You show me a single pundit or manager or Caftard for that matter who at the beginning of that season have them winning the CL.
He clearly exceeded expectations that first season. I'm no Pep's fanboy but I'm willing to give him that much.
Is it fair to worship Guardiola at this point? | The Ball Did It
- Thread starter Brwned
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
- Status
He clearly exceeded expectations that first season. I'm no Pep's fanboy but I'm willing to give him that much.
And what was expected from that squad (minus the players he brough in and promoted because another manager could have signed/promoted completely different players)?
Hindsight is a great thing but back in 2008 when Barcelona finished 3rd in Lal Liga no one would predict that they were on the cusp of becoming one of the TOP 3 SIDES of ALL TIME.
Fergie failed to repeat his success with the treble team after 99. Why hold it against Guardiola that he failed with Bayern? Truth is Bayern were exceptional under him and the only game in which they properly failed was at home vs Madrid (0-4). Against Barca they had injuries to key players and against Atleti they were unlucky to miss a pen when the result was 1:0.
As I say I'm probably being harsh but I really believe that firstly they were much, much better than they were performing under Rijkaard, which gave him an artificially low base to start from and secondly I do believe the maturity of that team to greatness was inevitable.
You're possibly right though, winning a treble is always a great achievement irrespective of the team you win it with. I still maintain though that he walked into a perfect storm and it was more a case if steering a ship than building, moulding and developing a team.
He seems to not be able to change things and make a difference. Fans are generally a bunch of gobshites who don't really know or understand what goes on in games at the highest level but they are not so stupid as to believe that somebody who is toted as the best thing since sliced bread should be doing better with unlimited amounts of money and generally the pick of a lot of the best players in the world. The aforementioned gobshites believe that they could do just as well with unlimited amounts of money and you know what ' they are probably right.
Regardless of the discussions that circle around style, results are all that tend to really matter.
Had City not scored that late, late (possibly too late) winner, then they'd be on 5 points from 3 games & potentially open to criticism. However, they won, and have 7 points from a possible 9. It would be ridiculous to criticise them/him for that.
Had City not scored that late, late (possibly too late) winner, then they'd be on 5 points from 3 games & potentially open to criticism. However, they won, and have 7 points from a possible 9. It would be ridiculous to criticise them/him for that.
I am sure you can google them. He splurged like it was nobody's business while at Inter. Sure, he had the support of the owner. But the club had to deal with the repercussions for several seasons after he left.
You are the one who need a google. They made a net profit in transfers the Treble season. What did them in was the wages Moratti gave out but that was already the story for 2 decades. Of the players he bought, Milito, Sneijder and Eto'o continued to perform in 10-11. Pandev was on a free.
The season before that, they spent 46.6m Euro total with Quaresma being the highest at 18.6m. What splurging?
The crippling transfer dealings myth is just that, a myth.
Crippling myth? you wish. Take a look at the finances of the club during Jose's tenure. You'll see how much of a moron Moratti really is.
I already quoted you the figures. They made a net profit from transfers in 2009-2010 and a spending of around 50m in 2008-2009 (Wiki figures and transfermkt differs by a few mil). Overall during his tenure, his net spend is about 25-30m pound, give or take.
The season after he left, Inter finished 2nd in Serie A, won the Copa Italia and and made CL quarter (losing to Schalke, I don't remember the exact scoreline, but Stankovjc scored a wonder goal from midfield in the tie). So they were hardly in the shit after his departure weren't they? Of his costliest transfers, only Quaresma is a failure (sold to Besiktas at a loss of 10m Eur).
Those are the facts. If you want to dispute them, show me some that state otherwise.
Honestly, I'm not sure.
Every manager has a desired set of players they could use to play "their system", if they had the resources. It's not like Mourinho hasn't splurged to make Utd the team he wants for his style of play, but I guess I see more adaptability in what Mourinho does. He might not have wanted Mata when he came to town but he has managed to fit him into his team to get the most out of him (obviously they have history, but still). Hell he's getting more out of Valencia and Fellaini than Moyes and LVG did here.
Frankly, so far I'm more impressed with Pochettino and what he has done with relatively less (in comparison to City, Utd, Chelsea) resources, though I suppose you could argue that there was a strong, young backbone there... But it's not like Pep was handed the keys to a Fiat Panda, either.
Anyway, too early to tell for me.
Every manager has a desired set of players they could use to play "their system", if they had the resources. It's not like Mourinho hasn't splurged to make Utd the team he wants for his style of play, but I guess I see more adaptability in what Mourinho does. He might not have wanted Mata when he came to town but he has managed to fit him into his team to get the most out of him (obviously they have history, but still). Hell he's getting more out of Valencia and Fellaini than Moyes and LVG did here.
Frankly, so far I'm more impressed with Pochettino and what he has done with relatively less (in comparison to City, Utd, Chelsea) resources, though I suppose you could argue that there was a strong, young backbone there... But it's not like Pep was handed the keys to a Fiat Panda, either.
Anyway, too early to tell for me.
What I find really surprising is that he still doesn't have that intelligent defensive midfielder who would calm things down and control proceedings. His options in that role at the moment are Fernandinho, Gundogan, Toure and now de Bruyne, all of whom are either box-to-box or advanced mids.
Can anyone explain why he hasn't gone for someone like Weigl (I know he's injured, just an example) or Allan/Jorginho from Napoli? I find it particularly baffling because of his own career in that position and how Cruyff plucked him from the academy to play him in the Dream team. He bought Alonso at Bayern as well, so why not here?
One thing which is hardly surprising is his dislike for pure strikers (or rather any player who cannot be a technical midfielder). Given how he removed Hart, I thought Pep would have the guts to sell Aguero. Keeping him might turn out to be his undoing. It will test his not-so-refined man management skills, that's for sure!
Can anyone explain why he hasn't gone for someone like Weigl (I know he's injured, just an example) or Allan/Jorginho from Napoli? I find it particularly baffling because of his own career in that position and how Cruyff plucked him from the academy to play him in the Dream team. He bought Alonso at Bayern as well, so why not here?
One thing which is hardly surprising is his dislike for pure strikers (or rather any player who cannot be a technical midfielder). Given how he removed Hart, I thought Pep would have the guts to sell Aguero. Keeping him might turn out to be his undoing. It will test his not-so-refined man management skills, that's for sure!
It's simple he is now in one of the most balanced leagues in the world with an amazing amount of good managers. Of course he and his team aren't as dominant anymore as they used to be in Spain and Germany.
But he got his reputation for a reason. He brought pressing back in combination with great one touch possession football, something that pretty much every team these days has mastered even though with not as much focus on possession maybe.
Guardiola was for a certain period ahead of his time, that isn't the case anymore so he looks more average these days and that in combination with not having the most dominant team in a league makes him look as what he is, human.
But he got his reputation for a reason. He brought pressing back in combination with great one touch possession football, something that pretty much every team these days has mastered even though with not as much focus on possession maybe.
Guardiola was for a certain period ahead of his time, that isn't the case anymore so he looks more average these days and that in combination with not having the most dominant team in a league makes him look as what he is, human.
Like I said earlier, you should google their revue and spending during Jose's tenure. They actually are in the public domain. The club is still paying the price today for Moratti's stupid business model that never took off.
All this time you've dodged answering me and moving the goalposts.
You are obviously not interested in a discussion with good faith, so we better end it here.
They went out by a single goal in the semi finals to United in 2008. Pundits backing them or not is irrelevant. You'd be beyond foolish to not put them into contention the following year.
The original point @finneh made is that Pep's never won it from any other position than clear favourites. They also finished 4th in Liga 18 points adrift of Madrid. They were obviously not 'clear favourites' for any major competition they were in the following season.
Na not really. Inter splurged while under Jose which financially made their situation worse. I stand by it.
Pep's style is not suitable for a team that doesn't have the quality of being a favorite 90% of the time, against most opponents. Why? Because he wants to play a certain way, and his brand of football can't be succesful without a world class team. It just can't. It's too complex for some lesser players to play it well and win titles with it. And he can't play any other way.
So, for that reason Mourinho is a better manager than Pep. Pep is probably the best manager of all time (or at least one of) in an ideal kind of setup, where the players both understand his vision and also have the technique and the football IQ to put it in practice at a very high level.
I just said they weren't clear favorites. But they were one of the stronger squads. If a team finishes 1st, 10th, 1st, then it is very fair to say the 10th place was the anomally not the 1st place. It was the worst defence of a title in the premier league era. Of course they downed tools. A team that comes 1st doesn't just come 10th without a major reason and there were lots of issues in the Chelsea camp that season.
Who has said anything about Hazard? Who has been killing him? Did you read my post? The entire squad fell into disarray and downed tools. It wasn't just Hazard.
Also when did I ever say Guardiola has shown said adaptability or criticised Conte? Reply to my post and stop making up stuff I haven't said.
If you think Chelsea playing 3-4-3 or 3-5-2 alone is the difference for their season I think I might die laughing, if you think their attitude was no different last season than the season before I give up.
Pep deserves much more credit for winning the CL in 2011, because 2009 was a fluke (they were gifted the semi-final by the ref). By 2011 he had implemented his philosophy, he no longer had Eto and Henry, who preferred to be the main forward and had gotten a team that was his own. No one expected Barca to win the treble in 2009, and they shouldnt have done so if the game was played fairly.
Pep's football was tumescent over and over again, only for Messi to dribble past 3 or 4 players, score and open up the game. In my opinion Messi elevated the perception of Pep to a level well above his actual level as a manager. Pep is simply a very good manager, yet some would have him among the GOAT, yet he isnt even as good a manager as Mourinho (forget about a manager like Ferguson or Clough).
Pep's football was tumescent over and over again, only for Messi to dribble past 3 or 4 players, score and open up the game. In my opinion Messi elevated the perception of Pep to a level well above his actual level as a manager. Pep is simply a very good manager, yet some would have him among the GOAT, yet he isnt even as good a manager as Mourinho (forget about a manager like Ferguson or Clough).
Except just saying that Chelsea downed tools in 2015-2016 is way too simplistic and naive explanation. Did Chelsea play up to its capability? No, but you trying working in a toxic environment day in and day out and see how it can affect your performance especially when you factor in the importance of leadership and morale in sports.
As much as people want to believe players are robots they're not and they are susceptible to influences affecting their play.
Hazard was injured for a large portion of 2015-2016 with a hip injury yet still played. If you say Chelsea downed tools isn't he part of Chelsea and part of the downed tools?
The formation change was the catalyst and if you don't believe that then explain how Chelsea went from 3 wins 1 draw and 2 losses in 6 matches equates to a 19 win 7 draw 12 loss season of 64 points to 30 wins 3 draws and 5 losses and 93 points.
Of course Chelsea's attitude was better. They were no longer under Mourinho's clueless attacking tactics and Hazard wasn't forced to carry the offense. Hazard intimated that Mourinho was tactically clueless on the attacking side of the ball by praising Conte for attention to detail and clear attacking tactics that they hadn't before.
It's not like this has been the first time Mourinho's attacking tactics or lack thereof have been questioned.
Oh hey that's right you guys only scored 54 goals last year.
Just wait, Mourinho will revert to his defensive shell as soon as he feels threatened and the whole goal scoring issues discussion will start all over again.
Let me help out InfinteBoredom with the googling you keep insisting here. Inter had a total net spend of about -£38m during Mourinho's term 2008-10. A team that posted similar levels of revenue during that period according to Deloitte (from googling), interestingly is Juventus the team that came to displace Inter's dominance. Juve 'splurged' a grand net spend of -£49m in that same period. Bayern the finalist that Mourinho 'splurged' to beat and complete the treble, had a net spend of about -£41m but they are much richer than Inter so, fair enough no splurging there.
In any case, Inter registered 9th on revenue among european clubs 2008-10 and their spending hardly looked out of place with most of the other clubs. For perspective, £38m was the combined fee Liverpool and Tottenham paid to sign Robbie Keane and David Bentley in 2008. It also happened to be similar to the prize money (€49m) Inter received in 2010 so all in all, the "splurge" seem to be of good value.
Yeap, he kept dodging because the actual figures showed that by any reasonable standard, Mourinho's transfer spending at Inter can't be called 'splurging'. For the real 'splurges', look to City (230m over the 2 years 08-10) or Madrid (170m). What sort of 'splurge' was that when the costliest player you brought in was valued at 22m.
Inter had been eating out of Moratti's hands for years when Jose arrived there. Their hole in finance came largely to the wages he gave out and previous high profile transfers like Ronaldo, Vieri, and Moratti's worsening financial situation. If he was to operate under fiscal misery like Wenger did at Arsenal, he wouldn't have gone there. Blaming their books on Jose is flat out idiotic, especially when half of that team were sought after in the 2010 transfer window. Inter refused 40m from us for Sneijder.
More than all the results, his inability to address the issues in his squad are more worrying. I think he is blind to his ideology and misses even the advice his aides give him. His inability to win against a more attacking team will always mark him inferior to the elite managers like SAF and Mourinho.
You're entitled to your opinion but your views are evidently coloured by the fact that one manager manages your team and the other manages a direct rival.
Firstly - where is this "complete revival?" He finished outside the top 4 last year having spent a fortune. I would say top 4 last year was a minimum if you asked the fans or the board or even Mourinho himself. Success is though, measured in trophies and credit is due for that but he needs to do more than win the first three games of this league season before he's revived anything. We won the first three games last year and the wheels came off. The season has just started and nothing has been decided. Its embarrassing to suggest otherwise. Weaknesses may have been fixed - although our lack of depth at fullback and potentially out wide have not, so any conclusion based on three games against average opposition is premature.
Whether United are in a better position that City will be seen over the coming weeks and months. Again, to suggest otherwise less than a month into the season is bizarre.
City had an ageing squad with a lot of players who aren't what Guardiola wants to implement his style of play. He's therefore done what Jose has done and moved players on. He now has his own players and will be judged accordingly over this season - as he should be. if it doesn't work he'll rightly be questioned and criticised.
And the comment on Pep being a "brat" is what really marks you out as having the United specs on by the way. Jose Mourinho is a fine manager but specialises in melodramatics when he's not getting his own way - moaning about refs, moaning about fixtures - even letting it be known in the press when he's not happy about how the summer transfer window is going. He wants things done his way - and there's nothing wrong with that.
Nothing else in that last paragraph makes any sense to me - especially since Pep's arrival in the EPL he's had one season and finished above United.
I'm enjoying things as it stands but have watched enough football to realise that a good start is desirable but counts for nothing over the stretch. Fergie's teams often took a while to get going but did what City are doing now - they won games while not playing particularly well and the best came later in the season where they became relentless in winning games week after week. Winning games, even when you're playing badly is what marks out title winning teams in the PL.
One thing he already lost was his aura of almost infallibility, which only Mourinho has scratched in that La Liga season. Even if he wins it this season, I think he's just one more (of the very good) managers.
I think that is just plain wrong and very misleading. Rikjaard's team was made up of aging stars. Guardiola broke that team up and replaced 16 players in his first season.
Rikjaard's 2006 CL winning team:
GK 1 Víctor Valdés
RB 23 Oleguer
CB 4 Rafael Márquez
CB 5 Carles Puyol (c)
LB 12 Giovanni van Bronckhorst
DM 15 Edmílson
CM 20 Deco
CM 17 Mark van Bommel
'
RW 8 Ludovic Giuly
LW 10 Ronaldinho
CF 9 Samuel Eto'o
Substitutes:
GK 25 Albert Jorquera
DF 2 Juliano Belletti
DF 16 Sylvinho
MF 3 Thiago Motta
MF 6 Xavi
MF 24 Andrés Iniesta
FW 7 Henrik Larsson
Manager:
Frank Rijkaard
Rikjaard then added Henry, Yaya Toure, Milito and Abidal to that squad for his final 2007/2008 season.
Guardiola's Copa del rey winning team only one year later in 2008/2009:
BARCELONA:
GK 13
José Manuel PintoRB 20
Dani AlvesCB 24
Yaya Touré CB 3
Gerard PiquéLB 5
Carles Puyol (c)DM 28
Sergio BusquetsCM 6
Xavi CM 15
Seydou Keita RW 10
Lionel Messi LW 11
Bojan CF 9
Samuel Eto'oSubstitutes:
GK 1
Víctor ValdésCB 2
Martín CáceresDF 16
Sylvinho MF 7
Eiður GuðjohnsenMF 29
Víctor SánchezFW 21
Alexander Hleb FW 27
Pedro Manager:
Pep Guardiola
Quite a few changes there really for someone who just walked into a winning team.
I suppose he isn't immune to criticism, but it's still early in his career at City. He's always had an almost starting 11 of the best players in the world which makes his work A LOT easier. At City he doesn't have a team of the's worlds best players and he's having to adapt to this league. It will be interesting whether he can make City a better team than under Pellegrini, but it will be tough as the league as a whole is getting tougher. I do think he's weakness is his stubbornness to change his style, but this will never change so we'll have to see how it pans out.
I don't think anybody should be immune from criticism, but nor should his achievements and huge impact while at Barcelona be misrepresented and downplayed to better fit in with a much more recent assessment regarding his far less impressive managerial feats post Barca.
I think that is just plain wrong and very misleading. Rikjaard's team was made up of aging stars. Guardiola broke that team up and replaced 16 players in his first season.
Rikjaard's 2006 CL winning team:
GK 1 Víctor Valdés
RB 23 Oleguer
CB 4 Rafael Márquez
CB 5 Carles Puyol (c)
LB 12 Giovanni van Bronckhorst
DM 15 Edmílson
CM 20 Deco
CM 17 Mark van Bommel
'
RW 8 Ludovic Giuly
LW 10 Ronaldinho
CF 9 Samuel Eto'o
Substitutes:
GK 25 Albert Jorquera
DF 2 Juliano Belletti
DF 16 Sylvinho
MF 3 Thiago Motta
MF 6 Xavi
MF 24 Andrés Iniesta
FW 7 Henrik Larsson
Manager:
Frank Rijkaard
Rikjaard then added Henry, Yaya Toure, Milito and Abidal to that squad for his final 2007/2008 season.
Guardiola's Copa del rey winning team only one year later in 2008/2009:
BARCELONA:
GK 13
RB 20
CB 24
CB 3
LB 5
DM 28
CM 6
CM 15
RW 10
LW 11
CF 9
Substitutes:
GK 1
CB 2
DF 16
MF 7
MF 29
FW 21
FW 27
Manager:
Pep Guardiola
Quite a few changes there really for someone who just walked into a winning team.
Cherry picking teams there.
The Valdes-Puyol-Xavi-Iniesta-Messi core of that team was ready to flourish regardless. He added Busquets and Pique.
I think that is just plain wrong and very misleading. Rikjaard's team was made up of aging stars. Guardiola broke that team up and replaced 16 players in his first season.
Rikjaard's 2006 CL winning team:
GK 1 Víctor Valdés
RB 23 Oleguer
CB 4 Rafael Márquez
CB 5 Carles Puyol (c)
LB 12 Giovanni van Bronckhorst
DM 15 Edmílson
CM 20 Deco
CM 17 Mark van Bommel
'
RW 8 Ludovic Giuly
LW 10 Ronaldinho
CF 9 Samuel Eto'o
Substitutes:
GK 25 Albert Jorquera
DF 2 Juliano Belletti
DF 16 Sylvinho
MF 3 Thiago Motta
MF 6 Xavi
MF 24 Andrés Iniesta
FW 7 Henrik Larsson
Manager:
Frank Rijkaard
Rikjaard then added Henry, Yaya Toure, Milito and Abidal to that squad for his final 2007/2008 season.
Guardiola's Copa del rey winning team only one year later in 2008/2009:
BARCELONA:
GK 13
RB 20
CB 24
CB 3
LB 5
DM 28
CM 6
CM 15
RW 10
LW 11
CF 9
Substitutes:
GK 1
CB 2
DF 16
MF 7
MF 29
FW 21
FW 27
Manager:
Pep Guardiola
Quite a few changes there really for someone who just walked into a winning team.
Quite a few changes but the bulk of the spine is still there and the others were exceptionally talented young players on the cusp of breaking through in my view. Henry, Eto'o, Xavi, Iniesta, Toure, Valdes, Puyol, Marquez, Abidal were all there when he arrived. As were Pique, Busquets and a certain Messi who were exceptionally talented young players who in my view it would have taken gross negligence to overlook.
That's why I believe the team was waiting in the wings for a manager to steer it to greatness. You look at the following seasons and again they were entirely reliant on players who were inherited (somewhat obviously as the players he inherited were phenomenal). Ibrahimovich flopped, Fabregas was unsuccesful, Sanchez didn't set the world alight. Mascherano was probably the biggest success.
The biggest decision would be getting rid of Ronaldinho, Deco and a couple of others which allowed the talented youngsters to come through and flourish quite early. If he had a substantial say in this then he certainly deserves a lot of credit.
I think overall it depends how much you believe he was responsible for players like Pique, Toure, Busquets, Iniesta, & Messi coming in and flourishing alongside great existing players like Puyol, Abidal, Henry, Eto'o, Xavi & Marquez. My view is the former 5 players have shown under several managers that they weren't merely improved by the system or the tactics, but were fundamentally great talents who were destined to be great players.
I do understand though that people could say the same about the class of '92 and Fergie. However I feel as a group he got infinitely more out of those players than any other manager would have. I believe Guardiola got exactly as much out of his incredible team than people would expect. The best player ever alongside three of the best midfielders of their generation, one of the best CB's of his generation, as well as two attacking players and full backs who were amongst the best in their positions. As a jockey would say "it's a steering job".
Last edited:
Yep. It's also not particularly difficult to see why he hasn't had the same impact elsewhere as at Barca - club legend, spent a year with the B team first, plus an academy and club culture perfectly suited to his tactical style. It was always going to get harder after he left.
You forgot Dani Alves.
Ready to flourish? How could you possibly know that without the obvious benefit of hindsight? It's easy to look back now and say 'it was obviously going to happen'. If so, why had no-one predicted it beforehand? And you pull me for cherry picking data. Think you are cherry picking memories and refashioning them to better fit your general opinion of Guardiola.
That was his Cop a del Rey winning team one year after Rikjaard left. How can anyone say he just walked into a side -that was not yet formed- who were somehow already destined to win a treble, and give him no credit whatsoever for his role in achieving that?
However you lot try and slice it up, he changed the personnel, and he introduced a completely new style of play. 2008/09 was a treble winning year for Barca. Spain won the Euro's that summer in 2008 -their first tournament win since 1964- playing his style of football. Then the WC in 2010, and the Euro's yet again in 2012.
Guardiola's impact was huge, he transformed Barca into one of the best teams ever, and his introduction of the tika taka style of play was not only pivotal in Barca's success, but clearly provided the catalyst for Spain's unprecedented international domination of the next 3 tournaments. Or was that all purely coincidental too?
Spain won 08 with Peps style of football? Months before he took over the Barca job?You forgot Dani Alves.
Ready to flourish? How could you possibly know that without the obvious benefit of hindsight? It's easy to look back now and say 'it was obviously going to happen'. If so, why had no-one predicted it beforehand? And you pull me for cherry picking data. Think you are cherry picking memories and refashioning them to better fit your general opinion of Guardiola.
That was his Cop a del Rey winning team one year after Rikjaard left. How can anyone say he just walked into a side -that was not yet formed- who were somehow already destined to win a treble, and give him no credit whatsoever for his role in achieving that?
However you lot try and slice it up, he changed the personnel, and he introduced a completely new style of play. 2008/09 was a treble winning year for Barca. Spain won the Euro's that summer in 2008 -their first tournament win since 1964- playing his style of football. Then the WC in 2010, and the Euro's yet again in 2012.
Guardiola's impact was huge, he transformed Barca into one of the best teams ever, and his introduction of the tika taka style of play was not only pivotal in Barca's success, but clearly provided the catalyst for Spain's unprecedented international domination of the next 3 tournaments. Or was that all purely coincidental too?
Pep th time traveller..
Also Spain storming the Euros kind of is a massive indicator of their Barca contingent being ready to break out
Just about to post this but you beat me to it!
Lots of suppositions and unverified assumptions seem to have led you to refashion the evidence in an effort to continue to downplay Pep's obvious influence at Barca. you should know that having an exceptionally talented group of players is not a a guarantee of winning anything. They still have to be moulded together as a group, and even then, it was the the introduction of a new footballing style that allowed them to fulfill that potential, both individually and collectively. Spain then take that same style onto the International stage to even greater success as a nation. It's a point that many of you seem to be strangely overlooking. Other managers have received far more credit for doing much less.
I get it, but the hard facts are the teams he has coached have and still do have the world's best players in their midst. You could take the players from the Barcelona and Bayern teams he took over and place most of them on the top 20 players list. Who from City would get into Pep's Bayern and Barcelona teams? City have top quality players, but not sure any of them are elite level tbh. There's no denying his quality as a manager, but it helps when you have elite players like messi, iniesta, busquets, eto'o, puyol, xavi, alves, and vidal, robben, ribery, lewandowski, muller, alaba, lahm etc. Let's be honest, City don't have players at that level.
Missed that one. I think it is an indication of the massive talent there, but the general point still stands, what he did at Barca and the football style of both Spain and Barca over the next few years was not simply destined to happen, anymore than our treble winning success was. The manager introduced a style of football to a talented group of players that has resulted in the defining of an era. Whatever you think about him post Barca should not overshadow that contribution imo. Right piss off now you lot, im supposed to be fecking painting the bedrooms before my missus gets back from Centre Parks tomorrow. Not arguing over Pep. If it's not done, there is little doubt it will not be a pleasant experience for me!
@InfiniteBoredom The only idiotic thing here is you comparing Real and inter. Two teams operating in completely different markets and revenues. As for your point about operating under "fiscal misery", no shit sherlock. Of course Jose wouldn't have gone there if the owner hadn't promised him that. Hence the reason he was often referred to as the "cheque book" manager.
Last edited:
Just for the record, a net spend of 38m pound over 2 seasons in 08-10 counted as a 'splurge' according to you?
You have already been quoted the figures for other teams. Bayern, known for their fiscal prudence, and Juventus who was off building a new stadium at the time both spent more than Mourinho Inter during the same period, did they splurge?
Maybe addressing that first before waffling on. No one ever said Mourinho never spent money, but the myth behind him buying shit load of old players that left his clubs in the shit is patently untrue. the Chelsea team he left made the CL final and 2nd in PL the following season, much of the spine of that team still played a part in their 2012 CL win, Madrid won CL the season after he left with no significant marquee signing, Inter won Copa Italia, 2nd in Seria A and made CL quarter in 10-11. He has never once broken a world transfer record or league transfer record until the Pogba transfer. So tell me again, how did he 'splurge' at Inter/Madrid?
- Status