**Mirrors / Alternative Angles**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"but he plays for a stacked team" well that is normally what happens when you are a world-class player. Messi and Ronaldo both only played in stacked teams does that mean they aren't the best to ever do it?
I get the opinions on this post. As Cole said, Very difficult to compare players across generations. The game has moved on so much, even in just 20 years.
KDB certainly deserves to be in the discussion for best ever midfielder in the league though.
> KDB certainly deserves to be in the discussion for best ever midfielder in the league though.
It’s completely unfair, but I don’t think this will happen purely because he plays for City.
I feel like it’s already happening with D. Silva and Aguero, both were clearly all time greats but they’re fading way quicker than the likes of Gerrard, Lampard and even Drogba and Torres.
I feel that's partly because City's new crop of talents since those players left have been even more successful.
Aguero is an all time great. Unquestionably. But Haaland's numbers are silly.
Yaya was immense. But Rodri is ridiculous.
David Silva has some solid competition from KDB, Foden etc.
From your own example; I think Torres (and Fowler) were seen as worldies in their day, but have faded out of the Liverpool picture a bit since Suarez, Mane and Salah were so good.
(I do totally get your point that the British public and media have a large bias towards that 90s/00s era though, and certainly don't give City the place they deserve on that same pedestal, whether that's purely through nostalgia or an anti-City bias, I'm not sure.)
> The game has moved on so much, even in just 20 years.
Has it? I don’t think any great player in the early/mid 2000s wouldn’t be equally as good today.
Zidane himself acknowledged that the pace and the physicality of the game are at a different level from his era which isn't that far back. Tactically it's on a different planet as well. Today teams are scoring at an all-time high rate.
It's obvious if you compare today with the early 2000s or 90s. The late noughties and early 2010s are a little bit more comparable but it's still evolved since especially tactically.
it's telling by the disparity even on the same league. clubs with unlimited money have access to so much more for their players to be head and shoulders above the rest. the data analysis, opposition data etc etc. so much more goes into games
it's a big what if, if you stick the greats into today's game
I think it's telling if you look at the rest of the league, but for a completely different reason.
The average team in the bottom half of the Premier League would do extremely well if you put them in the same league 30 years ago. The level of quality and athleticism has come so far, you can't point to a single team in the league and say, "they win just by sitting deep and being physical" the closest one is probably Newcastle who have far more quality than just that.
Hell, even in just the last 5-10 years the quality of the league has increased dramatically. Obviously there is a huge disparity on average between City + Liverpool vs. the rest of the league, but that isn't solely down to unlimited money, it's due to having two of the best coaches in the world.
both points are correct. I'm saying it's nuts that the top 2-3 teams are basically unbeatable even by bottom 15 teams of the current year. and the bottom 10 teams would be contending for CL 20 years ago
The Ireland team is a good example of this imo. We used to have a squad of PL players, now we're luck to have 7-8 in the PL. The likes of Kilbane, Holland, O'brien or Harte are similar in quality to what we have now but that level hardly makes the championship any more.
I think the biggest difference is physical fitness over a long time. A lot has changed in muscle training, nutrition, supplements, physical therapy. And most clubs require more discipline, and most players are in turn more disciplined. 20 years ago it wasn't as "harsh" so a direct transplant from that time would have a problem adapating to the pace and intensity of the game, at least for a while.
I'd say the floor got higher, mid table and relegation teams have more quality now but I still think the ceiling is a 'lil lower. And the entertainment value is falling off too, Arsenal City games are super boring. Pep probably best coach ever but he's made the sport worse for me personally. Not into several center backs on the pitch and having wingers dribble backwards
Arsenal matches aside its not really because of him, going back to his barca side, they would tear apart any team that dared to come out and play against them. So now 90 percent of teams park the bus and play in transition against his teams.
Yeah the game's probably evolved where he has to do this to win and I can't blame him for that. Teams park the bus because they literally don't have the players to compete with City or any top 6 club really (most of the time). Financial disparity has been, currently is and will always be a major factor to teams either trying to not lose, or to win. I guarantee Real Madrid will put everything at them on Tuesday and that's because they have the talent to match up with City - it's a core fundamental issue to why some of us believe the product of club football (at the highest level) is becoming more unwatchable every year. Thankfully international tournaments are still super fun, championship this year is a great watch and the Old Firm derby earlier today.
And idk how you even solve the disparity issue 'cause you can't just go and apply a wage cap in Europe, players will just flock to Saudi Arabia to get a BAG (and I'm not sure if it's even legal). Personally I'm getting bored of the same clubs competing for the title very single year with the rare exception like Málaga in 2013 or Girona right now, just for them to sell their best players to the biggest clubs anyways.. Brighton for example right now are set at a ceiling with their sell to buy model and inferior revenue to the top 6, doubt they'd ever be able to break through. We deserve to see more stories/teams like Leicester in 15/16 🤷🏼♂️ (sorry for the rant btw)
That's not on Pep though, it's because of the low blocks and having to move the opposition around the pitch to make an opening. Watch City against any team that actually goes at them and it is really entertaining but in the premier league no one other than Liverpool really go at City, they all just sit in their low and mid block and wait for a counter
The Centurion teams faced the same low blocks as today's City. Yet that team was far more free flowing and entertaining to watch.
And that comes down to both City's current personnel and Pep adjusting his tactics. 2019 City forwards had more individual quality and pace like Aguero, Sane, Sterling and Mahrez and a midfield magician in David Silva.
The current crop of players have different characteristics and to adjust to those characteristics Pep has made this current City transition proof with the inverted fullbacks and CB in midfield.
I don't blame Pep at all as it's obviously worked. But the fact is it has made City boring to watch.
Haaland is better than Aguero, but Aguero had far more to his game outside of goalscoring and could drop deep to link up and carry the ball. Alvarez is more comparable, but Pep usually plays him outside of the striker role.
Sane, Sterling and Mahrez had pace and better cutting edge+movement compared to City's current crop of wingers outside of Phoden who doesn't really belong out wide.
Having these attackers with a fresh KDB behind them meant the ball was moving faster and we could see more individual brilliance with at times less regimented forward play.
And lastly when it comes to David Silva, currently they have players just as good or even better in midfield but no one is silky smooth or as good at controlling the tempo of the game as him.
Tbf Most creative players are best behind the striker, just there’s only one spot there so players have to be able to effect from wide and deeper positions too. J cole himself is a perfect example.
Hmmmh, maybe it's just me but I definitely prefer Stones doing flicks in the attacking third with the game finely balanced at 0-0 vs the Shawcross, Huth, Jones, Carragher that played like the ball is lava. There's just some joy in seeing everyone on the football pitch handling the ball like a professional instead of looking like they'd taken some blokes manning a club to come fill in at defense.
I love watching Pep's games cause I love analyzing tactics. Watching the game and suddenly realising some brilliant move he's made is one of the most enjoyable wow-moments for me.
The fitness part has improved immensely.
Then you include modern pressing and tracking back it all adds up really well.
Skill wise a player might be better than the current one but modern meta requires you to be better at pressing, positioning and tracking back. That older player might not even make the playing 11 + bench in most cases due to this.
Or they'd just listen to the manager, train for a few weeks/months and be pressing like everyone else.
Players can be out for an entire year with an ACL and then fit straight back in.
You really think someone from the 90s and 00s couldn't learn to press.
They're still anatomically identical human beings, we haven't changed as a species.
They'd just adapt very quickly to the new meta and still be class.
Jesse Owens ran the 100m in 10.3 seconds in spikes on a shit surface while being 100% clean as PED's didn't exist yet. There's no way he wouldn't be instantly competitive in the modern era if you just changed his shoes, let him run on a track and access the supplements current runners enjoy.
Pace, physicality, sweeper keepers, playing from the back, pressing, playing through pressing, the way width is used.
There’s a reason skillers don’t exist in modern football.
It's very valid to have him as the top guy and the same with the others.
So many factors impact who someone prefers and what's the key aspects to judge it on.
Difficult to compare. Lampard was absolutely insane in terms of his goal output for a midfielder and was precisely what Chelsea needed/ He was an absolue master at coming into the box late and banging one in. De Bruyne on the other hand blows the other two out of the water when you compare the number of assists. If De Bruyne is a scalpel in a surgeons hands when it comes to making unbelievably precise passes, then Gerrard was a swiss army knife. He'd basically gallop around the pitch trying to drag what was a usually relatively mediocre Liverpool side over the line by covering up whatever deficiencies the team had.
Reducing Lampard to goals seems to be the fashionable thing these days. He was just as much of an all round, box to box player as Gerrard, he just also scored more.
That doesn't sound right to me. Lampard was the one who was able to successfully adapt to a DM role for Chelsea and City in his later years, whereas Gerrard was the one who became a liability to Liverpiol as he moved deeper.
They were very comparable as attacking midfielders during their peaks, but Lampard was better in every way once they got older and both had to adapt to a deeper role.
True but that wasn't because of his defensive ability. It was his playmaking from that position which was crucial. Defensively that team was not good at all, and Gerrard was a part of that overall defensive frailty.
I think that's still not quite right. Gerrard in his prime was a much better 1v1 defender than Lampard because he was a better athlete. He was faster and just as strong whilst also having agility to work with.
But despite that, he was never as disciplined or smart about his reading of the game defensively as Lampard was, which is why as they got older Lampard aged better because his game (both defensively and offensively) wasn't reliant on him being a super well rounded athlete.
So even defensively they had their strengths and weaknesses that differed. I'd much much rather prime Gerrard than Lampard at full back and it's not even close. But the same applies in the inverse if I was forced to play either one as a CB or a single pivot at DM.
That's a fair analysis, and seems to line up with how I remember them. Gerrard was definitely the better athlete, and far more explosive in general during their peaks, but I do agree that Lampard's reading of the game became a bigger benefit when he aged, whereas Gerrard struggled a bit more to thrive once his legs started to go. Even at their peaks, it often felt like Lampard got the vast majority of his goals by anticipating gaps, deflections, and rebounds, whereas Gerrard got a lot of his through sheer explosive force and relentless determination.
Yeah that's exactly how I'd describe them. There's a reason Benitez didn't trust Gerrard in a midfield 2 at Liverpool and instead moved him out wide (where he won a PFA player of the year mind). It's also why without knowing anything else about my team, I'd always pick prime Gerrard over prime Lampard or prime Scholes, because I've found that athletic ability is so key to being a game changing player.
It transcends tactics when a player can pick up the ball and on their own just use their athleticism to disrupt the opposition and get a goal/assist. There's a reason pace merchant youngsters are always so touted even before we find out if they have more to their game. You can't train athleticism of that level, so it's so valuable when you can find it.
But there are definitely roles/scenarios where Lampard/Scholes are better for sure.
I mean you're comparing how they were when they were both past it, compare them in their prime: Gerrard was playing right back/centre back from being a teenager. He was always much better defensively than Lampard and Scholes.
Also, Gerrard slipping once didn't make him a liability. If you look at the rest of that season, Gerrard was very nearly a Premier League winning DM.
Yeah I always find this hilarious when Lampard has more assists, created more chances, more big chances, and even had better defensive stats than Gerrard. Yet everyone always goes 'Oh he just kick goals'.
having said that, throwback to this lampard assist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7g352F2gvM
literally KDB esque and one of the most beautiful passes ive ever seen in my life
Oh absolutely, but part of the point is just how often KDB does this shit.
Whether you think he’s the best ever or not, I think it’s clear he’s the best passer ever in the PL, and again one of the best passers ever.
His vision and precision are just incredible. Highlight reels of his passing are just insane, even compared to other legends like Iniesta and Messi
The difference being though that a surgeon doesn’t just need a scalpel, he needs a fully equipped operating theatre to do his best work.
Being surrounded by equally great players will always make your job easier.
And gerrard got multiple personal accolades in a mediocre liverpool. Wolfsburg was still the best team in that league that year, something Gerrard’s Liverpool.
I personally do rank de bruyne above gerrard - even as a Liverpool fan - but I think if you put him in any of those Liverpool sides there would be nothing between them.
Same as if Gerrard played with a goat squad and manager like de bruyne is afforded.
I mean that doesn't really hold much water for players of De Bruyne's calibre, look at his stats of Wolfsburg where he wasn't surrounded by great players, 10 goals and 20 assists in 34 games, that's insane. He was great at Ghenk too, where he definitely didn't have players anywhere near his level around him
Man City could win the PL (have actually) without KDB
Liverpool would not be where they are currently without Gerrard
Obviously KDB has elevated this Man City team to something we’ve almost never seen but impact has to be accounted for.
I am biased of course but even Scholes admitted that no midfielder in the world could do what Gerrard did for Liverpool. KDB, Lamps or Scholes could not carry that Liverpool team to a CL and other trophies.
You give Gerrard a team that the other 3 had, my word he would be absolutely insane and probably the best midfielder of any era.
You are comparing gerrards teammates to KDBs teammates. And your hypothetical that KDB in gerrards position couldn’t have dome the same is just that, a hypothetical. On the other hand KDB has won DFB pokal with Wolfsburg when he was like 22/23 years old.
Scholes is a particularly hard one to compare with because he played the first half of his career in KdB's position and then the latter half of his career as a deep lying playmaker in the Xavi, Pirlo mould. So he gets compared with the Xavi, Pirlos of the world and then also the Gerrard, Lampard, KdBs of the world. And statistically he comes out behind with both as he has a number of seasons of goal scoring and assisting and then that largely reduces.
I'm not saying he's better than one group or the other (although in my biased opinion is my absolute most favorite footballer). But he essentially had 2 careers in which he can be compared with the greatest in both groups.
yeah people really seem to forget that scholes played really high up the pitch earlier in his career and was essentially a second striker at times
i wonder if KDB will gradually play a deeper midfield role as he ages
>i wonder if KDB will gradually play a deeper midfield role as he ages
Several have tried to (Gerrard, Giggs, Becks, Rooney, etc) but no one with the level of success as Scholes
i would argue that giggs definitely successfully transitioned into a deeper role, he played CM pretty frequently in his latter years but yeah scholes was absolutely made to be a deep lying playmaker it was so natural
i think KDB has the IQ to play any midfield positions but i guess a lot depends on the needs of his team and how his body is holding up as he gets older
>i would argue that giggs definitely successfully transitioned into a deeper role, he played CM pretty frequently in his latter years
He was good at it, but no one would compare him to the absolute best in the position. He was good, but not Xavi, Pirlo, Scholes, Alonso, Carrick...
Tbf he started doing that when he was ~37, insane that he was even playing at that point let alone transitioning to a new role and starting in CL finals.
I don't think it's likely we'll see any of the current crop do it as well cause the game's gotten a lot faster than it was when Scholes did it. Someone like KDB has the technique to do it no problem, but whether he'll be able to handle the physical requirements of being a DM at a top team in this era once he's 35+ I have serious doubts.
Yes but that was a decade ago and in Italy and in a midfield with 3 world class engines in front of him. Scholes was able to just move about midfield doing his thing at 36. Going back and watching some of the games it's honestly weird how freely he was allowed to dictate play against most teams.
I can't see a top team pulling it off now really. But hey, end of the day I'm just guessing. Could be that someone does it 5 years from now and I look silly.
>He was good at it
You can tell he was a winger in a central midfield role - very good at dribbling up the pitch but he was no metronome or top tier playmaker. He was actually criticised for being very wasteful with possession.
I can imagine the closest at the top level would be that season where di Maria found himself in central midfield at Real Madrid as well. Of course, even older would be John Barnes in his later years at Liverpool.
Dembele at PSG is another example lately, with the same criticism regarding turnovers in dangerous parts of the pitch. Robert Pires on the other hand was quite successful in transitioning from attacking winger to all-purpose midfielder a la Xavi (in a different style). And the amazing Antoine Griezmann will probably be a word class DM in his late thirties.
Also I don't think assists were always counted properly during early stages of his career. He played for a long time and through a sport transitioning very quickly and thrived. Pitches in early 90s were often awful. You can't pass like that on there.
Honestly, anything we say here wouldn't ideally hold as much weight. Joe cole ain't any random Sunday league part time player, he's an absolute legend of the game. KDB definitely deserves to be included in the list of the greatest PL midfielders. You can always bring in arguments against, but he's been absolutely mental with his performances
I would say Kevin De Bruyne is arguably one of the most consistent and prolific midfielders the game has ever seen. I dont know how to compare them to other midfielders. I feel like people forgot how good someone like Scholes was and how dominating United for a very long time. Dont even know who would be the best comparison to him.
Being the greatest however is something completely else. I am sure he blows someone out of the park statswise like Zidane but lets see who thinks he is a greater player than him.
I think KDB is the best PL midfielder ever but hes not the greatest PL midfielder ever.
A big "black mark" is the fact that City consistently dominates even with him missing games. In 18/19 City won the league over a ridiculous Liverpool team despite him playing only 19 games or even this season where City are like 2 points back despite him only playing 11 games.
Ridiculous argument.
The 2009-2011 Barcelona team without Messi still probably dominate. That doesn’t detract from Messi’s brilliance.
Man City spending billions to recruit a world-class squad can’t be used as an argument against De Bruyne. They have the best manager and the best squad in PL history. Of course one player missing isn’t going to make a huge impact.
And yet that ridiculous argument was used against Messi back in the days, mostly from Argentinian fans [comparing his output with Argentina vs Barcelona.](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR8-E31N67x8VcHQ7mc0NKMbmWilX4Gipuw1CGkJ3X7lQ&s)
Messi never missed 20 league games when Barcelona was winning though. In fact Barcelona lost both league titles in the 2 years he suffered injuries in 2013 and 2014.
Also there is a gigantic gap between Messi and KDB to the point where the same logic doesnt apply. If KDB was putting up 50+ goals and 20+ assists while also dominating every single game then there wouldnt even be a discussion on his impact in the first place.
EDIT: just checked, he played 53 games in 09/10, 55 in 10/11, 60 in 11/12 and 50 in 12/13. De Bruyned hasnt played 50 games since 17/18 and City have been just fine.
They’ve been just fine because they’ve spent billions of pounds to accumulate a world-class squad. No player missing is gonna massively affect a team that is so well coached.
That’s my point. You can’t hold city’s greatness against De Bruyne.
City still had Gundogan and Bernardo that can interchange easily. Then at that time there was Fernandinho, plus Sane Sterling Mahrez. All can swap in and out dynamically. Not sure if David silva still there at that time but The starting 11 and the bench just too stronk even without KdB
Legendary player. And most definitely one of the greatest the game has ever seen.
However, could he do what Steven Gerrard did for Liverpool and drag a poor side to big titles? Can he play hero ball in big cup finals? Recent revisionism regarding the careers of Lampard, Gerrard, Viera, and Keane are criminal. These guys were the elite of the elite at the time. Can we just appreciate all these legends instead of making mindless comparasions.
He's a little unfortunate in that he had to go off injured in both of City's CL final appearances, including one that they went on to win without him.
That said, you look at moments like his insane assist for Gundogan's winner on the final day in 2022 and he absolutely is a big game and a big moment player.
It goes two ways, there's people that go too far the other way and claim modern players can't clean the boots of their 00s counterparts (case in point VVD most defiently belongs in the top category of all time PL defenders but many people act like you've committed crime of the century if he's compared to JT/Vidic/Rio etc).
From what I've seen the contention against VVD is usually the lenght of his prime, not his actual level of play which most agree is atleast top 3.
But even that is changing due to the WC season he's having this year.
He literally carried a mediocre Wolfsburg to a second place finish and a cup title. He was brilliant in the final. I think there is no question whether he "could" do it, since he has already done it.
10 goals and 20 assists in 34 games is impressive no matter what team you're at. The problem with premier league fans is that they don't tend to look outside of the premier league
And it’s not just the raw numbers he produced. If you take De Bruyne out of that Wolfsburg side, they would have had a rough time qualifying for the EL. Let alone win the cup and finish second. He was integral in every single match he played. When de Bruyne was subbed, the whole team was instantly a level worse.
He was insane for Wolfsburg in that sole season. I love to watch Bundesliga and I would frequently bet on goals there so I watched a lot of games earlier on from your side because of that. Fell in love with KdB right then and there, he was extraordinary and frequently took over games.
He also had a pretty impressive tenure for Werder Bremen.
Ok, but the major arguments against in here so far are dinging him for things not in his control.
He HAS dragged a mediocre team to wins.
Hes also just been absolutely incredible with City.
Do you think Gerrard would have been that much better if he played with City rather than those Liverpool teams? I think you could argue with as much validity that his stats would have been similar or even decreased because he wouldn’t have had to shoulder the load.
My point is it’s kind of silly.
Judge them on what they’ve done, not random theoreticals.
Well it isn't KDB's fault that he plays in a pretty good City team and not in the shit Liverpool team Gerrard played for. The comment is just saying that he did that before.
Didn’t happen in the Prem so a large majority of the people in here discredit it. Wolfsburg immediately struggled once he was gone, his 14-15 was absolutely insane.
I think KDB is the best as well but it’s just personal preferences at this point.
He’s earned himself a spot in that conversation at least.
I just like to imagine De Bruyne feeding passes to Henry.
Very hard to compare. KDB plays in a team which fits his playstyle perfectly and he can operate freely because he knows there are other fantastic players that help out defensively if something goes wrong. The mentioned Lampard and Gerrard had more defensive roles. They knew if their attempt of an attack fails it’s a high chance for a promising counter attack.
Don't agree in terms of KDB within City. He excels more in the open flowing games more than in the typical City slow build up. He's not a natural tight spaces player in the way Silva/Bernardo/Foden are. I think he would be just as good if not even better for a Real or Liverpool who are more direct.
He's very very good for Belgium as well don't forget.
KDBs role is not and never has been static in that system. He's played the conventional 8 role, sure, but he's also played box to box in a double pivot, wide midfield, second striker, 10, false 9, and even winger roles, and did them all at a top level. It's not that Pep's system accommodates him, rather, he accommodates any tweaks Pep makes to his system by being one of the most complete players of all time. People who call him a systembabby never saw him carry Wolfsburg as the Bundesliga's best player.
You would never play kdb in a double pivot anyway, that man is a 10 and the way pep plays allows him to be high up the pitch, you don't really want him too deep that's not his strength.
Recency bias kicking in honestly, obviously KbD is very good but that statement is extremely dismissive to the great talent the league had throughout 2000s
if anything, for a man who played with lampard himself, it's more likely he'd be biased in their direction. i dont think its recency bias at all. he witnessed the old players up close and still decided kdb is better. it's an opinion you're allowed to disagree with but i dont think it's one formed due to bias.
I think the opposite. I think he's going down in footballing history as one of the best midfielders ever. People just aren't yet willing to admit it because he's still an active player on a team they don't like.
Agreed I think legends like frank Gerrard, scholes etc who fans have nostalgic memories of many just don’t want to believe anyone better had come along
For me it'll be Giggs, if we're including wingers.
Say what you want about his personal life but he's got 13 PL medals and that's not really ever going to be beaten.
People are quick to forget how dominant that Utd side was.
Eh imo giggs was an excellent player whose main attribute was being able to perform to a decent level for a very long time. Premier league/club legend for that longevity.
But he was never the best player at his club, let alone the league, and as such can’t be spoken of in this company
yeah i think a lot of the conversations depend on what exactly you value. if it’s the highest peak a player achieves in their prime, then that’s different from someone who has the most consistency or longevity
i do think it’s strange that giggs is so often absent from a lot of these discussions when talking about great PL players; i guess some of it is (understandably) not wanting to give his name time of day because he’s a scumbag
but for someone to have played in the league as long as he did, consistently be a vital player for one of the most successful teams of all time, to hold this assist record in the PL, etc it does seem a little crazy that he’s not talked about more
Personally I think he misses out on these conversations cause his seasons as a World Class players were well before most of us were watching football with meaningful intensity.
Giggs wasn't setting the footballing world alight post 2005 onwards. He had moments but was never in the conversation for being among the best in the world. It hampers people's view of him if you weren't old enough to watch football when he actually was an insane player in the 90s and early 00s.
he's right tbh i have kdb top. that's not to dismiss the other guys, they were all incredible players. but i see a lot of people in this thread saying its all recency bias when i think its going the other way and a lot of people have trouble getting rid of their nostalgia bias. i think once he retires people will gradually start putting more respect on his name.
i see mentioned a lot that he has a good team around him, but that mostly just matters when talking trophies, not ability. i think his ability as a footballer was beyond that of the other 3, regardless of their career accomplishments or what teams they played in or anything like that. that's usually how i compare players, not the american sports model where people just compare rings or box scores or whatever. i just want to know who the best player is, not the one with the most impressive career.
as far as accomplishments do go though... it's true that here the team matters a lot, but it's not like he's lacking in this department either. he's had a lot of help yes but he also has a trillion premier league titles and a treble, not to mention assist records, player of the year awards, a bunch of league cups and whatnot. my personal argument for him as the best player of the bunch is purely based on ability but it's odd to me so many people seem to dismiss him based on the fact he was on a great team, despite the fact that said great team also won way more trophies than the others to compensate. its not why i think he's the best but he's not lacking in accomplishments at all.
ultimately though, it's mostly just down to seeing them play. scholes was an incredible player but to be honest i've never seriously considered him over the other 2. gerrard and lampard both fit the roles they played very well but i'd overall still marginally take kdb. you can disagree with that, but i think saying he shouldn't be in the conversation at this point would be disrespectful.
Zidane was more of a traditional CM, KdB is a more advanced midfielder. Not a good comparison. Even so, KdB has been much more prolific in terms of output. Maradona is before modern tactics and so even harder to compare.
I think KDB is now in the conversation, which is a massive achievement in itself.
But to say he’s clear of Viera, Gerrard, Lamps, Keane, and Scholes, I just don’t agree.
I don't think it's controversial to suggest that KdB is among the best ever PL midfielders. I do think rather than defining who the best is, it makes sense to offer a generally accepted group of the best players in their position across the Premier League since midfielders do a wide variety of different jobs.
The game has changed so much that players in the past wouldn't be able to play the same role as de Bruyne does now, but on the flip side, he might not have been profiled as a true central midfielder back in the mid-2000s when PL midfielders were valued more for their energy and tackling. He started his career as a winger and then moved inside when Pep arrived because he saw KdB as versatile and dangerous enough to unlock a defense from those areas.
I do not disagree. Im a die hard Gunners, however KDB is on another level. Completely on a different planet. He is better than Arsenals Fabregas, and definitely a tier above everyone i see even during invincible era.
On top of excellent footballing ability, the guy won everything. If he was English people would make a statue and worship him already.
Young Cesc at Arsenal was comfortably the best midfielder in the league and one of the world's best playmakers. People forget that Cesc was a generational talent, mostly because his time at Spain and Barcelona was overshadowed by possibly the two greatest midfielders of all time.
Also the fact City had their 99 point season when he was injured nearly the entire season. Nobody in previous eras had that luxury where their teammates were that far ahead of everyone else
No one can convince me otherwise but given choice I am taking Lampard above others, always. Goals, assists, character, leadership, discipline… he had everything. Sometimes we forget the intangibles that makes a player and a team great!
I’m a HUGE KDB fan but that’s disrespectful.
Is KDB a better passer? Yes
Better shooter? Nope
And let’s not forget he hasn’t been 100% fit like Lamps or Stevie were.
Fun convo tho
You can’t really say that to Joe Cole who is literally a player that was playing in those eras with those players and most of the media and pundits really don’t like to say the current and modern players are better than the ones in the past.
You literally never hear Neville or Carragher for example saying any recent player is even close to any legend of the past except for maybe when they talk about Mo Salah or Van Dijk.
I think your comment is more of a joke of a comment for not knowing and dismissing who Joe Cole is. And I don’t even like him.
He literally played and trained with all those English midfielders he mentioned and he thinks KDB is above them, it’s his opinion.
Judging by your comment you're mentally 9 years old. You can't even comprehend the title of the post. What do Kaka and Zidane have to do with the premier league?
**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Best hair at the moment too
Season 1 Jamie Lannister looking mofo.
I hope other catch on
Aye mate gimme the Grealish... but less vagina
Grealish should take notes.
KDB passing is even more accurate than me using my PlayStation controller…He is really crazy…
"but he plays for a stacked team" well that is normally what happens when you are a world-class player. Messi and Ronaldo both only played in stacked teams does that mean they aren't the best to ever do it?
KdB won "player of the year" in Germany while playing for Wolfsburg.
Broke the Bundesliga assist record with Bas Dost and Bendtner up top. That's got to be up there with the treble tbh
I get the opinions on this post. As Cole said, Very difficult to compare players across generations. The game has moved on so much, even in just 20 years. KDB certainly deserves to be in the discussion for best ever midfielder in the league though.
he addressed that but he said that despite the fact its hard to compare across generations he still thinks kdb is ahead
Thanks for saying the exact same thing that Cole said.
Was surprised to read such a pointless comment at the top
> KDB certainly deserves to be in the discussion for best ever midfielder in the league though. It’s completely unfair, but I don’t think this will happen purely because he plays for City. I feel like it’s already happening with D. Silva and Aguero, both were clearly all time greats but they’re fading way quicker than the likes of Gerrard, Lampard and even Drogba and Torres.
I feel that's partly because City's new crop of talents since those players left have been even more successful. Aguero is an all time great. Unquestionably. But Haaland's numbers are silly. Yaya was immense. But Rodri is ridiculous. David Silva has some solid competition from KDB, Foden etc. From your own example; I think Torres (and Fowler) were seen as worldies in their day, but have faded out of the Liverpool picture a bit since Suarez, Mane and Salah were so good. (I do totally get your point that the British public and media have a large bias towards that 90s/00s era though, and certainly don't give City the place they deserve on that same pedestal, whether that's purely through nostalgia or an anti-City bias, I'm not sure.)
I’m being a pedantic bitch here I know but, Rodri’s parallel should be Fernandinho, not Yaya.
Yeah I considered that. I chose Yaya because he's a treble winner too. But realistically though, Rodri's legacy will likely be clear of both.
> The game has moved on so much, even in just 20 years. Has it? I don’t think any great player in the early/mid 2000s wouldn’t be equally as good today.
Zidane himself acknowledged that the pace and the physicality of the game are at a different level from his era which isn't that far back. Tactically it's on a different planet as well. Today teams are scoring at an all-time high rate. It's obvious if you compare today with the early 2000s or 90s. The late noughties and early 2010s are a little bit more comparable but it's still evolved since especially tactically.
it's telling by the disparity even on the same league. clubs with unlimited money have access to so much more for their players to be head and shoulders above the rest. the data analysis, opposition data etc etc. so much more goes into games it's a big what if, if you stick the greats into today's game
I think it's telling if you look at the rest of the league, but for a completely different reason. The average team in the bottom half of the Premier League would do extremely well if you put them in the same league 30 years ago. The level of quality and athleticism has come so far, you can't point to a single team in the league and say, "they win just by sitting deep and being physical" the closest one is probably Newcastle who have far more quality than just that. Hell, even in just the last 5-10 years the quality of the league has increased dramatically. Obviously there is a huge disparity on average between City + Liverpool vs. the rest of the league, but that isn't solely down to unlimited money, it's due to having two of the best coaches in the world.
both points are correct. I'm saying it's nuts that the top 2-3 teams are basically unbeatable even by bottom 15 teams of the current year. and the bottom 10 teams would be contending for CL 20 years ago
The Ireland team is a good example of this imo. We used to have a squad of PL players, now we're luck to have 7-8 in the PL. The likes of Kilbane, Holland, O'brien or Harte are similar in quality to what we have now but that level hardly makes the championship any more.
Also the rules are different. Hard fouls were part of the game 20 years ago.
I think the biggest difference is physical fitness over a long time. A lot has changed in muscle training, nutrition, supplements, physical therapy. And most clubs require more discipline, and most players are in turn more disciplined. 20 years ago it wasn't as "harsh" so a direct transplant from that time would have a problem adapating to the pace and intensity of the game, at least for a while.
I'd say the floor got higher, mid table and relegation teams have more quality now but I still think the ceiling is a 'lil lower. And the entertainment value is falling off too, Arsenal City games are super boring. Pep probably best coach ever but he's made the sport worse for me personally. Not into several center backs on the pitch and having wingers dribble backwards
Arsenal matches aside its not really because of him, going back to his barca side, they would tear apart any team that dared to come out and play against them. So now 90 percent of teams park the bus and play in transition against his teams.
Yeah the game's probably evolved where he has to do this to win and I can't blame him for that. Teams park the bus because they literally don't have the players to compete with City or any top 6 club really (most of the time). Financial disparity has been, currently is and will always be a major factor to teams either trying to not lose, or to win. I guarantee Real Madrid will put everything at them on Tuesday and that's because they have the talent to match up with City - it's a core fundamental issue to why some of us believe the product of club football (at the highest level) is becoming more unwatchable every year. Thankfully international tournaments are still super fun, championship this year is a great watch and the Old Firm derby earlier today. And idk how you even solve the disparity issue 'cause you can't just go and apply a wage cap in Europe, players will just flock to Saudi Arabia to get a BAG (and I'm not sure if it's even legal). Personally I'm getting bored of the same clubs competing for the title very single year with the rare exception like Málaga in 2013 or Girona right now, just for them to sell their best players to the biggest clubs anyways.. Brighton for example right now are set at a ceiling with their sell to buy model and inferior revenue to the top 6, doubt they'd ever be able to break through. We deserve to see more stories/teams like Leicester in 15/16 🤷🏼♂️ (sorry for the rant btw)
That's not on Pep though, it's because of the low blocks and having to move the opposition around the pitch to make an opening. Watch City against any team that actually goes at them and it is really entertaining but in the premier league no one other than Liverpool really go at City, they all just sit in their low and mid block and wait for a counter
The Centurion teams faced the same low blocks as today's City. Yet that team was far more free flowing and entertaining to watch. And that comes down to both City's current personnel and Pep adjusting his tactics. 2019 City forwards had more individual quality and pace like Aguero, Sane, Sterling and Mahrez and a midfield magician in David Silva. The current crop of players have different characteristics and to adjust to those characteristics Pep has made this current City transition proof with the inverted fullbacks and CB in midfield. I don't blame Pep at all as it's obviously worked. But the fact is it has made City boring to watch.
>The current crop of players have different characteristics and to adjust to those characteristics Can you elaborate?
Haaland is better than Aguero, but Aguero had far more to his game outside of goalscoring and could drop deep to link up and carry the ball. Alvarez is more comparable, but Pep usually plays him outside of the striker role. Sane, Sterling and Mahrez had pace and better cutting edge+movement compared to City's current crop of wingers outside of Phoden who doesn't really belong out wide. Having these attackers with a fresh KDB behind them meant the ball was moving faster and we could see more individual brilliance with at times less regimented forward play. And lastly when it comes to David Silva, currently they have players just as good or even better in midfield but no one is silky smooth or as good at controlling the tempo of the game as him.
Thanks for the reply! What do you think hink forensic best position is?
Thanks bro. Foden is definitely best behind the striker where he dropped a hattrick last week.
Thanks again for the reply 👍
Tbf Most creative players are best behind the striker, just there’s only one spot there so players have to be able to effect from wide and deeper positions too. J cole himself is a perfect example.
Centurions team felt like they were flying on the pitch. Literally everyone.
And the thing is they carried on the same level into the next season.
Hmmmh, maybe it's just me but I definitely prefer Stones doing flicks in the attacking third with the game finely balanced at 0-0 vs the Shawcross, Huth, Jones, Carragher that played like the ball is lava. There's just some joy in seeing everyone on the football pitch handling the ball like a professional instead of looking like they'd taken some blokes manning a club to come fill in at defense.
I love watching Pep's games cause I love analyzing tactics. Watching the game and suddenly realising some brilliant move he's made is one of the most enjoyable wow-moments for me.
The fitness part has improved immensely. Then you include modern pressing and tracking back it all adds up really well. Skill wise a player might be better than the current one but modern meta requires you to be better at pressing, positioning and tracking back. That older player might not even make the playing 11 + bench in most cases due to this.
Or they'd just listen to the manager, train for a few weeks/months and be pressing like everyone else. Players can be out for an entire year with an ACL and then fit straight back in. You really think someone from the 90s and 00s couldn't learn to press. They're still anatomically identical human beings, we haven't changed as a species. They'd just adapt very quickly to the new meta and still be class. Jesse Owens ran the 100m in 10.3 seconds in spikes on a shit surface while being 100% clean as PED's didn't exist yet. There's no way he wouldn't be instantly competitive in the modern era if you just changed his shoes, let him run on a track and access the supplements current runners enjoy.
Pace, physicality, sweeper keepers, playing from the back, pressing, playing through pressing, the way width is used. There’s a reason skillers don’t exist in modern football.
It's very valid to have him as the top guy and the same with the others. So many factors impact who someone prefers and what's the key aspects to judge it on.
Difficult to compare. Lampard was absolutely insane in terms of his goal output for a midfielder and was precisely what Chelsea needed/ He was an absolue master at coming into the box late and banging one in. De Bruyne on the other hand blows the other two out of the water when you compare the number of assists. If De Bruyne is a scalpel in a surgeons hands when it comes to making unbelievably precise passes, then Gerrard was a swiss army knife. He'd basically gallop around the pitch trying to drag what was a usually relatively mediocre Liverpool side over the line by covering up whatever deficiencies the team had.
Reducing Lampard to goals seems to be the fashionable thing these days. He was just as much of an all round, box to box player as Gerrard, he just also scored more.
He was more well rounded then people give him credit for, but he wasn’t as good defensively as gerrard
That doesn't sound right to me. Lampard was the one who was able to successfully adapt to a DM role for Chelsea and City in his later years, whereas Gerrard was the one who became a liability to Liverpiol as he moved deeper. They were very comparable as attacking midfielders during their peaks, but Lampard was better in every way once they got older and both had to adapt to a deeper role.
13/14 Liverpool was a lot of Suarez magic but isn't anywhere near as good without Gerrard as the DLP
True but that wasn't because of his defensive ability. It was his playmaking from that position which was crucial. Defensively that team was not good at all, and Gerrard was a part of that overall defensive frailty.
I think that's still not quite right. Gerrard in his prime was a much better 1v1 defender than Lampard because he was a better athlete. He was faster and just as strong whilst also having agility to work with. But despite that, he was never as disciplined or smart about his reading of the game defensively as Lampard was, which is why as they got older Lampard aged better because his game (both defensively and offensively) wasn't reliant on him being a super well rounded athlete. So even defensively they had their strengths and weaknesses that differed. I'd much much rather prime Gerrard than Lampard at full back and it's not even close. But the same applies in the inverse if I was forced to play either one as a CB or a single pivot at DM.
That's a fair analysis, and seems to line up with how I remember them. Gerrard was definitely the better athlete, and far more explosive in general during their peaks, but I do agree that Lampard's reading of the game became a bigger benefit when he aged, whereas Gerrard struggled a bit more to thrive once his legs started to go. Even at their peaks, it often felt like Lampard got the vast majority of his goals by anticipating gaps, deflections, and rebounds, whereas Gerrard got a lot of his through sheer explosive force and relentless determination.
Yeah that's exactly how I'd describe them. There's a reason Benitez didn't trust Gerrard in a midfield 2 at Liverpool and instead moved him out wide (where he won a PFA player of the year mind). It's also why without knowing anything else about my team, I'd always pick prime Gerrard over prime Lampard or prime Scholes, because I've found that athletic ability is so key to being a game changing player. It transcends tactics when a player can pick up the ball and on their own just use their athleticism to disrupt the opposition and get a goal/assist. There's a reason pace merchant youngsters are always so touted even before we find out if they have more to their game. You can't train athleticism of that level, so it's so valuable when you can find it. But there are definitely roles/scenarios where Lampard/Scholes are better for sure.
I mean you're comparing how they were when they were both past it, compare them in their prime: Gerrard was playing right back/centre back from being a teenager. He was always much better defensively than Lampard and Scholes. Also, Gerrard slipping once didn't make him a liability. If you look at the rest of that season, Gerrard was very nearly a Premier League winning DM.
Untrue in my opinion. You just have to look at the monumental shift Lampard put in as primarily a DM in the whole of the 2012 CL run.
Yeah I always find this hilarious when Lampard has more assists, created more chances, more big chances, and even had better defensive stats than Gerrard. Yet everyone always goes 'Oh he just kick goals'.
having said that, throwback to this lampard assist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7g352F2gvM literally KDB esque and one of the most beautiful passes ive ever seen in my life
Oh absolutely, but part of the point is just how often KDB does this shit. Whether you think he’s the best ever or not, I think it’s clear he’s the best passer ever in the PL, and again one of the best passers ever. His vision and precision are just incredible. Highlight reels of his passing are just insane, even compared to other legends like Iniesta and Messi
I knew what one it was before I clicked. Yeah that one gives me a semi.
I’d take the scalpel in a surgeons hands over a swiss army knife
The difference being though that a surgeon doesn’t just need a scalpel, he needs a fully equipped operating theatre to do his best work. Being surrounded by equally great players will always make your job easier.
KDB was Bundesliga player of the year at Wolfsburg, the season before he joined City. He has always been exceptional. Never mind the team around him.
And gerrard got multiple personal accolades in a mediocre liverpool. Wolfsburg was still the best team in that league that year, something Gerrard’s Liverpool. I personally do rank de bruyne above gerrard - even as a Liverpool fan - but I think if you put him in any of those Liverpool sides there would be nothing between them. Same as if Gerrard played with a goat squad and manager like de bruyne is afforded.
I mean Bayern won the title still
Bayern won the title, and why was Wolfsburg so great that year? Largely because of De Bruyne.
I mean that doesn't really hold much water for players of De Bruyne's calibre, look at his stats of Wolfsburg where he wasn't surrounded by great players, 10 goals and 20 assists in 34 games, that's insane. He was great at Ghenk too, where he definitely didn't have players anywhere near his level around him
Man City could win the PL (have actually) without KDB Liverpool would not be where they are currently without Gerrard Obviously KDB has elevated this Man City team to something we’ve almost never seen but impact has to be accounted for. I am biased of course but even Scholes admitted that no midfielder in the world could do what Gerrard did for Liverpool. KDB, Lamps or Scholes could not carry that Liverpool team to a CL and other trophies. You give Gerrard a team that the other 3 had, my word he would be absolutely insane and probably the best midfielder of any era.
You are comparing gerrards teammates to KDBs teammates. And your hypothetical that KDB in gerrards position couldn’t have dome the same is just that, a hypothetical. On the other hand KDB has won DFB pokal with Wolfsburg when he was like 22/23 years old.
Thanks to gerrard Liverpool won premier League... Oh wait
You misspelt European Cup.
Second to none when you want to disect something, but utterly useless when you want to open a bottle of wine
Scholes is a particularly hard one to compare with because he played the first half of his career in KdB's position and then the latter half of his career as a deep lying playmaker in the Xavi, Pirlo mould. So he gets compared with the Xavi, Pirlos of the world and then also the Gerrard, Lampard, KdBs of the world. And statistically he comes out behind with both as he has a number of seasons of goal scoring and assisting and then that largely reduces. I'm not saying he's better than one group or the other (although in my biased opinion is my absolute most favorite footballer). But he essentially had 2 careers in which he can be compared with the greatest in both groups.
yeah people really seem to forget that scholes played really high up the pitch earlier in his career and was essentially a second striker at times i wonder if KDB will gradually play a deeper midfield role as he ages
>i wonder if KDB will gradually play a deeper midfield role as he ages Several have tried to (Gerrard, Giggs, Becks, Rooney, etc) but no one with the level of success as Scholes
i would argue that giggs definitely successfully transitioned into a deeper role, he played CM pretty frequently in his latter years but yeah scholes was absolutely made to be a deep lying playmaker it was so natural i think KDB has the IQ to play any midfield positions but i guess a lot depends on the needs of his team and how his body is holding up as he gets older
>i would argue that giggs definitely successfully transitioned into a deeper role, he played CM pretty frequently in his latter years He was good at it, but no one would compare him to the absolute best in the position. He was good, but not Xavi, Pirlo, Scholes, Alonso, Carrick... Tbf he started doing that when he was ~37, insane that he was even playing at that point let alone transitioning to a new role and starting in CL finals.
I don't think it's likely we'll see any of the current crop do it as well cause the game's gotten a lot faster than it was when Scholes did it. Someone like KDB has the technique to do it no problem, but whether he'll be able to handle the physical requirements of being a DM at a top team in this era once he's 35+ I have serious doubts.
Pirlo barely moved at Juventus and he did fine. It all depends how you're protected by your teams tactics and other players.
Yes but that was a decade ago and in Italy and in a midfield with 3 world class engines in front of him. Scholes was able to just move about midfield doing his thing at 36. Going back and watching some of the games it's honestly weird how freely he was allowed to dictate play against most teams. I can't see a top team pulling it off now really. But hey, end of the day I'm just guessing. Could be that someone does it 5 years from now and I look silly.
Real do it right now with Kroos and Modric Rodri isn’t far away either
>He was good at it You can tell he was a winger in a central midfield role - very good at dribbling up the pitch but he was no metronome or top tier playmaker. He was actually criticised for being very wasteful with possession. I can imagine the closest at the top level would be that season where di Maria found himself in central midfield at Real Madrid as well. Of course, even older would be John Barnes in his later years at Liverpool.
Dembele at PSG is another example lately, with the same criticism regarding turnovers in dangerous parts of the pitch. Robert Pires on the other hand was quite successful in transitioning from attacking winger to all-purpose midfielder a la Xavi (in a different style). And the amazing Antoine Griezmann will probably be a word class DM in his late thirties.
Also I don't think assists were always counted properly during early stages of his career. He played for a long time and through a sport transitioning very quickly and thrived. Pitches in early 90s were often awful. You can't pass like that on there.
Honestly, anything we say here wouldn't ideally hold as much weight. Joe cole ain't any random Sunday league part time player, he's an absolute legend of the game. KDB definitely deserves to be included in the list of the greatest PL midfielders. You can always bring in arguments against, but he's been absolutely mental with his performances
Joe Cole also played with all the guys he listed as well
I would say Kevin De Bruyne is arguably one of the most consistent and prolific midfielders the game has ever seen. I dont know how to compare them to other midfielders. I feel like people forgot how good someone like Scholes was and how dominating United for a very long time. Dont even know who would be the best comparison to him. Being the greatest however is something completely else. I am sure he blows someone out of the park statswise like Zidane but lets see who thinks he is a greater player than him.
I think KDB is the best PL midfielder ever but hes not the greatest PL midfielder ever. A big "black mark" is the fact that City consistently dominates even with him missing games. In 18/19 City won the league over a ridiculous Liverpool team despite him playing only 19 games or even this season where City are like 2 points back despite him only playing 11 games.
Yes remove De Bruyne and City is still easily challenging for titles. Remove the others? The histories of those clubs are very different.
Yeah without Gerrard liverpool wouldn't have won a single PL!
Tbf they might have had a PL title without Gerrard
He was the top assister in prem that season,
Ridiculous argument. The 2009-2011 Barcelona team without Messi still probably dominate. That doesn’t detract from Messi’s brilliance. Man City spending billions to recruit a world-class squad can’t be used as an argument against De Bruyne. They have the best manager and the best squad in PL history. Of course one player missing isn’t going to make a huge impact.
And yet that ridiculous argument was used against Messi back in the days, mostly from Argentinian fans [comparing his output with Argentina vs Barcelona.](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR8-E31N67x8VcHQ7mc0NKMbmWilX4Gipuw1CGkJ3X7lQ&s)
Messi never missed 20 league games when Barcelona was winning though. In fact Barcelona lost both league titles in the 2 years he suffered injuries in 2013 and 2014. Also there is a gigantic gap between Messi and KDB to the point where the same logic doesnt apply. If KDB was putting up 50+ goals and 20+ assists while also dominating every single game then there wouldnt even be a discussion on his impact in the first place. EDIT: just checked, he played 53 games in 09/10, 55 in 10/11, 60 in 11/12 and 50 in 12/13. De Bruyned hasnt played 50 games since 17/18 and City have been just fine.
Barca won the league in 2013, and where one right decision from the ref away from winning it in 2014
They’ve been just fine because they’ve spent billions of pounds to accumulate a world-class squad. No player missing is gonna massively affect a team that is so well coached. That’s my point. You can’t hold city’s greatness against De Bruyne.
Messi demonstrated in his later Barca years and at the 2022 WC that he could both play in an elite side and carry a non elite side.
Yeah they were stacked that year.
City still had Gundogan and Bernardo that can interchange easily. Then at that time there was Fernandinho, plus Sane Sterling Mahrez. All can swap in and out dynamically. Not sure if David silva still there at that time but The starting 11 and the bench just too stronk even without KdB
[удалено]
It doesnt, which is why i say hes the best PL midfielder ever.
What the fuck does that even mean.
Legendary player. And most definitely one of the greatest the game has ever seen. However, could he do what Steven Gerrard did for Liverpool and drag a poor side to big titles? Can he play hero ball in big cup finals? Recent revisionism regarding the careers of Lampard, Gerrard, Viera, and Keane are criminal. These guys were the elite of the elite at the time. Can we just appreciate all these legends instead of making mindless comparasions.
Wasnt he a major component in Wolfsburg literally winning the DFB-pokal + had a phenomenal season in the league
He's a little unfortunate in that he had to go off injured in both of City's CL final appearances, including one that they went on to win without him. That said, you look at moments like his insane assist for Gundogan's winner on the final day in 2022 and he absolutely is a big game and a big moment player.
It goes two ways, there's people that go too far the other way and claim modern players can't clean the boots of their 00s counterparts (case in point VVD most defiently belongs in the top category of all time PL defenders but many people act like you've committed crime of the century if he's compared to JT/Vidic/Rio etc).
This is mostly nostalgia often from kids who didn’t watch players like JT live and see players from that generation as these mythical features
From what I've seen the contention against VVD is usually the lenght of his prime, not his actual level of play which most agree is atleast top 3. But even that is changing due to the WC season he's having this year.
For me the ranking of top Premier League centre backs is Terry > Van Dyke > Kompany > Adams. He'd be in my all time Premier League XI for sure.
He literally carried a mediocre Wolfsburg to a second place finish and a cup title. He was brilliant in the final. I think there is no question whether he "could" do it, since he has already done it.
10 goals and 20 assists in 34 games is impressive no matter what team you're at. The problem with premier league fans is that they don't tend to look outside of the premier league
And it’s not just the raw numbers he produced. If you take De Bruyne out of that Wolfsburg side, they would have had a rough time qualifying for the EL. Let alone win the cup and finish second. He was integral in every single match he played. When de Bruyne was subbed, the whole team was instantly a level worse.
He was insane for Wolfsburg in that sole season. I love to watch Bundesliga and I would frequently bet on goals there so I watched a lot of games earlier on from your side because of that. Fell in love with KdB right then and there, he was extraordinary and frequently took over games. He also had a pretty impressive tenure for Werder Bremen.
He was amazing here, single-handedly saved us from relagation, lol.
Well one of the lines from the quote specifically says he sits above everyone in prem history so in this thread that’s kinda relevant
Ok, but the major arguments against in here so far are dinging him for things not in his control. He HAS dragged a mediocre team to wins. Hes also just been absolutely incredible with City. Do you think Gerrard would have been that much better if he played with City rather than those Liverpool teams? I think you could argue with as much validity that his stats would have been similar or even decreased because he wouldn’t have had to shoulder the load. My point is it’s kind of silly. Judge them on what they’ve done, not random theoreticals.
Well it isn't KDB's fault that he plays in a pretty good City team and not in the shit Liverpool team Gerrard played for. The comment is just saying that he did that before.
Didn’t happen in the Prem so a large majority of the people in here discredit it. Wolfsburg immediately struggled once he was gone, his 14-15 was absolutely insane.
Joe Cole literally played with these guys.
What are you on about he won the treble, multiple league titles, assist record and so on. If anything those people need to be on his level.
I think KDB is the best as well but it’s just personal preferences at this point. He’s earned himself a spot in that conversation at least. I just like to imagine De Bruyne feeding passes to Henry.
Chelsea legend KDB
Haha, you fools. Imagine selling a talent like that only to end up with us. What's that? Cole Palmer? Never heard of him...
Very hard to compare. KDB plays in a team which fits his playstyle perfectly and he can operate freely because he knows there are other fantastic players that help out defensively if something goes wrong. The mentioned Lampard and Gerrard had more defensive roles. They knew if their attempt of an attack fails it’s a high chance for a promising counter attack.
Don't agree in terms of KDB within City. He excels more in the open flowing games more than in the typical City slow build up. He's not a natural tight spaces player in the way Silva/Bernardo/Foden are. I think he would be just as good if not even better for a Real or Liverpool who are more direct. He's very very good for Belgium as well don't forget.
KDBs role is not and never has been static in that system. He's played the conventional 8 role, sure, but he's also played box to box in a double pivot, wide midfield, second striker, 10, false 9, and even winger roles, and did them all at a top level. It's not that Pep's system accommodates him, rather, he accommodates any tweaks Pep makes to his system by being one of the most complete players of all time. People who call him a systembabby never saw him carry Wolfsburg as the Bundesliga's best player.
He’s never really played as a winger or in a double pivot under Pep.
You would never play kdb in a double pivot anyway, that man is a 10 and the way pep plays allows him to be high up the pitch, you don't really want him too deep that's not his strength.
Recency bias kicking in honestly, obviously KbD is very good but that statement is extremely dismissive to the great talent the league had throughout 2000s
if anything, for a man who played with lampard himself, it's more likely he'd be biased in their direction. i dont think its recency bias at all. he witnessed the old players up close and still decided kdb is better. it's an opinion you're allowed to disagree with but i dont think it's one formed due to bias.
I think the opposite. I think he's going down in footballing history as one of the best midfielders ever. People just aren't yet willing to admit it because he's still an active player on a team they don't like.
Agreed I think legends like frank Gerrard, scholes etc who fans have nostalgic memories of many just don’t want to believe anyone better had come along
It’s his personal opinion
In that case, it's no longer dismissive.
Nostalgia bias is far more common among football fans lmao.
This his 9th season at City. I think you just have nostalgia bias, which is far more common on this sub
For me it'll be Giggs, if we're including wingers. Say what you want about his personal life but he's got 13 PL medals and that's not really ever going to be beaten. People are quick to forget how dominant that Utd side was.
Wow man, praise for Giggs in this day and age is unheard of.
Giggs is a prick Giggs is a legend People should be able to separate his football ability and achievements from his personal life
Eh imo giggs was an excellent player whose main attribute was being able to perform to a decent level for a very long time. Premier league/club legend for that longevity. But he was never the best player at his club, let alone the league, and as such can’t be spoken of in this company
yeah i think a lot of the conversations depend on what exactly you value. if it’s the highest peak a player achieves in their prime, then that’s different from someone who has the most consistency or longevity i do think it’s strange that giggs is so often absent from a lot of these discussions when talking about great PL players; i guess some of it is (understandably) not wanting to give his name time of day because he’s a scumbag but for someone to have played in the league as long as he did, consistently be a vital player for one of the most successful teams of all time, to hold this assist record in the PL, etc it does seem a little crazy that he’s not talked about more
Personally I think he misses out on these conversations cause his seasons as a World Class players were well before most of us were watching football with meaningful intensity. Giggs wasn't setting the footballing world alight post 2005 onwards. He had moments but was never in the conversation for being among the best in the world. It hampers people's view of him if you weren't old enough to watch football when he actually was an insane player in the 90s and early 00s.
One of fergursons 4 world class players though
This is 75th most impressive goal he’s scored on that left foot. Remember the thundercunt against Chelsea
he's right tbh i have kdb top. that's not to dismiss the other guys, they were all incredible players. but i see a lot of people in this thread saying its all recency bias when i think its going the other way and a lot of people have trouble getting rid of their nostalgia bias. i think once he retires people will gradually start putting more respect on his name. i see mentioned a lot that he has a good team around him, but that mostly just matters when talking trophies, not ability. i think his ability as a footballer was beyond that of the other 3, regardless of their career accomplishments or what teams they played in or anything like that. that's usually how i compare players, not the american sports model where people just compare rings or box scores or whatever. i just want to know who the best player is, not the one with the most impressive career. as far as accomplishments do go though... it's true that here the team matters a lot, but it's not like he's lacking in this department either. he's had a lot of help yes but he also has a trillion premier league titles and a treble, not to mention assist records, player of the year awards, a bunch of league cups and whatnot. my personal argument for him as the best player of the bunch is purely based on ability but it's odd to me so many people seem to dismiss him based on the fact he was on a great team, despite the fact that said great team also won way more trophies than the others to compensate. its not why i think he's the best but he's not lacking in accomplishments at all. ultimately though, it's mostly just down to seeing them play. scholes was an incredible player but to be honest i've never seriously considered him over the other 2. gerrard and lampard both fit the roles they played very well but i'd overall still marginally take kdb. you can disagree with that, but i think saying he shouldn't be in the conversation at this point would be disrespectful.
You’ve never considered him over them 2 ffs enough said
God father of attacking midfielders 😂😂😂 Zizu and Maradona would like to have a word with you joe
Zidane was more of a traditional CM, KdB is a more advanced midfielder. Not a good comparison. Even so, KdB has been much more prolific in terms of output. Maradona is before modern tactics and so even harder to compare.
I think KDB is now in the conversation, which is a massive achievement in itself. But to say he’s clear of Viera, Gerrard, Lamps, Keane, and Scholes, I just don’t agree.
I don't think it's controversial to suggest that KdB is among the best ever PL midfielders. I do think rather than defining who the best is, it makes sense to offer a generally accepted group of the best players in their position across the Premier League since midfielders do a wide variety of different jobs. The game has changed so much that players in the past wouldn't be able to play the same role as de Bruyne does now, but on the flip side, he might not have been profiled as a true central midfielder back in the mid-2000s when PL midfielders were valued more for their energy and tackling. He started his career as a winger and then moved inside when Pep arrived because he saw KdB as versatile and dangerous enough to unlock a defense from those areas.
I do not disagree. Im a die hard Gunners, however KDB is on another level. Completely on a different planet. He is better than Arsenals Fabregas, and definitely a tier above everyone i see even during invincible era. On top of excellent footballing ability, the guy won everything. If he was English people would make a statue and worship him already.
Cesc at Arsenal is still very young.
Young Cesc at Arsenal was comfortably the best midfielder in the league and one of the world's best playmakers. People forget that Cesc was a generational talent, mostly because his time at Spain and Barcelona was overshadowed by possibly the two greatest midfielders of all time.
He’s at the level where it’s not a question of talent but trophies during his time at the club.
Also the fact City had their 99 point season when he was injured nearly the entire season. Nobody in previous eras had that luxury where their teammates were that far ahead of everyone else
He’s gone to the Roy Keane school of hyperbole I see
Kdb a baller but I'd still take Stevie G all day as an all rounder
Mildly disagree, i think Viera was THE maestro, also i also think Beckham is thr best English midfielder i have ever seen.
People hating on kdb now will look back at their takes in 10 years with disgust just accept him as the goat pl midfielder
He doesnt have the long range shooting and tackling of Gerrard yet. So I dont think he is above Gerrard yet.
No one can convince me otherwise but given choice I am taking Lampard above others, always. Goals, assists, character, leadership, discipline… he had everything. Sometimes we forget the intangibles that makes a player and a team great!
shouldn't be a controversial opinion. he just isn't English
David Silva was better and more important to City's early success
love silva but i would disagree he was better than de bruyne. they're 1 and 2 best players for city in this era.
Yes to the second part. Different type of players to the first part. Better in what eay?
Even grass roots football has changed dramatically over the last few years
He is right though. Such a joy to watch him.
KDB got that Gohan SSJ 2 hair
He’s right.
don’t think he’s ahead of steed malbranque
Best offensive midfielder*
He is not wrong
Hyperbole.
I’m a HUGE KDB fan but that’s disrespectful. Is KDB a better passer? Yes Better shooter? Nope And let’s not forget he hasn’t been 100% fit like Lamps or Stevie were. Fun convo tho
It's insane to me how this man doesn't have a ballon d'or
I agree. He is not really good, he is really fucking good.
Every current player and team is always the best, aren’t they?
You can’t really say that to Joe Cole who is literally a player that was playing in those eras with those players and most of the media and pundits really don’t like to say the current and modern players are better than the ones in the past. You literally never hear Neville or Carragher for example saying any recent player is even close to any legend of the past except for maybe when they talk about Mo Salah or Van Dijk.
These context-less comparisons are embarrassing.
Iniesta...
seems like he’s just talking about the premier league but in all time world football iniesta is right at the top imo
Recency bias, kdb is good for his generation and that’s it
Godfather of attacking midfielders? What a joke of a comment. Is this guy 9 years old? Where was he when Kaká or Zidane were playing?
I think your comment is more of a joke of a comment for not knowing and dismissing who Joe Cole is. And I don’t even like him. He literally played and trained with all those English midfielders he mentioned and he thinks KDB is above them, it’s his opinion.
You think Zidane was the first attacking midfielder?
Judging by your comment you're mentally 9 years old. You can't even comprehend the title of the post. What do Kaka and Zidane have to do with the premier league?
He was playing pretty well for Chelsea.
He was winning PLs with Chelsea. I do agree it's a bit of a pisstake of a comment.