...argue Cuauh did more for Mexico? I may not like Hugo Sanchez, but I will give credit where it is due. Hugo is the best player Mexico ever produced, period. I'm not even going to get into the whole argument of whether Hugo is better than Cuauhtemoc, or vice versa. I have been there and done that. @cazador de malditos claims he says that Hugo is the best player that Mexico ever produced, but simultaneously contradicts himself by saying Cuauh did more fo the seleccion than Hugo. How can you defend Hugo as the best and at the same time claim Cuauh did more for Mexico? If you believe Hugo is the best, then there shouldn't be any argument over the issue or even make a claim that Blanco did more for Mexico than Hugo Sanchez. Yet, cazador de malditos chooses to argue and foolishly contradicts himself in the process. What grade level did you drop out at, 7th grade? The point of an argument is to rebut the claim, not to contradict yourself. If you believe Sanchez is the best Mexico ever produced, then why are you saying Cuauh did more for Mexico? You can't say the two claims you made in the same sentence as they contradict one another.
@ Oscar: Are you too stupid to even read? The question is not directed towards you and ergo there is no need for you to answer it. Your opinion is irrelevant in this question and useless.
Okay, if the question isn't directed towards you, then don't answer it. Skip to another question unless you are Cazador de Malditos. If you aren't him, your opinion is irrelevant in this question.
But Cazador, you are making the two statements side by side. It's impossible to say the two statements together as they are contradictory. Given you haven't passed the 7th grade, I am not surprised you can't make a coherent argument. Let's make a truce. I will argue you on your claims and assertions and make the argument based only on those claims, while you will argue me based on the same claims and assertions without getting into the inane name calling. Does that sound fair? Just make simple arguments without making personal attacks? I will adhere to this if you do. Or are you too afraid to argue points of validity that you have to resort to name calling and personal attacks. By the way, I'm a grad student at the University of California, San Diego in Economics and I have a Bachelor of Science in Economics and Math from Princeton.
@ Cazador: You are asking me a question based on players within a specific position, that being forward. My point in the previous question and in this question relates to who is the all around best player Mexico ever produced. It has nothing to do with position. Even if a person wanted to say Rafael Marquez, fine. But, could one say he is all around the best Mexico ever produced. I see where you are going, but I think you misunderstood or misread the point of my question. I was asking if Hugo was all around the best player Mexico ever produced. Not who was better at their respective positions. Maybe I misled you with the goals statistic. But I hope you understand what I am attempting to say now.
@ Badmutha: The question isn't geared towards you so please don't get involved. I am having an honest conversation with someone and that doesn't include you. I have nothing against you and if you want to worship Cuauhtemoc, then fine. I just wish the same fans would give Hugo is due respect as the best overall player in Mexico. It's okay to like Cuauh, but I don't think he is better than Hugo. I don't expect you to agree, but I just want others to understand where I am coming from. Hope you understand what I am saying and no hard feelings against you.
@cazador: I hope you read my statement above, because my point is NOT who is the better forward? My point is who is the best player (overall) that mexico produced? If you really want me to pick, I will say Klose because he led the scoring in world cup 2002 and it looks as though he may have a chance to lead in 2010. Of those players he came closest to winning the World Cup, 2nd in 2002 and at worst 4th in 2010. But I would prefer to wait and see on how Ronaldo and Messi end their careers. Klose is getting close to the end of his career adn although Messi and Ronaldo haven't come as far, they still are young and have a ways to go.
@ Oscar: Are you too stupid to even read? The question is not directed towards you and ergo there is no need for you to answer it. Your opinion is irrelevant in this question and useless.
Okay, if the question isn't directed towards you, then don't answer it. Skip to another question unless you are Cazador de Malditos. If you aren't him, your opinion is irrelevant in this question.
But Cazador, you are making the two statements side by side. It's impossible to say the two statements together as they are contradictory. Given you haven't passed the 7th grade, I am not surprised you can't make a coherent argument. Let's make a truce. I will argue you on your claims and assertions and make the argument based only on those claims, while you will argue me based on the same claims and assertions without getting into the inane name calling. Does that sound fair? Just make simple arguments without making personal attacks? I will adhere to this if you do. Or are you too afraid to argue points of validity that you have to resort to name calling and personal attacks. By the way, I'm a grad student at the University of California, San Diego in Economics and I have a Bachelor of Science in Economics and Math from Princeton.
@ Cazador: You are asking me a question based on players within a specific position, that being forward. My point in the previous question and in this question relates to who is the all around best player Mexico ever produced. It has nothing to do with position. Even if a person wanted to say Rafael Marquez, fine. But, could one say he is all around the best Mexico ever produced. I see where you are going, but I think you misunderstood or misread the point of my question. I was asking if Hugo was all around the best player Mexico ever produced. Not who was better at their respective positions. Maybe I misled you with the goals statistic. But I hope you understand what I am attempting to say now.
@ Badmutha: The question isn't geared towards you so please don't get involved. I am having an honest conversation with someone and that doesn't include you. I have nothing against you and if you want to worship Cuauhtemoc, then fine. I just wish the same fans would give Hugo is due respect as the best overall player in Mexico. It's okay to like Cuauh, but I don't think he is better than Hugo. I don't expect you to agree, but I just want others to understand where I am coming from. Hope you understand what I am saying and no hard feelings against you.
@cazador: I hope you read my statement above, because my point is NOT who is the better forward? My point is who is the best player (overall) that mexico produced? If you really want me to pick, I will say Klose because he led the scoring in world cup 2002 and it looks as though he may have a chance to lead in 2010. Of those players he came closest to winning the World Cup, 2nd in 2002 and at worst 4th in 2010. But I would prefer to wait and see on how Ronaldo and Messi end their careers. Klose is getting close to the end of his career adn although Messi and Ronaldo haven't come as far, they still are young and have a ways to go.