Had Zico won the 1982 WC his all time great status would obviously be higher than it is now. But that happens with every player. Titles is a big part of "greatness". Dont mean he would have been any better a player than he was without winning such title. Greatest is not a 100% match with best the way I see it. Regarding the direct comparison between Zico and Maradona which James claims to have taken place until 1985 (I would like to see proof of this the same way Vegan provides proof with whatever he claims, because looking at their respective 1984-85, looks to me as if Diego would have already taken a clear lead quite a bit before the World Cup)... Anyways, one has to keep in mind that the probably very best years of Zico (or the most noted ones at least) coincided with some of the weakest years of Maradona. Im talking the 1982-84 period. On the one hand Zico keeps winning titles with the club of his entire career and takes part in a WC edition being a pillar of one of the most outstanding Brazilian teams of all time. He then has one more outstanding tournament with Flamengo before moving to Italy and have a great season with Udinese. Maradona takes part in the World Cup with a team that is broken and completely lacks postive leadership inside and outside the field. Then he moves to the roughest and probably most violent league in Europe to experience a series of problems throughout his two whole seasons in Spain. If in these circumstances they were directly compared and Zico was never clearly ahead of Maradona... what does that say to you? Even if he was. I mean logically he should have, dont you think? It was Zico's most notoriously great period against Maradona's darkest... Zico was great, one of my favorite players ever. But Maradona was a superior footballer IMO. The best player ever in my personal view.