I have a bit of a problem with these kinds of statements.
It’s a bit like when people say no one defends like 90’s NBA anymore. I think a pretty similar/parallel evolution occurred in both sports.
While I’m a bit conflicted, because I feel like people like Nesta, Cafu, etc. were simply some of the best defenders of all time, I also think it’s highly unlikely that great defenders nowadays like van Dijk, Piqué, Puyol, Chiellini etc. wouldn’t have had just as much success then. Defenders are asked to do much more today, football attacking is more advanced (especially wrt pressing, which makes the requirements to be a defender much more exigent in a way; you wonder if certain CBs of the past who weren’t great on the ball would even make it in today’s game), technology and refereeing favours attacking, etc.
Basically, the more scientifically rigorous part of my brain suggests to me that these kind of claims are likely false.
Yes, Messi and Ronaldo produce in a more favourable offensive climate than great forwards of the past. They also helped make that climate themselves, they’ve changed the sport themselves. People in the 90s did get close to Messi/Ronaldo level numbers on a few occasions; Romario in one season for Barça, Ronaldo…that tells me that if they were out of this world talents like Messi or Ronaldo (or stayed fit in the case of fat Ronald), they could’ve maintained something similar wrt to the overall goal-scoring environment. I mean, I don’t think the difference between Henry level numbers and Ronaldo/Messi level numbers 3 years later is just the goal-scoring environment; I think we’re talking about players who took dominance to a new level.
Ronaldo’s numbers come with an asterisk because, aside from not being nearly as good as Messi’s when you factor in creativity, pure scorers have had goal-scoring seasons that look pretty much just like his if you adjust for goal-scoring environment. Ronaldo’s great achievement really comes in the consistency of that excellence. That’s why I always argue that he belongs more in the discussion with fat Ronaldo, di Stéfano, Laudrup, Zidane, etc. etc. among the greats of the past, than he does in the discussion with Messi and maybe Pele and Maradona. The issue with Maradona is at club level Messi’s career is simply better.
In short, I don’t really think there’s any legitimate discussion to be had to discount Messi’s greatness. He’s the best ever or 1b with Pele or Maradona at worst.
These articles come out every now and then with someone with a new data model to analyse Messi and Ronaldo’s contributions. While they always come out miles ahead of everyone in whatever new model it is, Messi always comes out miles ahead of the guy who’s miles ahead of everyone else (Ronaldo), in his own category. (In this study, they use a big data model to obtain a number for Value of All Actions according to Estimated Probability–basically trying to calculate the value added of each intervention on the pitch, as I understand it–and Messi comes out as 1.21 to Ronaldo’s 0.61.)
He’s quite simply an aberration and I get a bit tired of people trying to take away from such, or use specious arguments about the past to discount him. If you have a different criteria that involves impact in your own nation, national team level, weighting these kind of things arbitrarily higher, sure, you can make a case against him with Maradona, but if you’re criteria is just who is the player who’s been best at the sport and repeated it for a few years at the highest level, it really only leads to one end.
