most talented teenager in any sport ever no doubt, future goat
to put in valorant terms hes like asuna when he first brust in to the scene at 16
EDLxDinks [#5]I been saying it for time this kid is either the best right now or he's gonna be the best very soon. Like in the world type shi
best right winger in the world at 16 is crazy
best player at the euros fs
thenutoriousPRO [#7]maybe lebron
Magic won the NBA Finals MVP in his rookie year, while playing off his primary role
ButterflyEffect23 [#9]Magic won the NBA Finals MVP in his rookie year, while playing off his primary role
he was 20
bloxm [#11]if here in brazil people let young boys play in professional... Pelé started at 17 in world cups and psycologist denied but the team bring him. Neymar started as 17 in professional and was denied to play his first world cup in 2010.
yamal at 16>>>pele at 17
thenutoriousPRO [#12]yamal at 16>>>pele at 17
Pele at 16 scored 36 gols in a championship, Yamal barely score 20 goals in all competitions he played.
FDWC- [#17]most talented teenager in any sport ever no doubt
this shit is crazy to say when lebron james,mike tyson,tiger woods & michael phelps exist
lebron is up there
woods didnt even play professionally till he was 20
dont know much about the others
thenutoriousPRO [#19]lebron is up there
woods didnt even play professionally till he was 20
dont know much about the others
lebron def up there 100%, he was supposed to be at the league at 15 and teenager mike tyson had 23-0 record with 21 KO
let that sink in
but woods he was dominating the amateur tournament since the age 15-19 (still pretty impressive imo)
bloxm [#13]Pele at 16 scored 36 gols in a championship, Yamal barely score 20 goals in all competitions he played.
Pele played against fruit sellers
thenutoriousPRO [#8]best right winger in the world at 16 is crazy
best player at the euros fs
deffo not
olmo or ruiz have been the best players of the euros
thenutoriousPRO [#8]best right winger in the world at 16 is crazy
best player at the euros fs
Take his nuts out your mouth he is definitely not the best right winger in the world or the best player in the euros he is a world class player already at 16 which is insane but calling him the best right winger is just glazing when he isn’t even top 5
PessiPenaldo17 [#21]Pele played against fruit sellers
The brazilian league was the most competitive league in the 60s
USCK [#28]Take his nuts out your mouth he is definitely not the best right winger in the world or the best player in the euros he is a world class player already at 16 which is insane but calling him the best right winger is just glazing when he isn’t even top 5
true
USCK [#28]Take his nuts out your mouth he is definitely not the best right winger in the world or the best player in the euros he is a world class player already at 16 which is insane but calling him the best right winger is just glazing when he isn’t even top 5
seriously name 5 right wingers better than him
ButterflyEffect23 [#9]Magic won the NBA Finals MVP in his rookie year, while playing off his primary role
magic won that at 20 Yamal is one game away from winning one of the three most prestigious tournaments at 16 while arguably being player of the tournament
DeluluGavin [#23]to put in valorant terms hes like asuna when he first brust in to the scene at 16
you are not allowed to step foot in Europe,
what if he did MONKA
VietJesu [#29]The brazilian league was the most competitive league in the 60s
So was the NBA in the 60s that doesn't mean Wilt didn't play against plumbers, game evolves. Not saying I necessarily agree but that argument just doesn't make sense
Mortadelo [#37]So was the NBA in the 60s that doesn't mean Wilt didn't play against plumbers, game evolves. Not saying I necessarily agree but that argument just doesn't make sense
I mean it does? For at his time if hes playing against the best and spinning circles around them then then he was just levels above everyone. And the game evolves argument doesnt make sense since you have to compare players to their era not to the modern day since any modern day player would be better than any player in the 60s.
VietJesu [#39]I mean it does? For at his time if hes playing against the best and spinning circles around them then then he was just levels above everyone. And the game evolves argument doesnt make sense since you have to compare players to their era not to the modern day since any modern day player would be better than any player in the 60s.
Sure the game evolves and you can't compare players in different eras. But it also isn't fair to current players
By definition a game less evolved it's easier to dominate because there are more things you can be better at than everyone else. If everyone is a 5 you can be an 8 and be incredibly dominant, but if everyone is a 9 you can be a 10 but there aren't many more things to improve at.
Also players now dedicate 99% of their time to the sport, I don't think it's fair to discredit the old guys but it also isn't fair to assume they were better because they came first
In Track and Field for example the record is held by whoever jumped further, regardless of if he had better trainers or shoes. And that's the way it should be imo
Mortadelo [#41]Sure the game evolves and you can't compare players in different eras. But it also isn't fair to current players
By definition a game less evolved it's easier to dominate because there are more things you can be better at than everyone else. If everyone is a 5 you can be an 8 and be incredibly dominant, but if everyone is a 9 you can be a 10 but there aren't many more things to improve at.
Also players now dedicate 99% of their time to the sport, I don't think it's fair to discredit the old guys but it also isn't fair to assume they were better because they came first
In Track and Field for example the record is held by whoever jumped further, regardless of if he had better trainers or shoes. And that's the way it should be imo
Youre comparing oranges and apples.
In Track and Field records are easier to compare because Track and Field is all about numbers.
In a sport like football its harder to measure. For example its easy to say Usain Bolt is the fastest man but its harder
to say whos the best football player.
By definition a game that evolves less over time isnt necessary all easy to dominate because if nothing changes then when youre at the top and there isnt anything left to learn everyone will catch up. By definition neither is a game that constantly evolves. Its just all about who has the ability to adapt the best its only easier or harder for certain people.
I never said the old guys were better than the players now. If anything I said the opposite. Pele with the training he had would never survive in todays game and thats why when you compare players from different eras you cant bring up who they played against as an argument. Thats why you compare how dominant they were at their time to the players of their time since you level the playing field by making sure you arent comparing people who have the modern sports science they do today to people who dont.
VietJesu [#42]Youre comparing oranges and apples.
In Track and Field records are easier to compare because Track and Field is all about numbers.In a sport like football its harder to measure. For example its easy to say Usain Bolt is the fastest man but its harder
to say whos the best football player.
By definition a game that evolves less over time isnt necessary all easy to dominate because if nothing changes then when youre at the top and there isnt anything left to learn everyone will catch up. By definition neither is a game that constantly evolves. Its just all about who has the ability to adapt the best its only easier or harder for certain people.I never said the old guys were better than the players now. If anything I said the opposite. Pele with the training he had would never survive in todays game and thats why when you compare players from different eras you cant bring up who they played against as an argument. Thats why you compare how dominant they were at their time to the players of their time since you level the playing field by making sure you arent comparing people who have the modern sports science they do today to people who dont.
Thats why you compare how dominant they were at their time to the players of their time since you level the playing field by making sure you arent comparing people who have the modern sports science they do today to people who don't.
Here is the disagreement, you're telling me they can't be compared because they had different trainings and I'm telling you they can't be compared because they didn't play the same people.
Let me put it differently, by your logic, Vision Strikers is the best team of all time because they were most dominant at their time. Regardless of them only playing Koreans and how much the game evolved since then
Mortadelo [#43]Thats why you compare how dominant they were at their time to the players of their time since you level the playing field by making sure you arent comparing people who have the modern sports science they do today to people who don't.
Here is the disagreement, you're telling me they can't be compared because they had different trainings and I'm telling you they can't be compared because they didn't play the same people.
Let me put it differently, by your logic, Vision Strikers is the best team of all time because they were most dominant at their time. Regardless of them only playing Koreans and how much the game evolved since then
Thats a dead comparison. VS bombed out internationally. Santos played teams from around Europe South America and North America and not to mention internationally as well. Again Im saying you cant use the "they played different people" argument because it is the same argument as different eras of the game. A player like Antony could probably be 2x the player Pele was would you put him with todays sports science but we dont put him on that pedestal now do we? You need to judge them on what they had to their disposal at their time not what they couldnt have ever had and then do that with players from other eras.