I don't understand why he has to win a collective trophie to be considered for individual comparisons. Rose tinted glasses are what comes to mind when old folks try to explain that Pele and Maradona "gave" their respective teams world cup trophies. While I think in their era, Pele and Maradona had much better teams assembled than what Messi inherited nowadays. Aditionally, football is much more tactical and professional than what it was from 60's till 80's. Argentina back 4 has been average for years and they're never compact to save their lives. 

Chime in I wanna read your opinions.

He needs to win a major tournament to beat Christiano Ronaldo at this point, let alone be compared to Pele or Maradonna. Only player who never won a major tournament and can be compared to those two is Johan Cruijf.

He definitely doesn't. His performance in this years Copa America aswell with everything else solidifies his name in history as one of the greatest ever.

Because finance fraudsters need to prove their might more than regular, non-fraudster players. It's to compensate their shady financial tactics.

You said it! Those nostalgia glasses are too strong. My father is one of those old folks and it gets annoying.

I really want this Copa America though... But not because of Messi but because we haven't won a single major tournament for 23 years+.

Realistic or not, greats are measured by championships. Some say Tom Brady is the greatest quarterback of all time because he has been to six Superbowls and won four of them. However, people argue that Joe Montana is better because he won four without losing any. They discount the fact that Brady took his team to two more because he lost them. Peyton Manning continues to have his story rewritten because a defense won him his second Superbowl, so now the "greatest regular season quarterback" is his tag.

Look at the most recent NBA Finals. People were saying losing and going 2-5 in the Finals, despite being there 7 times, would knock LeBron out of a lot of top 5/top 10 players of all time lists. But, going 3-4 by winning suddenly puts him on the same level as Michael Jordan.

Winning is more important in the general eye than talent when it comes to placing people on their sport's Mt. Rushmore. It is a bit sad, but is what it is.

Even if Cristiano had won antyhing. Does it really matter? Major tournaments are group effort, it doesn't elevate individuals.

Best players in the world should be evaluated by individual stats. That's how you get ballon d'or.

Because the only people who refuse to compare Messi to Maradona are Argentina fans and media that don't give a damn about Messi's acomplishments with his club, and demand him to be as good and successful with Argentina as he is with Barcelona.

It's just a bad way to see it. Joe Monatana didn't win the championship by himself, Brady didn't win championships without some well rounded Pats teams.

No i'm saying neither can be compared to Pele or Maradonna right now, but to be able to claim that you have to atleast be the best player of your generation. So for that he needs to beat Christiano, and the only way to do that is to win a major tournament.