Yeah I believe so, Notts County is the oldest. Think Juventus were inspired by their kit and adopted the same colours.
I dont know everything about it but think European Cup was largely a knockout competition for much of its time until it was rebranded. Like you said only league champions and title holders would qualify, now I cant imagine competing in the Serie or the English League of the 1980s for one spot. There was the ban on English clubs in the 1980s, and I believe that without that ban Liverpool would've won atleast 2 more European Cups. Even though Maradona didnt win a lot its more impressive than a lot of other players' legacies just because of that era.
I think Ronaldo was also a bit unlucky with his career choices(injuries aside) as Inter wasnt going through its best years during his spell and then he was part of a dysfunctional Galacticos team. But like you said he was a the main man in the finals, should've stayed at Barcelona though.
Even without the Champions League Maradona at his peak was rivaled by only one player in my opinion. And besides that, every trophy is a collective success, Nacho won 5 or 6 UCLs but that doesnt mean he's in the same bracket as the best defenders, let alone someone like Pique.
First of all, sorry for the length of this lol. But I did say I'd put effort in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, Notts County is the oldest and their black and white stripes inspired Juventus. We think similarly as I was gonna make that point, too. Their stripes also inspired other clubs I believe, like Newcastle and maybe St Mirren and Botafogo too.
You're correct - it was a knockout competition until it was rebranded as the 'CL'. That's why there's debate about whether it was harder to win then or now. The consensus is it's harder to win now as at some point you have to go through 1, 2 or even 3 or 4 really good teams, but back then you could also have one bad night and effectively be eliminated in the first round if you couldn't recover in the second leg.
It seems people think it's harder to win now, but obviously qualifying for it in the first place back then was much harder. Like you say, imagine the rules were in place now - only Liverpool would be playing from PL, and Real Madrid would never have got the chance to win many of their CL trophies in the CL era as they rarely won the league in the previous season (or even the winning season).
The ban was ironically due to Liverpool themselves (Heysel, which I regret calling them murderers on here due to, which was below the belt and uncalled for and the previous angry me, even if they did have troublemakers that night who effectively did kill Juventus fans). That ban led to English football being in the doldrums, and even with the formation of the PL, it took a long time for England to get back to rivaling Italy and Spain as the top league. Even after being allowed back into Europe, an English club didn't win the CL again until United in 1999. They were fortunate to win that night as we know. They had also struggled in previous seasons, and in one of their first seasons in the newly created CL I believe they lost in the qualifiers to Rotor Volgograd. That shows how long it took for English football to start to catch up, and I would say by the mid 00s it was the best league potentially (maybe still being La Liga, but Serie A was rocked by calciopoli). It's not just these factors, but the money and satellite TV and rise of the internet (as well as colonial ties and prevalence of English as the world's main language) were massive factors in getting so many eyeballs on the PL, as persists to this day.
You're right that Liverpool would likely have at least two more ECs, as they were the best team in Europe for me before Sacchi's Milan came to the fore. In fact, they'd probably have won that night in 1985 if not for all the problems off the pitch.
Moving on to Ronaldo and Maradona - correct, it's not about trophies or goal tallies, it's about the gorgeousness of the game and their abilities. They both were excellent in World Cups anyway (with Diego putting in the best overall WC performance of all time in Mexico '86). In fact, your point about trophies proves it, because even though Brazil won the WC in 2002 and Ronaldo scored 8 goals, including two in the final, I felt he and Brazil performed even better in 1998 - just everything surrounding he and the side in the final soured it for obvious reasons.
You're right that Ronaldo did play with Inter when they were up and down. The point about the Galacticos is true though - that team was like a Harlem Globetrotters team, and Perez was more interested in playing fantasy football than building a cohesive team (see buying a better flair player like Beckham to replace the engine of the team, Makelele, as Zidane said). People think because they had R9, Zidane, Beckham, Figo, Carlos, Raul etc they should have been winning everything, but football doesn't work that way and people should consider that when heavily criticising the players in that team for their underperformance. They weren't helped by a dreadful tactical framework. Tbf they did win the EC in 2002, but that was before the team became the main Galacticos really.
I believe had R9 stayed at Barcelona, we'd have an even more positive view of him now. And let's not forget the injuries too, as you allude to. Messi, Portuguese Ronaldo, Lewa and others haven't had to contend with what he did.
The thing about the trophy argument is it's only a worthy argument is the player is a high contributor - David May or Nacho were fringe players. Beckenbauer and Muller winning three ECs in row in the 70s, for example, as main players, is the true test. You don't even have to be a main player - Gary Neville consistently did well as RB in all those United league winning teams, even if he was a steady eddie and not one of the gamechangers in the side. That is highly commendable.
However, the overall point is that a lack of trophies shouldn't be used to beat players with. R9 and Maradona might not have won the EC, but as I said, the UEFA Cup and CWC were big trophies back then and much more competitive than now in terms of top teams for reasons I alluded to earlier. It's about a player's ability and brilliance.
Look at George Best. The guy didn't win much (he did win the EC), didn't score many goals relative to others. Even Bresko said his goal stats are underwhelming for a player of his ability. But it's about his genius, watching him, and how he makes you feel. Success and achievement are important but so is overall ability, if not more so.
