I rate Xavi as probably the best midfielder after Zidane. Although I'm confused about how to rate Lothar Matthäus because his prime was before my time. Based on the research I have done, Lothar Matthäus is one of the GOAT midfielders and was arguably the most complete player ever and loads of credible sources pick him in an all time 11. Platini was before I was born lmao. No clue.
I find it crazy that some people rate Iniesta above Xavi simply because Iniesta dribbled and looked easier on the eye. Xavi was the heartbeat of that Spain and Barca team and the most important player for both the systems to work(even though Messi is a far superior Footballer and a MUCH bigger match-winner). For me Iniesta and Modric are pretty much at the same level. I probably prefer Modric because he did it for longer, was better off the ball and had nowhere near the privileges Iniesta had at NT level(try arguing this lmao). What Modric has done with Croatia is arguably even more impressive. This is exactly why individuals shouldn't be rated by simply counting team trophies on Wikipedia. Context is everything.
Yes, I seen a fair bit of Matthaus in the 90s (though already a bit past his peak) and for me he's in the top two midfielders I have watched with Xavi. He could also man mark players and do really well defensively - Maradona called him his toughest opponent across his career, which is as high a compliment as a player can receive. Matthaus was also very versatile and could play as a libero/sweeper and a centre-back. He could score goals too when deployed in midfield and granted license to get further forward. He was as 'complete' as a midfielder as we are ever likely to see.
I don't really consider Zidane a 'midfielder' in the pure sense (same as I don't De Bruyne) - he seems more of an attacking midfielder. Iniesta is similar but has more Xavi in him than I think Zidane did. Obviously Zidane could run a game but he was more effective in the final third a lot of the time with his cute and incisive passing and dribbling.That's just my take though.
A lot of French people consider Platini better than Zidane and from what I have seen of Platini (slightly before my time) I would have to agree, even though Zidane was my idol when I was 16. Platini was exceptional.
There's also Rijkaard, Didi and others who can be candidates.
Yeah I know what you mean. I would never go against Iniesta on anything as he's a genius and among my favourite players, but I do prefer Xavi. Iniesta was more talented than Xavi in my opinion, but Xavi understood the game to an even greater degree than Iniesta did I think. His spatial awareness was unbelievable. It can be said that Xavi is a system player, but the point is he is emblematic of that system and absolutely embodies it. Like you say Barca back then wouldn't work without Xavi.
But at the same time I can respect if someone prefers Iniesta to Xavi too.
Modric as brilliant as he is didn't control games to quite the extent a Xavi did (totally right on the Croatia point by the way). Real Madrid were often outplayed in their three in a row CL run. However, that is also because of the fact that Real Madrid are just less focused on possession and more on moments than Barcelona are. Could prime Modric have successfully and fully replicated what Xavi did for Barcelona, had he been in his place? Without being a La Masia graduate and completely immersed in 'Barca DNA'? It's a loaded question - I am sort of tempted to say yes, but at the same time the sheer dominance Xavi exerted for that four year spell Pep was in charge was borderline supernatural. To the extent I am not even sure if other GOAT midfielders could replicate it even 85 percent as well. I could be wrong, or misremembering, but I remember being mesmerised by Xavi's performances.
