Who is better, Meazza or Neeskens?
Giuseppe Meazza leads with a GOAT score of 87.2 against 87.2 for Johan Neeskens — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Giuseppe Meazza and Johan Neeskens level at 87.2. Giuseppe Meazza leads on Dominance, Statistics. Johan Neeskens leads on Longevity, Peak, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Meazza wins: Dominance, Statistics
Neeskens wins: Peak, Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/giuseppe-meazza-vs-johan-neeskens
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Meazza leads in 2 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇮🇹 Meazza | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 167 |
| 🇳🇱 Neeskens | 0 | 0 | 50 | 108 | 248 | 697 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | MeazzaRetired | NeeskensRetired |
|---|---|---|
| World Cup titles | 2 | — |
| Serie A titles | 3 | — |
| Serie A goals | 216 | — |
| Italy goals | 33 | — |
| Serie A top scorer awards | 3 | — |
| European Cup titles | — | 3 |
| Intercontinental Cup titles | — | 1 |
| World Cup finals | — | 2 |
| Eredivisie titles | — | 4 |
| Netherlands caps | — | 49 |
| Dominance w25% | 88 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 88 | 90 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 84 |
Giuseppe Meazza leads with a GOAT score of 87.2 against 87.2 for Johan Neeskens — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Neeskens scores higher on peak, honours, longevity. Meazza leads on dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Meazza: 87.2, Neeskens: 87.2.
Make your case for Meazza vs Neeskens. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.