What is the best team or player that you have seen. It may be a team or player that reached climax before you were born, but that you have seen on videos (not highlights only though).

Mine is the Clockwork Orange of 1974, the dutch national football team that took part in the World Cup that year. I've never seen them live, but I have seen the matches on video and they were incredible. There isn't any football team that brought such a revolution to the game: they invented modern football.
Ultimately the most incredible thing is that they actually lost the final of that WC. Only the germans could have made it...

The 2 best American College Football teams I've seen are:

1995 Nebraska Cornhuskers
2001 Miami Hurricanes

NFL TEAM: 1999 St. Louis Rams
NBA TEAM: Any Chicago Bulls team from the early to mid 90's

EDIT: MLB TEAM: 1998 NY Yankees

2000 yankees??? What about 1998 when they had 116 wins? That was the best MLB team ever.

Hockey: Best Player i say is a tie- Wayne Gretzky and Bobby Orr. Wayne is great but a hockey player especially forwards usually have to deal w/ punishing checks by the defense. I think when gretzky played a team, they probably thought they would be fined if they touched him, because i have hardly ever seen a guy hit him. Now Bobby Orr, he was just awesome

GO BRUINS

1995 Cornhuskers-Best college football team of all time.

The Bears of 1985 were the best pro team ever. Bar none.

Early 90's Bulls- Best basketball team ever. Period.

88 A's as a POWERHOUSE baseball team. They lost to the Dodgers, but they still had a GREAT team.

The best individual player that I have ever SEEN is either Barry Sanders or Michael Jordan.

Hockey:

Montréal Canadien of 1976-1979
Edmonton Oilers of 1984-1990

I have to agree with McDread :D No better team, ever. Ok, maybe they would get their ass kicked against the Real Madrid of today, but Real Madrid would indeed be playing against the inventors of modern football. Everyone is still mad about the fact we didn't win...on the other hand I won a bit too since I'm both Dutch and German :p However, I can't say Germany won because of stupid decissions of the referee (although that penalty wasn't really a penalty...but one can have a whole new thread about that) and it was a pretty fair game when it comes to scores.... Gerd Mueller was the 'Bomber' after all....we didn't have AA guns.

oh, and when it comes to individuals, I vote for both Michael Jordan, and in (european) football Johan Cruyff. He's crowned best European player of the century, but is 3rd (after Pele and Maradona) in the world rankings... I don't wanna say much, but Cruyff was better than Maradonna, and Pele being better...some discussion as well I think.

ok I'll try to go with other sports than the 5 main here (foot-hockey-basket-soccer-base)...I'Ve seen ...Tough!

Curling : Guy Hemming's team (Quebec) at the Brier 2 years ago...The tournament was in west Canada and all the crowd was screaming like hell GUY GUY GUY GUY!!!

Snooker: Hendrix (right spelled?)

Pool: that Chinese girl...

Golf (if a sport ): tiger woods

Swimming :Ian Thorpe

World Strongest Man : Magnussen

Street luge: do I have to name it? :)

Boxing : Prince Naseem Hamed

Boulingrin: Agatha Pullman

:lol: :)

Curling is a sport?

:hmm:


I forgot boxing BTW:

Ali

Some fine ones mentioned here, particularly by the Nebraska boys

Some of mine may sound repetitive, as I have mentioned them before

Muhamad Ali: remember when you could actually watch boxing on network tv for free? and Sugar Ray Leonard.

The 70's Steelers, Man I was proud to be a Pennsylvanian in those days

the 70's Cowboys weren't too shabby either. Tom Landry had class.

Penn State; Several undefeated seasons, Champs in 82 and 86, and I went to some of those games.(yes, there were times when Nebraska Looked amazing too)

Those Damn Yankees of the late 90's

Da Bulls and the 85 Bears

More later

Originally posted by willemvanoranje
However, I can't say Germany won because of stupid decissions of the referee (although that penalty wasn't really a penalty...but one can have a whole new thread about that) and it was a pretty fair game when it comes to scores

Yeah, in the end I think it was deserved. Holzenbein already admited he dived, but in the second half there was also a disallowed goal scored by Müller that should have counted. For me the key moment was a dutch counter-attack that found Cruijff and Rep clear with only Beckenbauer ahead of them. When everyone expected Cruijff moving forward to face Beckenbauer so that the public could see who among both of them was the best player in the world, he made a pass to Rep who was runing clear on the left. Maier made an excelent effort and Rep struggled to reach the ball first. His shot found Maier's body and Holland missed a great oportunity to get the lead again. I think they would have won if they scored this goal. Rep still says that Cruijff was a little scared to challenge the Kaiser and when he finally decided to give him the ball, the timing was not the best anymore. It seems that he never got another Xmas card by the Cruijff family after he said that. ;)

I vote for both Michael Jordan, and in (european) football Johan Cruyff. He's crowned best European player of the century, but is 3rd (after Pele and Maradona) in the world rankings... I don't wanna say much, but Cruyff was better than Maradonna, and Pele being better

In that we disagree. In my opinion Maradona was by far the best player ever to step a football pitch. He's not a model of virtue outside a stadium (more the opposite), but in the pitch he was the closest thing to a divine incarnation. Cruijff and Pelé were also superb, as were Di Stefano, Eusébio or Beckenbauer.

Originally posted by WildFire444
2000 yankees??? What about 1998 when they had 116 wins? That was the best MLB team ever.
Oops, forgot about that team. :o

Best baseball player I've ever seen, or anyone's ever seen for that matter, is Barry Bonds. I had great seats at one game in Candlestick (the old stadium they used to play in) and my friend and I shouted 'Go, Barry!' when he came up to bat, and he actually turned around and looked right at us! He hit a triple.

Best I've read about? Chicago Cubs of the early 20th century.

Best I've seen? 2001 Seattle Mariners.

Ahhh, the age old Maradonna/Pele/Cruyff debate. You cannot say for sure which one is the best ever because there are always situations when one would be the better option. But I would have to say Pele every time.

Cruyff's temprament was always suspect, he wasn't a really a team player as his almost criminal pulling out of the 1978 World Cup showed. Also if you compare him with Maradonna, I think that big Diego's all round play is superior. Maradonna had it all skills wise, but again as with many of the great players had an offsetting character. Also, he never truly seemed to turn it on at the very biggest stage. He was anonymous in both the 1986 & 1990 WC finals (well, apart from making the winner in the 1986 final, but one single good piece of play in 90 mins is pathetic really) and never played well in the big matches for Napoli or Barca.

Pele however had it all. Strength of an ox, outstanding technique with either foot, eyes in the back of his head to spot his teammates runs, killer power and presicion with head or feet, the desire to win through brick walls if it meant victory and the personallity that made him a hero for the fans, a father for the players and a God to the media. 1200+ top level career goals, 98 at international level, both those records, he really was a class above the rest in every department. It is just a shame he never came to play for one of the big European clubs, then he would have proved such a question as this redundant.

Originally posted by mordhiem
Cruyff's temprament was always suspect, he wasn't a really a team player as his almost criminal pulling out of the 1978 World Cup showed. Also if you compare him with Maradonna, I think that big Diego's all round play is superior. Maradonna had it all skills wise, but again as with many of the great players had an offsetting character. Also, he never truly seemed to turn it on at the very biggest stage. He was anonymous in both the 1986 & 1990 WC finals (well, apart from making the winner in the 1986 final, but one single good piece of play in 90 mins is pathetic really) and never played well in the big matches for Napoli or Barca.

Now I hjave to disagree. Cruyff didn't go to the '78 world cup because of his wife. His wife forbad him to go. A lot of you might know that there was a little pool party in the hotel of the dutch players during the 1974 WC, which was photographed by some german paper...was a big scandal, and Cruyff's wife got very upset. He had to promise her not to go on a long trip like that again. At least that's the most asumable thing... Cruyff was a person that made the entire team better, he knew everything for every position and knew better what that position meant than any of the guys actually playing there. He invented the total-football. He was a teamplayer, a leader. Maybe you can question his loyalty: in his final years, after a fight with the Ajax-board, he left for Feyenoord for a year...unforgivable.

Pele however had it all. Strength of an ox, outstanding technique with either foot, eyes in the back of his head to spot his teammates runs, killer power and presicion with head or feet, the desire to win through brick walls if it meant victory and the personallity that made him a hero for the fans, a father for the players and a God to the media. 1200+ top level career goals, 98 at international level, both those records, he really was a class above the rest in every department. It is just a shame he never came to play for one of the big European clubs, then he would have proved such a question as this redundant.

indeed, that's the big question...some say those 1200 goals aren't that hard to achieve in such leagues (Maradona could've done it as well), I'm not sure though. Indeed the big problem in comparison between Cruyff, Pele and Maradona is, that they didn't mean the same thing to their team. Cruyff was the leader, inventer of total football, he made the other players so much better, and he scored every now and then as well. But Maradona was a man of actions, goals of the highest level, the rush from the midfield against England. Pele and Maradona come closest in comparison I think, since Pele was also man of goals, technique and beauty in football. But we all agree they are the 3 best in the world. (1 on 1 I think Cruyff would be defeated rather easily though, but then Davids would be winner :p)

Best teams?
As one has said elsewhere, Australia in the mid to late 1990s in cricket, and Essendon in 2000 for AFL.
Best players? Gary Ablett for AFL.

how about 'best moment'. I'd say that american guy that jumped 8.90 meter on the olympics in '84 or something. That record has been broken by now, but it was phenomenal back then. It was also the last big achievement the guy ever made, like he was born for that moment.

Originally posted by willemvanoranje
how about 'best moment'.

Given the different nationalities, and their subsequent different sporting focus, ye are going to have a whole conglomeration of events, moments and situations that many have no idea what ye are talking about.
This highlights the problem in these generalist polls, which try and get opinion from all sports. One has not even heard of any of these soccer players ye mention, except Pele - he is an African or something?
And ye would have no idea who I am talking about if I were to give my 'best moments'. :p :cool:

Well, off the top of my head, one best moment has to be Warne's bowl at Gatting in 1990/1/2?

1993. First ball he had bowled in an Ashes series. Brilliant huge leg break.
He is going to have a lot of fun this summer with the miserable Eeenglish batsmen. :D

Originally posted by willemvanoranje
how about 'best moment'.

I might as well get it in before someone else does :D.

"Some people are on the pitch! They think it's all over..."

what game was that?

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade


Given the different nationalities, and their subsequent different sporting focus, ye are going to have a whole conglomeration of events, moments and situations that many have no idea what ye are talking about.
This highlights the problem in these generalist polls, which try and get opinion from all sports. One has not even heard of any of these soccer players ye mention, except Pele - he is an African or something?
And ye would have no idea who I am talking about if I were to give my 'best moments'. :p :cool:

true, and Pele is Brazilian, Maradona Argentinan and Cruyff Dutch. So you never heard of any Ausi football players either? Mark Viduka, Bosnich, Culina, Emerton.... But true, I don't even understand cricket, and only the fact that a match can go on for 5 days makes me understand it must be a very uncommon sport... on top of that it has the name to be veeeeeery boring here...then again, so does football in the US..

Originally posted by willemvanoranje
true, and Pele is Brazilian, Maradona Argentinan and Cruyff Dutch.

So you never heard of any Ausi football players either?

Mark Viduka, Bosnich, Culina, Emerton....

But true, I don't even understand cricket,
and only the fact that a match can go on for 5 days makes me understand it must be a very uncommon sport... on top of that it has the name to be veeeeeery boring here...then again, so does football in the US..

Brazilian? He doesn't look it.

Sure, I've heard of Aussie football players, but none of those soccer players. The general character of their names can tell ye something; that soccer is only really played and followed by ethnic minorities over here.

Cricket is a very common sport, watched and played by millions upon millions upon millions, even though those in the subcontinent have a peculiar view of the game. And it is definitely not boring to the appreciative eye. Such feats as the tied Tests and Atherton batting out two days to save a match are anything but boring.
Soccer does not only have the reputation of being boring and pointless in the US, but here also. :D

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade


Such feats as the tied Tests and Atherton batting out two days to save a match are anything but boring.

That's right. Who remembers Atherton vs. Donald. Another great moment of (recent) cricket.

Cricket, like any sport, is a game of tactics, but if you don't understand the game then it can appear slow and boring. And, let's face it, sometimes it is slow and boring - but that's the nature of the beast. However, we could quite easily sit there for endless hours watching the battle between a great fast bowler trying to outwit a top order batsman. The batsman might duck and swerve and nick the ball, but then suddenly he might be all over the bowler hit him round the ground and the battle (if not the war) has been won.

As I say, like many other sports, it's a mind game, and only if one has a grasp on the tactics, etc, can one fully appreciate the excitement in seeing the ball pass the bat, or a maiden over.

Even my French g/f enjoys the game now. It took some converting but I got her there! Might not let her see any of the Ashes, though...

:lol: well I can't say I've ever really watched a cricket game on high level, so I'll just believe what you say. Everyone has his own opinion of course. The reason that Pele doesn't look Brazilian is simple, could've thought of it yourself, his descendents must've been Portuguese, Dutch or Spanish slaves that were taken from Africa to work on the land over there.

What about The All Blacks of New Zealand rugby? If I reacll, they were pretty dominating back about 5 yrs ago

Originally posted by Pillager


That's right. Who remembers Atherton vs. Donald. Another great moment of (recent) cricket.

Cricket, like any sport, is a game of tactics, but if you don't understand the game then it can appear slow and boring. And, let's face it, sometimes it is slow and boring - but that's the nature of the beast. However, we could quite easily sit there for endless hours watching the battle between a great fast bowler trying to outwit a top order batsman. The batsman might duck and swerve and nick the ball, but then suddenly he might be all over the bowler hit him round the ground and the battle (if not the war) has been won.

As I say, like many other sports, it's a mind game, and only if one has a grasp on the tactics, etc, can one fully appreciate the excitement in seeing the ball pass the bat, or a maiden over.

Even my French g/f enjoys the game now. It took some converting but I got her there! Might not let her see any of the Ashes, though...

One was thinking more of 1995/6, with his 185 not out, but his recent innings against Donald in 1998 was also terrific. Such a pity we destroyed his Test career.

There is great tension and mind games in cricket, where even when batting to save a game, the tension is incredible. One thinks of Lindsey Kline against the Windies, Mike Whitney against a rampant Hadlee, Dean Jones in the tied Test in 1986/7, the 1995/6 Sheffield Sheild final, Iron Mike of course, and many others.
And anyone who thinks that this means that cricket is defensive and boring need only look at the batting of Lara, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist etc. Or at the sheer artistry of Gower or M. Waugh.
Or the exuberance of Botham at Headingly 1981, and later in the series.
It is a game of many great facets.

willem - Ah, so he was a slave! Now one understands.

wes - Don't think so; I think we have won the recent World Cups, et al.

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade


One was thinking more of 1995/6, with his 185 not out, but his recent innings against Donald in 1998 was also terrific. Such a pity we destroyed his Test career.



Yes, I know, hence the 'another' in my post ;)

Should've been clearer perhaps :crazyeye:

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade
willem - Ah, so he was a slave! Now one understands.

:lol: you'd be such a good world dictator if it weren't for me...ya can have the moon though if you want, it'll have a big detention area/prison-camp thingy on it which you can manage if you want ;)

I think the best is Maradona.
Take a look at his goal in Argentina-England in 1986....the best goal ever

They say the best team is `70 Brazil team I could not watch them. So I think the best is Colombian team in 93/94 qualifiers. But they did not live up to the expectations.A pity.

Originally posted by Rhye
I think the best is Maradona.
Take a look at his goal in Argentina-England in 1986....the best goal ever :



lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Originally posted by jeriko one
They say the best team is `70 Brazil team I could not watch them. So I think the best is Colombian team in 93/94 qualifiers. But they did not live up to the expectations.A pity.

But the '74 Dutch team kicked their asses....then again, of course those Brazilians were 4 years older by then. Wouldn't it be nice if we could put all those great teams together at the top of their cunning and let them play a tournament. (I'd suggest a pre and an after '74 though; '74 changed the world:p)

Originally posted by willemvanoranje


But the '74 Dutch team kicked their asses....then again, of course those Brazilians were 4 years older by then. Wouldn't it be nice if we could put all those great teams together at the top of their cunning and let them play a tournament. (I'd suggest a pre and an after '74 though; '74 changed the world:p)

The '70 and '74 teams were very different in both players and style. The '74 team had no Pele, Gerson, Carlos Alberto, Tostao, Felix or Everaldo. They had replaced skill and technique with brute strength. I still don't understand why Zagalo chopped half of that great team.

Originally posted by gr8ful wes
:
lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I think he was talking about the actuall goal he scored in the match and not the other one that wasn't a goal.

Originally posted by mordhiem


The '70 and '74 teams were very different in both players and style. The '74 team had no Pele, Gerson, Carlos Alberto, Tostao, Felix or Everaldo. They had replaced skill and technique with brute strength. I still don't understand why Zagalo chopped half of that great team.

prolly because they were old and he thought they couldn't make it anymore...(which is obviously not a legit point)

Originally posted by Dell19


I think he was talking about the actuall goal he scored in the match and not the other one that wasn't a goal.

Yeah, that was good. Sometimes my one tracked mind can only think of the negative.

The best team I can think of would be the 1967 Celtic side.

The brazilian 1970 side is a little bit overrated in my opinion. The goalie was crap, and the defense was not brilliant also. And it was also not an easy walk to the title. England lost to them because they missed many chances, and Brazil struggled to beat Peru and Uruguay (against this team they only grabed the advantage in the last minutes). Finally the game against Italy was not as easy as the score sugests. Italy was the better side in the first half, and it was only in the second half that Brazil managed to overcome. And you have to keap in mind that Italy had a terrible battle in the semifinal against Germany (the famous 4-3). Simply Brazil had an incredible group of talents from midfield to attack (and even some of the defenders shined better in the offense than in the back), probably the best group of players ever. But in the end it was the victory of the individual virtuosism, rather than the team spirit or tactical superiority.
In that aspect, I think that Holland 74 had no rival. The game against Argentina (who would win the WC 4 years later) is their master piece. The superiority in every aspect of the game is simply amazing and perhaps unrivaled at this level.

Oh yes, the sweet 3-0 (or was it 4-0?). Will football see such revolution again, is what I ask myself. OR actually what I ask myself is, will we ever get so close to the World Cup final victory again...:p

Originally posted by Dell19


I think he was talking about the actuall goal he scored in the match and not the other one that wasn't a goal.


Yes, I wasn't referring to the famous "hand of God", but to the regular goal he scored.


And I think one of the best teams ever (but not the best) was Brazil in 1982. It was defeated by Italy in the second phase, but the semifinal versus Poland and the final versus Germany were matches much easier.

Rhye says everything...
Brazil's best team is '82, but they were overconfident and lost to Rossi.
The Dutch team in 1974 was Cruyff. In 1978 he was out and Argentina humiliated them in the final.
Europeans like to underestimate Brazil's '70 team. It was one of the most technic teams ever.
And at last... "that leagues???" Brazil's leagues in the 60's were among the best in the world, with Garrincha, the players from the '62 team and the '70 team. So only a incredibly good player, like Pelé (Edson Arantes do Nascimento, so a brazilian, not a slave, neither african) could score 1000 goals. Maradona isn't even a second. He isn't more than a bandit (brutal ways in the field), a drug addict that had a great ability and threw it away.
Most people that say Maradona is better than Pelé never watched Pelé playing during the 60's in Santos. His best playing wasn't in the world cups...
And can someone forget that goal in '58 world cup against Sweden?

What about The All Blacks of New Zealand rugby? If I reacll, they were pretty dominating back about 5 yrs ago

Yes, the most dominating rugby side for an entire century!! But, alas, not very recently, those cunning Aussies keep snatching away victories.

Bring on the Rugby and Cricket World Cups!

Hockey:
Last year's Redwings! There will never be such a dominating team in the NHL for years to come. They were awesome, but the Championships sucked vs. Carolina. They didn't even deserve to kneel before the Redwings. ;)

Actually it was amazing that the Canes even got passed game 1.

Originally posted by DrOrgaZmo
Hockey:
Last year's Redwings! There will never be such a dominating team in the NHL for years to come. They were awesome, but the Championships sucked vs. Carolina. They didn't even deserve to kneel before the Redwings. ;)

Actually it was amazing that the Canes even got passed game 1.
Apparently you weren't around for the REAL most dominating hockey team, the Oilers? They beat my B's twice in the Stanley Cup finals :( Nobody was going to stop the Oilers those 2 seasons. The Islanders when they won the Cup 4 times in a row were amazing too, but that was from when I was born to 4 years old.

Best player I've ever seen:
Stevie Yzerman
but Johny Bucyk for best player I'm too young to see ;)

Apparently you weren't around for the REAL most dominating hockey team, the Oilers? They beat my B's twice in the Stanley Cup finals Nobody was going to stop the Oilers those 2 seasons. The Islanders when they won the Cup 4 times in a row were amazing too, but that was from when I was born to 4 years old.

Yeah, but I'm young, stupid and stubborn. Redwings all the way. ;)

I agree with you on Stevey Y. No one can pull it together quite like him.

2001-2002 Detroit Red Wings
2001 Arizona Diamondbacks
2001-2002 Los Angeles Lakers

(i havent seen too many teams in action, im quite young)

Originally posted by gugalpm
Rhye says everything...
Brazil's best team is '82, but they were overconfident and lost to Rossi.
The Dutch team in 1974 was Cruyff. In 1978 he was out and Argentina humiliated them in the final.
Europeans like to underestimate Brazil's '70 team. It was one of the most technic teams ever.
And at last... "that leagues???" Brazil's leagues in the 60's were among the best in the world, with Garrincha, the players from the '62 team and the '70 team. So only a incredibly good player, like Pelé (Edson Arantes do Nascimento, so a brazilian, not a slave, neither african) could score 1000 goals. Maradona isn't even a second. He isn't more than a bandit (brutal ways in the field), a drug addict that had a great ability and threw it away.
Most people that say Maradona is better than Pelé never watched Pelé playing during the 60's in Santos. His best playing wasn't in the world cups...
And can someone forget that goal in '58 world cup against Sweden?

I agree with you on the Maradona subject. Pele is undoubtly better than Mr.Cocaine. I must say though, that Pele's ancestors probably were slaves from the African continent, actually I don't even doubt it. But of course those ancestors have been taken to America centuries ago, and his ancestors have simply adapted and integrated, so yes, he's Brazilian and nothing else.

And saying Holland was humiliated implies that you didn't see the match, just the result (which i doubt, you probably saw it). It was only in extra time that Argentina succeeded to beat Holland, and Holland had some pretty good chances to achieve the final victory just before the end. On top of that, it was an Argentinan home game and the crowd was much more supportive than the Germans back in '74. In '74 there were a lot of Dutch fans too. Third factor is Cruyff as you mentioned, needs no explanation. Fourth, a bit doubtful though, are the stories of players back then, how they were intimidated by agressive guards, how they had to wait in the hall for 5 minutes before the Argentinan squad showed up, some wicked story about the referee....
Anyway, in the end Holland lost, but humiliation sounds a bit too harsh to me.

I disagree in the Maradona issue. In Pelé vs. Maradona, Maradona is the man.

Secondly, willem is absolutely right: the only humiliation in that game should be FIFA's one. 1) isreali Klein was apointed to the final, but was vetoed by the argentines, and the more malleable Gonella was selected. 2) before the match started, the referee allowed that ridiculous scene about van der Kerkhoff' s protection in the arm. They only stopped when Neesskens gathered the players and threatened to get off thepitch. 3) the bias of the referee towards the argentines is evident since the game started. You just have to watch the match and count the number of fouls not called or the number of times the argentines do handball, without any cards shown. It's ridiculous. 4) the humiliation is out of place given that the dutch dominated the match especially in the second half. Argentina was lucky to get the extra-time. And even with the score in 3-1, they continued to play handball.
Argentina had a good team, that's for sure. But how good we'll never know, as they had everything on their advantadge through the entire tournament.

@gugalpm: to say that the dutch aquad of 74 was only Cruijff only leds me to think that you never watched any match of this team (I have in videos).

well, cruyff was the man, it would be very different without him. In '78 all of the players had already learned so much of Cruyff so they could still play without him (they might have won with him?), but indeed, the '74 team was a team of stars with Cruyff starring between stars :p

Holland had a good team in 78, but without Cruyff they would never had got to the final.

On the Maradona v Pele argument, I think that the skill of Pele is 'diluted' when you watch him playing for Brazil. Maradona was always playing with some good players and other mediocre ones. He stood out like a sore thumb, he was the only one who seemed interested in playing football for a start! In the Argentinean teams, Maradona was the focal point, everything went through him, they tried to get him on the ball at every opportunity. With Pele, he is surronded by a team full of legendary attacking talent. He was the best player in the team (exception with Garrincha in '58 when Pele was just starting out, he was second best), but they didn't need to give it to him all the time. So I think Maradona only seems better due to the greater opporunities he was given. As someone said, watch Pele playing for Santos in the 60's and you'll see just how spectacular he really was.

don't you mean '74? They reached the finals in '78 without Cruyff...

This is not an all-time list, but rather a list comprised of teams and individuals from my era of sports viewing. So no teams or players from the 70's or before (unfortunately). It's hard to choose just one, but I'll give it a shot.

U.S. Football

Player: John Elway
Team: 1985 Chicago Bears

Baseball

Player: Barry Bonds
Team: 1999 NY Yankees

Basketball

Player: Michael Jordan
Team: Any of the Lakers championship teams from the 80's.

Hockey

Player: Mario Lemieux
Team: 2000-01 Colorado Avalanche

Yes, some of my picks are biased, but hey, it's my list.:)

Elway was a great QB, but if you've seen him surely you'd have seen Marino and Montana, and they wipe the floor with him.

Oh, wait, you come from Colorado... ;)

Manchester United In 57 or 58 anyway its the year of the munich air disaster United were amazing that year the vids i've seen of them they were absolutely breath taking.

during my life time Man U in 1999 maybe as good the 68 team