as well.
And its not like Argentina has only poor players. They have the topscorer and the best midfielder of the serie A on the bench not even coming on (I know not top top league anymore but still, how many squads would bench those??). And they are not benched because of their lack of skill, but because most of the time they play with 10 man considering messi's just walking around. Therefore they wont/cant play Lautaro or Paz, but they need the henchman (paredes, de paul etc) to do the dirty work. That doesnt make for a good football playing squad. And in a team like that Messi should always get the most goals, dribbles etc even when he's 45.
This is where I have a problem.
I agree with you that Argentina were quite mediocre, or even crap, for a lot of the tournament.
Given that Argentina were pretty crap, and still made it to the final somehow, must mean that credit must go somewhere for them reaching that far.
You can't have it both ways and say that both Argentina and Messi weren't good.
That's illogical hate.
I dont think it is. The fact is we had a crap team reaching the final.
The "somehow" of how they reached the final can be recapped pretty simple
They beat capo verde (barely)
They beat egypt (barely again and with a controversial disallowed goal by egypt)
Then in the QF they beat 10 men of switzerland (because of "mistaken identity")
And in the HF they beat an England team that started waving the flag after they came ahead. They faced 0.5 decent opponents basically (spain meanwhile knocked out portugal, belgium & france with less trouble)
Thats how argentina reached the final, not by good football by any of them.
Messi has the numbers because he scored against the likes of cabo verde, egypt, jordan and algeria. Well thats not "carrying a team" for me like I said.
But lets not act like he dragged them to a final like Maradona did.
Carrying a team means deciding a game against the big boys, showing them who's boss.
The best country he scored against this WC was Austria ffs.
But anyone can have their own definiton of carrying a team, this is mine.
I think the draw carried them further than a 39 year old Messi ever could.
Portugal could have made their draw a little harder but they are hampered by their own old man who barely does anything. Thats not taking anything back from their enormous legacies.
I think the draw carried them further than a 39 year old Messi ever could.
Portugal could have made their draw a little harder but they are hampered by their own old man who barely does anything. Thats not taking anything back from their enormous legacies.
What does this mean? Portugal was on Spain's side of the bracket. Argentina never played Portugal.
Idgaf I loudly and proudly declare myself a hater of that giant nosed midget
Wahhhhh look at me weep for the crowd for a 2nd place showing that was 30 places too high wahhhhhh
What does this mean? Portugal was on Spain's side of the bracket. Argentina never played Portugal.
That's his point. Had Portugal won their group and beaten Switzerland (which Colombia didn't) etc. Unsure why it matters except on paper
That's a pretty wild assumption. Who's scoring and creating all the goals for Argentina if not for Messi?
Sure, maybe the team presses better defensively without Messi, but we have seen time and time again at the World Cup, what happens to teams that play "good football" but can't put the ball in the net. Canada played "better" than Morocco for large portions of the match before getting blown away because they couldn't finish anything.
Argentina is willing to make sacrifices for Messi and let him walk around doing nothing, because Messi is the greatest creator of goals this sport has ever seen. Prime Barcelona was willing to do this, and they were far worse whenever Messi couldn't play. Why do you assume Argentina would be any different?
In any case, we're going to get to see Argentina play without Messi now. If Alvarez and Lautaro lead them to another World Cup final without Messi, you will be proven right, and I will be proven wrong. But I'm pretty confident that won't happen.
And it's not like Argentina has only poor players. They have the topscorer and the best midfielder of the serie A on the bench not even coming on (I know not top top league anymore but still, how many squads would bench those??).
Be honest now. Do any of these guys start for Spain, France, or even England? It's a pretty clear no. And that's my point, they have a weaker squad than all of these other teams yet beat one of them to reach the final.
Credit must be given somewhere, and you can't blame it all on the "weak draw," because with the 48-team format, EVERY team got to stat pad against crap teams. People are glazing Mbappe's golden boot when he scored his final 2 goals in a game where neither team played with any defensive intensity.
So what does that make England for losing to them?
Let's analyze this "easy draw" they had:
Cape Verde - Spain also failed to beat this team in 90 minutes, so maybe everyone is disrespecting them too much?
Egypt - fairly average round of 16 opponent, not particularly easy or difficult.
Switzerland - this could have been Portugal or Colombia, but neither team made it here. Switzerland are not minnows. Certainly not worse than Norway, and not a ton worse than current Belgium either. All of these teams aren't that far apart talent-wise.
England - a top 4 side.
Is this a particularly difficult route? No, but it's not even close to the easiest path to the final this century even.
It's certainly not easier than what Italy faced in 2006 (Australia, Ukraine, Germany), and definitely not easier than what Germany had in 2002 (Paraguay, USA, and Korea).
Seriously, Germany reached a World Cup final by beating Paraguay, USA, Korea, and Oliver Kahn got a Golden Ball for it.
This "easy path" narrative is way overblown.
Oh I forgot Croatia in 2018. They went through Denmark, Russia, and England. That's not any harder than Egypt, Switzerland, and England either.
France in 2022 went through Poland, England, and Morocco. England in the quarters is tough, but then they got Morocco in the semis, which is relatively soft for that round.
The more you look at it, the more you realize that Argentina's draw wasn't particularly easy by historical standards. It's not uncommon for a finalist to not face a top team until the semi-final.
All of this is to say that dismissing Messi's stats for playing weak opposition is a bad-faith argument. Every team gets a few easy match ups. No one is dismissing Mbappe or Haaland for scoring vs Iraq. And Messi didn't even start vs Jordan, his weakest opponent. He only came on in the final 20 minutes and scored from a free kick. You don't think he could have stat padded even further by demanding to start that game?
Before 2022, the argument was, "Messi can never be the GOAT when he's not won the big one at international level." Putting aside the fact that this is a ret4rded argument to begin with, given the crapshooty nature of knockout tournaments, he won the thing four years ago. But that didn't silence the doubters.
The fact that people are still debating between Messi and Penaldo is frankly baffling to me. We have more than two decades of evidence (no, proof) that Messi is the unequivocal best player this sport on this planet has ever seen (ÖAT).
It's dumb but also very boring. He'd be probably be GOAT for me even if he retired twelve years ago. And if he's not, it's not because of CRonaldo
Thank god it's over anyway. Thanks to Trump, FIFA and Argentina, the worst world cup I've ever seen.
Im not talking GOAT stuff, its subjective and I dont even care for it.
Im not taking messi 10 years ago.
Im talking messi at this specific tournament.
That's a pretty wild assumption. Who's scoring and creating all the goals for Argentina if not for Messi
Topscorer serie A should be able to score goals, Alvazez should be able too, Paz named best midfielder of Serie A should create chances (if he plays), Enzo too. But their main jobs in this tournament were not tot play football, it was to butcher.
In any case, we're going to get to see Argentina play without Messi now. If Alvarez and Lautaro lead them to another World Cup final without Messi, you will be proven right, and I will be proven wrong. But I'm pretty confident that won't happen.
I specifically said its the draw that led them to the final.
If without Messi they cant beat Algeria, Jordan, Cabo verde, Egypt, 10 man of Switzerland or white flag waving England you are right and I am wrong.
If without him they still beat them that it proves messi did not carry them across this wild river.
Its not just that. You dont have to compensate for someone walking 90% of the time so you dont need 4 butchers in midfield. You can actually play someone whos good on the ball. And yes they have those, it was just never their intention
Seriously, make 1 player of Spain just a walking footballer and see how much everyone else will struggle. Its not doable in modern football anymore.
Lautaro somehow worse than Baena or Gordon/madueke??
Also, out of those 3 teams they only faced England. If they faced Spain or France earlier and got knocked out we wouldnt be having this discussion at all.
Ok, by current rankings argentina in the KO beat #64, #24, #14 and #4 to reach the final
Spain beat #23 #7 #8 and #3... Where the #3 france were actually the big favorites
Which would you rather have?
90% the weakest draw to the final you will see the rest of your life (given its gonna be KO of 32 from now on)
+
10% 20 minutes of good football vs England
=
Final
He certainly could have
Ref also could have also given him the red that almost any other player would have gotten there so he would be suspended for 5 of his goals, leaving only 3 on the board.
Maybe its the lack of idolization, maybe its realism
Like im Dutch and last Euros we reached the semi final but were just awful. We got third in the poule behind Austria and were gifted Romania & Turkey to lose in the semis versus a once again disappointing England. Yes, we came third but nobody here is saying we deserved it or that we played good football. We all know theres one reason we got so far and that is we were extremely lucky with the draw. And argentina was as well, comparing that to spain having to beat portugal belgium and (the big favorites to win) france is just as nonsense as having 0.00xg on the board after 100+ minutes of play.
GOAT aint subjective and numbers dont lie, ok...
Because Pele has 3 WC titles compared to Messi's 1.
In 17 years of playing prime barcelona Messi has won the Champions league 4 times, someone like carvajal 6 times in 13 years.
I thought messi was better than carvajal but hey, numbers dont lie. These are the biggest tournaments for club and country and he has been outnumbered on both.
And if its about goals CR still has his number (also more CL's)
Thank god numbers dont lie.
GOAT aint subjective and numbers dont lie, ok...Because Pele has 3 WC titles compared to Messi's 1.In 17 years of playing prime barcelona Messi has won the Champions league 4 times, someone like carvajal 6 times in 13 years.I thought messi was better than carvajal but hey, numbers dont lie. These are the biggest tournaments for club and country and he has been outnumbered on bo
I literally said he and CR7 are two of the GOATs. You're being pedantic.
Probably pedantic yes but also making a point.
If whoever qualified for being GOAT was set in stone the discussion would have never started in the first place.
And if its just a numbers game the label GOAT suddenly opens up for a lot of players that shouldnt fit that category imo i.e. carvajal nacho
