Well Gilgillespie, it all depends on what you think matters the most in football, results or the way a team plays. In my opinion, when it comes to choosing best teams ever, final results are not the most important thing. Let's take a look at the Dutch team from 74. They played football in a brand new way, that hasn't been done since.And the fact that they lost their final game didn't change the fact that the football they produced was much better than any other at that time. Losing is part of the game and sometimes what matters the most is how you played it. Sometimes we don't even remember who won, but we will never forget who made the difference, as you pointed out saying:

Actually, who won the cup that year was Germany, Argentina won in '78, once again against the remains of the Dutch team of '74 (without Cruyff and a few others). You see, we may not remember who were the winners, but we will never forget the wonder that the Dutch team and their total football were.

The same thing may be said about the Brazilian team of '82, the Hungarians in 54 and - I would also dare to say - the Brazilian team of 1950. But as Foxrocks pointed out, those things are always subjective. This is just my opinion. I think that playing beautifully is way more important than winning at any cost. We call this difference as "art football' and 'result football' here in Brazil. Our '82 squad will always be remembered as a far better team than our '94 squad. Unfortortunately (or not?), the best team doesn't always win, but that doesn't mean that they're not better. If Brazil and Italy (from '82), or Holland and Germany ('74) for that matter, had played 7 matches instead of one, the odds are that Brazil and Holland would have won most games. But again, that's the great thing about football, it's unpredictable.

Subscribe to World Soccer