Why at Real Madrid it often proves a bad move and not a good one

redout

Here’s an analogy for you to mull over:
An entrepreneur, lets call him Phil, comes up with a product. It can be any product: a website, a toaster, a killer ninja battle droid, you name it, but Phil designs and develops it. He makes it successful. It’s him who brings this product to the attention of the world… and it’s a truly great product. Now once this online killer ninja robot toaster is in the public eye, and shown to be a success, a big corporation buys it. It pays off Phil, the entrepreneur, creator and nurturer, and takes the product for itself, selling it under it’s name and reaping the benefits of it’s spin off fluffy toys and lunch boxes. The great product is now owned by the corporation, helping it succeed, which it does.

Who is great in this equation? Phil or the corporation?
I ask you this because this is how I often see Real Madrid. Most people probably casually accept Real Madrid as king of the uber-super clubs, but why? What actual pragmatic reason is there for this lofty assumption? Before you try and figure it out, Phil isn’t supposed to be anyone at all, but I could, feasibly, have given him any number of names, Alex, Carlo, Claude, Jose, Rafa, Gérard, Louis etc but I didn’t want to tie it to one instance. Because there isn’t one instance. Madrid don’t really develop players. They don’t really even develop teams. They let other clubs and other managers do this, and once the player has proved his worth to the world, they buy him, and use him to make themselves more successful. Which often, they do.

Historically of course, Real are undoubtably great. The early teams of the Di Stefano era and the Quinta del Buitre generation of the 80s are both truly great sides. But in the last 25 years what have Madrid achieved, on their own merit, to make them truly great? Because it’s only really in the last 25 years, even the last 10, that this claim has been forcibly made.
I say this because as Real sit second to Barcelona, again, after the staggering events of the summer, we’re still constantly being reminded, by their players and their fans, and casually by writers in both print and up and down the blogosphere, that this is a uniquely special club. The biggest club in football. The greatest club. We were reminded this constantly as they wheeled out star after star in elaborate presentation ceremonies over the summer, but is this true? Where has this idea come from? Sure, they’re certainly the biggest ’show’ in town, but what makes them a great or even legitimately the biggest, club? Surely the five back to back European Cups won during the Franco regime when the competition was in it’s infancy in the 50s can’t be the only reason they’re still revered so highly? No one’s claiming Nottingham Forest are as great or as big as Juventus or Inter despite having the same amount of replica cups in their trophy cabinet. Their recent history has been decent admittedly, with 3 wins since the 60s, but AC Milan have 5 wins since then, with 3 runners up spots and just as many post Champions League re-structing victories. Liverpool have 5 wins too, all since the 70s. Barcelona and Manchester United are viewed, in some quarters, as bigger than either of those foes, yet they both have a paltry 3 in comparison. So it surely can’t be this which makes Madrid so seemingly massive.

The thing that Barca and United hold over their European Cup superiors is the amount of admired quality that has flowed, grown and been moulded through their ranks. The list of genuinely great teams who play genuinely great football is what has swelled their support bases to where they now stand, as unofficially the two most supported clubs on the planet. This doesn’t make them the greatest, but since we can’t be simply using old European Cup victories as our only criteria we’ll have to look at how Madrid fare in this respect. Well, not that well. The list of genuinely quality players who’ve come up through Real’s Castilla or Reserve structures recently isn’t all that impressive: Eto’o, Cambiasso, Raul, Casillas. Only two of them have made their name at the club and the most famous, Raul, is actually a product of the Athletico Madrid youth structure. Guti? Maybe, but not really great. Arbeloa? Hardly. Can we add Rafa Benitez to the list? He’s possibly a great manager? I’m stretching a little though. In fact West Ham have a far better record of producing world class players in the last 25 years than Real Madrid do.

Now youth team product alone isn’t the be all and end all of greatness. Far from it. Many players realize their potential at a club that didn’t nurture them. Fabregas at Arsenal and Ronaldo at Manchester United being two recent examples. So who have Real had who are similar to this? Hierro? Yes. Robinho? Hmmm, not really, but maybe at a push. Higuaín? Getting there, I’ll count him for the moment. Raul could count, but then he’d be exempt from the earlier category. Surely I can think of more than three, possibly four? This is the greatest club in the world isn’t it?
What else increases the greatness of a club? Well there are the players that reach their peak there. One’s whose long journey to greatness is finally realised majestically at the club they become synonymous with. Who’s synonymous with Madrid? Zidane? Probably yes, still debatable though, he was great a Juve. Roberto Carlos? Yes. Fat Ronaldo? No, he was better at Barca. Figo? Same I’d say. Beckham and van Nistelrooy? Both unquestionably better at Manchester United. Robben? Made his name elsewhere, and I’m moving down the food chain too. Di Stefano and Puskás remain the only certainties in this category, even when extending the board to include their whole history. Alfredo was 27 when he went to Madrid, he fits perfectly. But surely they’re not just riding on his coat tails still? Napoli don’t seem to be doing too well in the great club stakes despite being synonymous with Maradona. I wonder how far up the ladder of greatness Stanley Matthews has propelled Stoke and Blackpool?

OK, I’m getting a bit facetious now, it’s obviously a combination of great old names, a few new ones, and generally sustained success. But the point is what then separates Real Madrid so far from the rest? On close inspection they really aren’t that special. If anything far less than other clubs. Few players become great at Madrid, certainly recently. They’re usually great somewhere else first. Real can rarely claim to have produced, made or molded a great player in the last few decades.
When the other still considered ‘great’ clubs of Europe, the Barcas, Milans, Juves, Bayerns, Uniteds and Liverpools buy, they buy to order. More or less. They rarely poach each others players on such a level and for such frivolous purposes and when they do, the move is generally seen as a sideways one rather than a step up, depending on the current fortunes of each club of course. Yet Madrid not only manage to pick and choose from any club, they also manage to convince the players themselves they’re getting a big promotion. That they’re joining the elite, a band only the brightest and the best are permitted entry to.

So when the Ronaldos, Kakas and Benzemas of this world wax lyrical about what an honour it is to follow in the foot steps of the great players and the great teams of yore to have worn the white shirt, who on earth are they talking about? I could reel you off a name of great players to have played for Milan, Barca, Ajax or United equal or longer off the top of my head. As for teams? Again, what teams? The last truly great Madrid team was the aforementioned Quinta del Buitre. The early Raul era and first Galacticos maybe? Meh, maybe, but that Galacticos team was fairly run of the mill big club success wise. They’d peaked by the time Fat Ronaldo arrived and troughed after Beckham did. 1 Champions League and 3 League titles is equal to the Fergie Fledgling United side that preceded it and only just above the Rijkaard Barca team. Liverpool fans will happily tell you how many Leagues and European Cups they won during a much longer period. Any player of peak age or abouts, and around mine in their mid to late twenties, would have grown up with the truly great AC Milan side of Gullit and Van Basten (not to mention Maldini & Baresi) that retained the trophy in 1990, and who’s successors went on to beat the equally great ‘92 Champions, the Barca Dream Team of Romario, Laudrup, and Stoichkov managed by the legendary Johan Cruyff in 1994. They would have witnessed the home grown fluid brilliance of both Alex Ferguson and recently Pep Guardiola’s Treble winners. They would have seen those same teams win the trophy in 2006 & 2008. They would’ve seen Milan win it again, twice. They may have even seen the Arsenal invincibles play a brand of football far and beyond anything Madrid have managed in 50 years. What, Zinedine Zidane’s glorious 2002 final winner aside, would they have seen so strikingly alluring and uniquely special about Madrid? Steve McManaman? Really?

Now I’m clearly exaggerating slightly, I’m not trying to say Madrid aren’t a big club, or even a great one, it’s just that I’m constantly baffled why anyone, let alone professional footballers, are so uniquely attracted to this particular club. Why it’s seemingly held in such high esteem. Everyone has their own definition of what makes the greatest team in the world, and I’m not proposing an alternative myself (I may be mentioning 3 clubs quite prominently, but simply as a comparison to Madrid, not to promote them as the greatest themselves), but there are many different criteria for such an accolade, and yet Madrid come second best, or worse, in all of them bar pre 1960s success. So it seems odd that they’ve managed to build up this illusion, and convince so many people to blindly accept that they are far and away the biggest club in the sport. They have no stability, no real legacy, no desire to do the hard graft, they simply have one, very simple, strategy; “Who’s the best player in the world right now?..Right, lets buy him” Is that truly the mark of greatness? Or the mark of a once great business now woefully short on ideas.

What an article. I have been asking myself that same question for years.

Courtesy of Footballfancast

Mr Alan

barca fan, right?

m@cc@

There's no new information or insight in that article.

redout

Mr Alan wrote: »

barca fan, right?

This aint nothing got to do with Real Madrid v Barcelona.

Did you read the article that quick ?

It asks why Real Madrid are perceived as the greatest/biggest and questions its merits.

There are many valid points raised in that article.

Mr. Presentable

If there is a football food chain, and there is, Real are at the top and your Man Us and Barcas are feeder clubs. Reads like some bitter crap to be honest. You measure your club on its successes, but don't agree the same criteria be applied to another?

Mr Alan

Its just a dig at Real, that's all.

Mr Alan

they are perceived as the biggest and best cause they've won the most european cups. always had the best players in the world. are the most famous club in the world. and virtually every player on the planet wants to play there.

amacachi

What's the draw to the club? Not money anyway.

redout

Mr Alan wrote: »

they are perceived as the biggest and best cause they've won the most european cups. always had the best players in the world. are the most famous club in the world. and virtually every player on the planet wants to play there.

I am going to ask again.

Have you read the article ?

Eire-Dearg

amacachi wrote: »

What's the draw to the club? Not money anyway.

Success, history, the fact most of the world's greatest players played for it.

Mr Alan

yes. twice.

Glico Man

amacachi wrote: »

What's the draw to the club? Not money anyway.

Prestige

And you would be seen as being at probably the worlds most famous club

mormank

success?? what a load of tosh! they won most of their european trophies back in the day when there were only 2 teams in it!! imo AC Milan's european achievements are by far the most impressive!!

Real...perception, perception, perception! It's all smoke and mirrors with real

CHD

Cliff notes?

redout

Mr Alan wrote: »

they are perceived as the biggest and best cause they've won the most european cups. always had the best players in the world. are the most famous club in the world. and virtually every player on the planet wants to play there.

So let me dissect this.

Perceived as the biggest and best primarily because of the fact that at their peak they won 5 european cups in 10 years between 45-55 years ago.

Sure if thats one of the main basis of the argument then I could argue that Liverpool at their peak over 10 years were equally if not moreso succesful.

Real at their peak over 10 years (55/56 – 65/66)
8 league titles
5 European cups
1 Copa

Liverpool at their peak over 10 years (75/76 – 85/86)
8 league titles
4 European cups
1 Uefa cup
1 FA Cup
4 League cup

Now, "always had the best players". The majority of them they just bought or in one particular famous case stole. When have they actually produced their own ? I think Joan Laporta summed it up best when he said "and the difference is that we create FIFA World Players and Ballon D’Ors, and the other model buys FIFA World Players and Ballons D’Or."

Next "are the most famous club in the world". I would agree that at certain moments in time that they were but I would also argue that Liverpool at one time or another were themselves. I as have many heard repeated whispers that Man Utd are the biggest, most supported club in the world for about the past 15 years. If one is the biggest, most supported football team in the world then surely that is a case for arguing they are currently the most famous is it not ?

and as for "virtually every player on the planet wants to play there" I will now direct you to your very own sig
Mr Alans sig: "The white shirt is a huge privilege for players, but for me the biggest privilege in Europe is the red shirt of Liverpool"-Fernando Torres

Smegball

I like Madrid even though they are our new feeder club

But honestly any team to have Zidane, Ronaldo, Ronaldo, Beckham and Van Nistelrooy in the past 10 years will be a club I will like, even though they bought 3 of them off us

jesus_thats_gre

Hmmm I have always argued that Real's early European Cups, while obviously valid, significantly reduce the achievement of having 9 wins under their belt. It is something that doesn't seem to register with most people for some reason.

Saying that, I don't like the article at all and it seems as much a Barca and United puff piece than an impartial assessment of Real's status in world football.

The other clubs he list stand alongside Real as the biggest and most famous clubs in the world. Real have essentially just spent a **** load on marketing recently and thier brand name is now in everyones head. It isn't sustainable and the cycle will continue as it always has with Milan or whoever else having a few years in the limelight.

recylingbin

Reads like a man united fan pleading with Rooney to ignore the inevitable transfer rumours.

Karmafaerie

Real are the biggest (not best, biggest) cub in the world because they've traditionally had the biggest names.

Why do the best players in the world want to go to Real?
Cause Real pays them more.

Why do clubs sell their best players to Real?
Cause Real pays them more.

It's simple really.
As long as Real continue that policy, they will always attract the biggest players.
As long as they continue to attract the biggest players they will always be considered the biggest club in the world.

When most of the best players want to play for Real, of course the general conception is that they are the best.

elgriff

Mr Alan wrote: »

they are perceived as the biggest and best cause they've won the most european cups. always had the best players in the world. are the most famous club in the world. and virtually every player on the planet wants to play there.

hmmmm....wrong

Dont be at yourself

tl;dr

Mr. Presentable

elgriff wrote: »

hmmmm....wrong

Disseminate and elucidate please.

Mr. Presentable

redout wrote: »

So let me dissect this.

Perceived as the biggest and best primarily because of the fact that at their peak they won 5 european cups in 10 years between 45-55 years ago.

Sure if thats one of the main basis of the argument then I could argue that Liverpool at their peak over 10 years were equally if not moreso succesful.

Real at their peak over 10 years (55/56 – 65/66)
8 league titles
5 European cups
1 Copa

Liverpool at their peak over 10 years (75/76 – 85/86)
8 league titles
4 European cups
1 Uefa cup
1 FA Cup
4 League cup

Now, "always had the best players". The majority of them they just bought or in one particular famous case stole. When have they actually produced their own ? I think Joan Laporta summed it up best when he said "and the difference is that we create FIFA World Players and Ballon D’Ors, and the other model buys FIFA World Players and Ballons D’Or."

Next "are the most famous club in the world". I would agree that at certain moments in time that they were but I would also argue that Liverpool at one time or another were themselves. I as have many heard repeated whispers that Man Utd are the biggest, most supported club in the world for about the past 15 years. If one is the biggest, most supported football team in the world then surely that is a case for arguing they are currently the most famous is it not ?

and as for "virtually every player on the planet wants to play there" I will now direct you to your very own sig
Mr Alans sig: "The white shirt is a huge privilege for players, but for me the biggest privilege in Europe is the red shirt of Liverpool"-Fernando Torres

"History" is more than one ten year period. They have 31 domestic league titles and 18 runners up. Compare that with either of your English teams.

Nine European Cup/CL, again compare with your English teams.

Domestic Cup wins 17, ..............

Most famous does not necessarily mean most supporters. Hitler is more famous than Bono, but I bet Bono has more supporters (maybe not, but you get the distinction, right?)

As for the best players, if I can buy the best car it is still the best car despite the fact I didn't build it myself. Buying players does not relegate said players to being less than the best.

I think the original piece is an amateurish attempt to deflate RM and promote another. Your defence of it is misplaced.

Prufrock

It doesn't matter where you've been its where your going that matters.

They bought in some great talent in Ronaldo, Kaka and Benzema but Barca are still ahead of them. They have to start winning things on a regular basis again.

DazMarz

Karmafaerie wrote: »

Why do the best players in the world want to go to Real?
Cause Real pays them more.

Why do clubs sell their best players to Real?
Cause Real pays them more.

It's simple really.
As long as Real continue that policy, they will always attract the biggest players.
As long as they continue to attract the biggest players they will always be considered the biggest club in the world.

I think the nail has been hit firmly on the head... Money talks and Bullshít walks. Real has more money than God to throw around on Galacticos and hence why a helluva lot of players want to play there. Economics.

mike65

Real Madrid had a fair bit of "help" to win some of the early European Cups.

Mr. Presentable

mike65 wrote: »

Real Madrid had a fair bit of "help" to win some of the early European Cups.

You can point to "help" for any of them. Barca got "help" vs Chelsea last year to get to the final. Liverpool when they beat Milan in the final. I don't know what help you refer, but you can't get much more than a blatant penalty not given, and one given where undeserved.

m@cc@

nipplenuts wrote: »

You can point to "help" for any of them. Barca got "help" vs Chelsea last year to get to the final. Liverpool when they beat Milan in the final. I don't know what help you refer, but you can't get much more than a blatant penalty not given, and one given where undeserved.

I'd say he's referring to the Franco regime.

inforfun

m@cc@ wrote: »

I'd say he's referring to the Franco regime.

So did teams in Eastern Europe during communism. Big help in the domestic leagues still doesnt help you win European cups.

Being a big team or not can not always be judged with league/cup wins.
There is stuff that make a club big that can not be measured.

In Holland feyenoord and Ajax will always be the big clubs while over the last 10 years they can not even get close to PSV as it comes to prices won. Still, PSV will never ever be judged as a bigger club than Feyenoord or Ajax

Nulty

IMO, Real are another Coca-Cola or McDonalds. They buy up whats available and drop it when they're done. Coca-Cola is one of the richest Corporation in the world and it makes sweet fizzy water. You don't need to have any substance to your product to be considered the best at something.

Real are the greatest Magicians in football. They're feet don't touch the ground. They're a phenomenon. They outsource everything.

It's as big a mystery how Real sustain their veil of greatness as how a company that sells sweet fizzy water is the biggest brand name in the world.

We ought to promote and appreciate merit and creativity rather than money and fame but the simple fact is that people who buy sweet fizzy water in those quantities want a shiny football team to watch with their beverage.

I'm rambling and losing my focus at this stage...

Pro. F

I enjoyed that article because I despise Real and I like to point out their shortcomings. Although the arguments about what team is the biggest in the world are a little pointless, imo, because there is no definitive way of measuring that.

I don't despise Real because of any club loyalties but because of what they represent. They are Franco's team. Support for Franco in Spain is very strong still to this day and Real are a part of that. They are financially supported by a corrupt banking and government system and that is how they have the money to attract and buy all their star players. The number of trophies they have won and the number of star players they have signed is irrelevent to me. Maybe they are the ''biggest'' team in the world but if that is true then it just shows that the world is a nasty place.

DazMarz

Nulty wrote: »

IMO, Real are another Coca-Cola or McDonalds. They buy up whats available and drop it when they're done. Coca-Cola is one of the richest Corporation in the world and it makes sweet fizzy water. You don't need to have any substance to your product to be considered the best at something.

Real are the greatest Magicians in football. They're feet don't touch the ground. They're a phenomenon. They outsource everything.

It's as big a mystery how Real sustain their veil of greatness as how a company that sells sweet fizzy water is the biggest brand name in the world.

We ought to promote and appreciate merit and creativity rather than money and fame but the simple fact is that people who buy sweet fizzy water in those quantities want a shiny football team to watch with their beverage.

I'm rambling and losing my focus at this stage...

But you make a very valid point.

It happens all too often that flash and splash will get more kudos than hard graft.

One of the best quotes I ever heard was from the film The Damned United; "You're the shop front, the razzle and bloody dazzle... But I'm the goods at the back! Without me, you'd have fúcking nothing!"

But it is so untrue at times... Sultans of spin can make something that is all style and no substance appear to be so much more.

There is a very good reason why Real have not won a European Cup in nearly 10 years; simply not good enough. There have been bigger and better teams there, and the same is happening in Spain too.

Real will always be one of the biggest teams in the world, but a great deal of it is window-dressing. All style but very little substance.

Bodhidharma

I think a lot of the Mystique of Real comes from the traditional demographics of world football. Real are from Spain, therefore players from around that region; France, Spain, and Portugal view them as the biggest club in the vacinity. Add to this the fact that nearly all South American players speak Spanish and would naturally go to a place most like home, which is Spain, as has already been established Real are the biggest team in the league (most titles). As we all know, South American players have been some of the exciting of all time; Di Stefano, Valdano, Hugo Sanchez, Ronaldo, Kaka so its natural to associate their flair with the flair of Madrid.

So there you have it, three of the biggest footballing nations and probably the continent of South America view Madrid as the greatest, all the other contenders are split by smaller demograpics. Milan and Munich have large fan bases but not wordlwide, Liverpool and United are in the same country so are in affect split. Africa cant really afford to support a club (financially I mean), North America is disinterested, as is Australia to an extent, and the Asian market is still emerging.

Barcelona are an interesting comparison but they've had less footballing success so I guess they're not as 'big'.

Idu

redout wrote: »

I think Joan Laporta summed it up best when he said "and the difference is that we create FIFA World Players and Ballon D’Ors, and the other model buys FIFA World Players and Ballons D’Or."[/B]

Never quite got this. I know what he's getting at but it doesnt really stand up IMO. This is a list of Barca's Ballon D'or winners

Luis Suarez - 1960
Johan Cruyff - 1973, 1974
Hristo Stoichkov - 1994
Rivaldo - 1999
Ronaldinho - 2005
Lionel Messi - 2009

Possibly Figo and Ronaldo could be included although they won the trophy while at other clubs the following year.

So out of that group only really Suarez, Figo and Messi were really unknown quantities before willing the Ballon D'or at Barca. Maybe you could include Stoichkov. The others were brought in after considerable success elsewhere

Ush1

redout wrote: »

So let me dissect this.

Perceived as the biggest and best primarily because of the fact that at their peak they won 5 european cups in 10 years between 45-55 years ago.

Sure if thats one of the main basis of the argument then I could argue that Liverpool at their peak over 10 years were equally if not moreso succesful.

Real at their peak over 10 years (55/56 – 65/66)
8 league titles
5 European cups
1 Copa

Liverpool at their peak over 10 years (75/76 – 85/86)
8 league titles
4 European cups
1 Uefa cup
1 FA Cup
4 League cup

Now, "always had the best players". The majority of them they just bought or in one particular famous case stole. When have they actually produced their own ? I think Joan Laporta summed it up best when he said "and the difference is that we create FIFA World Players and Ballon D’Ors, and the other model buys FIFA World Players and Ballons D’Or."

Next "are the most famous club in the world". I would agree that at certain moments in time that they were but I would also argue that Liverpool at one time or another were themselves. I as have many heard repeated whispers that Man Utd are the biggest, most supported club in the world for about the past 15 years. If one is the biggest, most supported football team in the world then surely that is a case for arguing they are currently the most famous is it not ?

and as for "virtually every player on the planet wants to play there" I will now direct you to your very own sig
Mr Alans sig: "The white shirt is a huge privilege for players, but for me the biggest privilege in Europe is the red shirt of Liverpool"-Fernando Torres

Peak is one thing, 9 European cups is better than 5 no matter how they won them. Simple.

Ush1

Bodhidharma wrote: »

Barcelona are an interesting comparison but they've had less footballing success so I guess they're not as 'big'.

No club has had as much European success as Real.

m@cc@

inforfun wrote: »

So did teams in Eastern Europe during communism. Big help in the domestic leagues still doesnt help you win European cups.

Ah c'mon. I'm sure you mean it doesn't guarantee you European Cups, it definitely helps to know your domestic competitions are not going to be that competitive.

Idu wrote: »

Never quite got this. I know what he's getting at but it doesnt really stand up IMO. This is a list of Barca's Ballon D'or winners

Luis Suarez - 1960
Johan Cruyff - 1973, 1974
Hristo Stoichkov - 1994
Rivaldo - 1999
Ronaldinho - 2005
Lionel Messi - 2009

Possibly Figo and Ronaldo could be included although they won the trophy while at other clubs the following year.

So out of that group only really Suarez, Figo and Messi were really unknown quantities before willing the Ballon D'or at Barca. Maybe you could include Stoichkov. The others were brought in after considerable success elsewhere

Rivaldo, Ronaldinho and Stoichkov were a long way off winning the Ballon D'or before they moved to Barca.

redout

Idu wrote: »

Never quite got this. I know what he's getting at but it doesnt really stand up IMO. This is a list of Barca's Ballon D'or winners

Luis Suarez - 1960
Johan Cruyff - 1973, 1974
Hristo Stoichkov - 1994
Rivaldo - 1999
Ronaldinho - 2005
Lionel Messi - 2009

Possibly Figo and Ronaldo could be included although they won the trophy while at other clubs the following year.

So out of that group only really Suarez, Figo and Messi were really unknown quantities before willing the Ballon D'or at Barca. Maybe you could include Stoichkov. The others were brought in after considerable success elsewhere

That is outrageous.

Suarez, Stoichkov, Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Figo, Ronaldinho and Messi all developed into Ballon D'or winners from their time at Barca. The only one who did not would have been Cruyff.

The only player to develop into a Ballon D'or winner at Real Madrid was Raymond Kopa. I suppose if you want to reach you could argue Di Stefano though the fact he had a record of 147 goals in 193 appearances prior to joining Madrid kind of dispels any notion that he developed into a phenom only after he arrived!

Bounty Hunter

There is a big difference between Biggest club and Best club. Madrid may be the biggest club in the world and may have been for longer periods of time than anyone else but they were not always the best during this time and are not now imo.

People are talking about how they just buy in the biggest stars but as said this does not make them worse players because they were not developed at Madrid and does of course hugely raise the profile of the club. However it can lead to a team of Individual Galacticos who perhaps dont compliment each other as well as a team of players developed primarily at the club would. Thus despite Madrid buying the best players around may keep them as the biggest and most high profile club in the world where other big name players want to go to play alongside some of the nbest in the business but it will not neccesarily make them the best team.


...Isn't there a Madrid Superthread somewhere

Idu

redout wrote: »

That is outrageous.

Suarez, Stoichkov, Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Figo, Ronaldinho and Messi all developed into Ballon D'or winners from their time at Barca. The only one who did not would have been Cruyff.

The only player to develop into a Ballon D'or winner at Real Madrid was Raymond Kopa. I suppose if you want to reach you could argue Di Stefano though the fact he had a record of 147 goals in 193 appearances prior to joining Madrid kind of dispels any notion that he developed into a phenom only after he arrived!

Stoichkov scored 81 goals in 108 games before going to Barca in what was a much tougher Bulgarian league than now.

Ronaldo got 42 in 46 over two seasons with a good PSV team and was only at Barca one year.

Rivaldo was sensational at Depor for a year before Barca "developed" him

They paid 32million for Ronaldinho. That's a lot of money for a player they intend on developing.

If you're not going to allow Di Stefano then you can't really allow all of these then really

m@cc@

Idu wrote: »

Stoichkov scored 81 goals in 108 games before going to Barca in what was a much tougher Bulgarian league than now.

Ronaldo got 42 in 46 over two seasons with a good PSV team and was only at Barca one year.

Rivaldo was sensational at Depor for a year before Barca "developed" him

They paid 32million for Ronaldinho. That's a lot of money for a player they intend on developing.

If you're not going to allow Di Stefano then you can't really allow all of these then really

Did any of them win the Ballon D'Or before going to Barca?

Idu

m@cc@ wrote: »

Did any of them win the Ballon D'Or before going to Barca?

That's like saying if Ibrahimovic won it then it's because Barca developed him

m@cc@

Idu wrote: »

That's like saying if Ibrahimovic won it then it's because Barca developed him

It's nothing like that at all, Ibrahamovic has been playing amongst the top of European football for 5 years. Bad example.

pickarooney

Bodhidharma wrote: »

As we all know, South American players have been some of the exciting of all time; Di Stefano, Valdano, Hugo Sanchez, Ronaldo, Kaka so its natural to associate their flair with the flair of Madrid.

Two Brazilians and a Mexican? Pedantic on the Sanchez front, granted, but the whole 'Spain is like home' thing falls flat when you bring non Spanish-speakers into the equation, particularly ones who are past their best by the time they leave their Italian clubs to join Real.

gimmick

m@cc@ wrote: »

Did any of them win the Ballon D'Or before going to Barca?

As Laporta said "Madrid buy ballon Dors, we make them" or something to that effect. The fact that most Barca players who won the award were Barca players when they won it, while most Madrid players won it previous to being a Real player ends the argument

Idu wrote: »

That's like saying if Ibrahimovic won it then it's because Barca developed him

No, it isn't.

Ush1

Idu wrote: »

Stoichkov scored 81 goals in 108 games before going to Barca in what was a much tougher Bulgarian league than now.

Ronaldo got 42 in 46 over two seasons with a good PSV team and was only at Barca one year.

Rivaldo was sensational at Depor for a year before Barca "developed" him

They paid 32million for Ronaldinho. That's a lot of money for a player they intend on developing.

If you're not going to allow Di Stefano then you can't really allow all of these then really

Ronaldinho was well developed by the time Barca bought him, but you just ain't gonna win a 'Dor playing at PSG, but he was just as good a player there.

Bubs101

Didn't bother reading the article but who really cares who's the biggest football team in the world right now. Considering how the game's grown Barca, Juve, Milan, United, Liverpool and Bayern are all sitting pretty because of new markets and advanced technology giving them more exposure. I doubt any of them care who's "bigger"

fillmore jive

Ush1 wrote: »

Ronaldinho was well developed by the time Barca bought him, but you just ain't gonna win a 'Dor playing at PSG, but he was just as good a player there.

did George Weah not win the ballon d'or at PSG?

Sir Gallagher

Is somebody still a little bitter about the Ronaldo move?

Ush1

fillmore jive wrote: »

did George Weah not win the ballon d'or at PSG?

Pretty sure he was at Milan at that stage. Plus that was when more was thought of French league football.