Carragher article in The Telegraph

[gavdim2002]

Is it just me (probably) but when we talk about players that have stepped up under any given manager at United it is usually the same selection: Young, Valencia, Fellani, Lingard etc.

The less fashionable players but generally players who are consistent/nothing fancy

You are right.

 

[Smores]

"If Pep Guardiola was in charge of the United squad I believe they would win the title."
It's possible. But if he is implying in the article that there is parity of talent between the City and Utd squads, I fundamentally disagree. The game intelligence and god given footballing ability of our front line in particular does not compare. City are way out in front. Danny Mills keeps using this "Utd have a great squad" as a stick to beat Mourinho with, too. We don't have a great squad. Look hard at the abilities of too many of our players.

Agree with this, total bullshit.

I also think it's disingenuous to say he's only improved a few players. Half the squad is new so automatically is ruled out that criteria, he's improved a handful whilst the likes of Jones/Smalling have been steady.
Those that have struggled Shaw, Blind already had question marks over them. Herrera is the only one id say has significantly declined.

 

[JPRouve]

Is it just me (probably) but when we talk about players that have stepped up under any given manager at United it is usually the same selection: Young, Valencia, Fellani, Lingard etc.

The less fashionable players but generally players who are consistent/nothing fancy

Also players that have not really improved at the exception of Lingard. All the improved players under LVG and Mourinho have been better in their careers. They are just not as bad as they lately were.

 

[El Zoido]

Absolutely no chance Guardiola would win the league with our squad. His City side last year was better than us and he fell a long way short.

 

[Bobski]

So where does this Utd squad rank then? For me it is even at my most most pessimistic no lower than third, and you would have to make a strong argument to convince me that the Chelsea squad is clearly superior.

 

[Gomes]

This crap article is now being discussed on Sky Sports News. Spewing the same nonsense as the great "non top reds" fans here. Made the same player comparisons and of course managed to avoid every good City player.

 

[Theonas]

You were stating these things like that meant nobody could be better than us because we have all those players with those credentials. The point is some of them mean absolutely nothing when comparing the quality of squads. And the same and more can be said about other clubs.

De Bruyne, unlike Mkhitaryan, has proven to be a good player in England also. And that was proven before Guardiola came along. Who said Mata was useless? Him playing 20 minutes of a game against Honduras isn’t evidence that we have a squad on the level of our rivals especially when their equivalent was one of the players keeping him out of their team. Fernando Llorente was part of that squad too does that mean Spurs have a squad on par with Man City? Pochettino must be really shit. He has players who’ve played in Euros finals and somebody who just beat Alan Shearers calendar year record. Lukaku’s international record is insignificant for comparing against our rivals because their strikers aren’t Belgian. If Aguero were Belgian then Lukaku wouldn’t even be first choice much less their record goal scorer.

Guardiola has done a good job and we’re having a sticky patch, coupled with a better squad to begin with and more money to spend, that’s why the gap is what it is. Last years champions are even further behind and Conte is a bloody good manager as well.

I am not comparing both squads, that's impossible to do because none of them have Balon d'Or quality players. None of us have the quality all over the pitch Real do or the head and shoulders above the rest talent Barcelona or PSG do. What I am saying is that both squads have a legitimate claim to have some top players who have proven it throughout their career. This is shown through the trophies and accolades they won and the records and stats they have. This is why it is very relevant to look at what Lukaku achieved even if there is no direct comparison with a City player. As for Mata, of course simply being a squad player for a WC winning team is not in itself indicative of his quality. When you add that to the fact that he was a mainstay in a CL winning team and a double player of the year winner at a major European club, those factors add up.

The argument I am trying to put up here is the squad difference is such a misleading subject to focus on. If a team loses a football game by 5 or 6 to 0, unless the squad difference is that of between City and Palace, that scoreline cannot be explained by individual quality of players. This makes focusing on that as the reason for our issues misleading and distracting, even if it is not entirely wrong. Your point about Conte, I am not sure what you are trying to say. Of course Conte is a top manager just like Mourinho. They are also another team whose individual quality I consider to be on a similar level to us or City. Maybe a bit worse off but again, certainly not enough to warrant what is happening in the league this year.

 

[acnumber9]

I am not comparing both squads, that's impossible to do because none of them have Balon d'Or quality players. None of us have the quality all over the pitch Real do or the head and shoulders above the rest talent Barcelona or PSG do. What I am saying is that both squads have a legitimate claim to have some top players who have proven it throughout their career. This is shown through the trophies and accolades they won and the records and stats they have. This is why it is very relevant to look at what Lukaku achieved even if there is no direct comparison with a City player. As for Mata, of course simply being a squad player for a WC winning team is not in itself indicative of his quality. When you add that to the fact that he was a mainstay in a CL winning team and a double player of the year winner at a major European club, those factors add up.

The argument I am trying to put up here is the squad difference is such a misleading subject to focus on. If a team loses a football game by 5 or 6 to 0, unless the squad difference is that of between City and Palace, that scoreline cannot be explained by individual quality of players. This makes focusing on that as the reason for our issues misleading and distracting, even if it is not entirely wrong. Your point about Conte, I am not sure what you are trying to say. Of course Conte is a top manager just like Mourinho. They are also another team whose individual quality I consider to be on a similar level to us or City. Maybe a bit worse off but again, certainly not enough to warrant what is happening in the league this year.

You can’t compare squads and say one is better than than another because they don’t have Ronaldo or Messi in them? What a lot of nonsense.

You’re using a lot of unnecessary words to say that Guardiola is doing a good job then. What are our issues then? That Guardiola isn’t our manager? How do you suggest we rectify that?

 

[Theonas]

You can’t compare squads and say one is better than than another because they don’t have Ronaldo or Messi in them? What a lot of nonsense.

You’re using a lot of unnecessary words to say that Guardiola is doing a good job then. What are our issues then? That Guardiola isn’t our manager? How do you suggest we rectify that?

Among the top squads, yes that is what I am saying. I think there is way too much exaggeration going when comparing squads. I do not mean that all are equal, I mean the difference is not as big as to warrant a clear level of superiority and the difference is usually too nuanced to be detected by the average fans like ourselves as it is more to do with profile of players rather than quality. Real Madrid stand out with 5 or 6 players who can be legitimately considered among the very best in their position and Barcelona have the almost cheating like option of having Messi.

The rest of the top squads in Europe, the difference is not decisive. The difference maker then comes down to the profile of the players and how they fit rather than quality as well as other factors like experience, tactics, setup, momentum, etc ...

Our issues have been discussed on other threads by a lot of posters on here. Although looking at the amount of words you judge to be unnecessary, perhaps looking at that would be too much of a waste of time.

 

[superdry]

We're a good team, but Mo fecks us up every time he goes into hoofball mode, it changes the mood of the club in a bad way, players and fans.

 

[roonster09]

It does. It was one of the highlights of our double winning defense in 2008.

It doesn't. If that simple stat says so much then Palace have 7th best attack in the league. Eibar have the best defense in La Liga.

 

[Regalia]

Lousy article. The opening line already tells you it's just another flimsy tabloid piece with opinions masquerading as facts. I used to write like this in uni when I didn't have the time/knowledge to hand in a good assignment and hoped my lecturer would 'believe' my bullshit just because I made myself sound so correct.

 

[JPRouve]

It doesn't. If that simple stat says so much then Palace have 7th best attack in the league. Eibar have the best defense in La Liga.

Or can you use more than one variable and acknowledge that shots conceded will be part of the equation?

 

[hubbuh]

I can't stand Neville now. after all we have done for him and he goes and becomes total ABU so that he can become a football pundit.

Scholes is a pundit, Ferdinand is a pundit neither of them have gone ABU to do so. They have kept their Man Utd bias the same way that ex Liverpool players have towards their club.

The bolded bit?! Scholes has gotten so much stick practically every time he opens his mouth about Utd. He's very dour by nature but people really started to take against him because of the things he was saying.

 

[Escape Goat]

So where does this Utd squad rank then? For me it is even at my most most pessimistic no lower than third, and you would have to make a strong argument to convince me that the Chelsea squad is clearly superior.

TBH I think 4th; I think City, Liverpool and Chelsea each have more balanced first XI's.

Headline players - for Pogba, see Coutinho and Hazard.

The rest of the first XI is nothing special, but at least Chelsea and 'pool have proper full backs playing at full back; wingers playing on the wing etc.

In that context Jose is doing a good job - he's probably got more points than the squad deserves. However the concern is form is heading in the opposite direction to Chelsea and the Victims, who I can see taking 2nd & 3rd by the end of the season.

 

[roonster09]

Or can you use more than one variable and acknowledge that shots conceded will be part of the equation?

Obviously, I questioned using that stat alone.

 

[Escape Goat]

In fact I think a case could be made for Spurs' first XI being equal, if not slightly superior.

 

[breakout67]

Or can you use more than one variable and acknowledge that shots conceded will be part of the equation?

Any variables you use are largely going to be incomplete due to them being very vague. For example, shots conceded misses out a very important detail and that is the timing of these shots.

I would be confident in saying that the Utd v Arsenal game completely warped the stats for shots conceded because it was such a freak game. In that game Arsenal had an xG of 4.5 yet only scored 1 goal.

Just to put that game into perspective; Utd have a total xG against of 24.79, so one game accounted for 18% of their xG against.

 

[Theonas]

TBH I think 4th; I think City, Liverpool and Chelsea each have more balanced first XI's.

Headline players - for Pogba, see Coutinho and Hazard.

The rest of the first XI is nothing special, but at least Chelsea and 'pool have proper full backs playing at full back; wingers playing on the wing etc.

In that context Jose is doing a good job - he's probably got more points than the squad deserves. However the concern is form is heading in the opposite direction to Chelsea and the Victims, who I can see taking 2nd & 3rd by the end of the season.

The starting full backs for those teams the past two seasons have been Joe Gomez, Trent Arnold, James Milner, Alberto Moreno, Victor Moses and [Irrelevant point]. 3 of these are not "proper" full backs with Moreno being the most criticized defender in the top 6 during that period. As for the wingers, none of those teams play with wide wingers just like us and most top teams this decade. They utilised the likes of Coutinho, Pedro, Hazard, Salah in advanced wide positions just like we do. So I have to ask you what is your definition of balanced?

 

[JPRouve]

Any variables you use are largely going to be incomplete due to them being very vague. For example, shots conceded misses out a very important detail and that is the timing of these shots.

I would be confident in saying that the Utd v Arsenal game completely warped the stats for shots conceded because it was such a freak game. In that game Arsenal had an xG of 4.5 yet only scored 1 goal.

Just to put that game into perspective; Utd have a total xG against of 24.79, so one game accounted for 18% of their xG against.

Did I argue that there was an absolutely complete set of variables out there?

 

[breakout67]

Did I argue that there was an absolutely complete set of variables out there?

Not what I meant to say. Shots conceded is such an incomplete stat that its become outdated. xG is a much better stat to use because it includes shots conceded but shows the quality of those shots conceded.

https://understat.com/league/EPL

The above is an easy source of xG.

 

[acnumber9]

Among the top squads, yes that is what I am saying. I think there is way too much exaggeration going when comparing squads. I do not mean that all are equal, I mean the difference is not as big as to warrant a clear level of superiority and the difference is usually too nuanced to be detected by the average fans like ourselves as it is more to do with profile of players rather than quality. Real Madrid stand out with 5 or 6 players who can be legitimately considered among the very best in their position and Barcelona have the almost cheating like option of having Messi.

The rest of the top squads in Europe, the difference is not decisive. The difference maker then comes down to the profile of the players and how they fit rather than quality as well as other factors like experience, tactics, setup, momentum, etc ...

Our issues have been discussed on other threads by a lot of posters on here. Although looking at the amount of words you judge to be unnecessary, perhaps looking at that would be too much of a waste of time.

In your opinion. You’re basically boiling it down to whether these squads have one of two players. If not then they’re all the same when that is clearly not the case. Pogba is probably our stand out player. When he’s missing, which he has quite often, we have nobody to replace him. If City lose De Bruyne they still have David Silva or Bernardo Silva to throw in. We don’t have replacements of that standard. If Aguero isn’t playing then they have Jesús. We have had Zlatan available for about a month and he’s a 36 year old recovering from a very bad injury. Aguero is also a cut above our main striker. These are the big differences and to say they don’t make a difference is nonsense.

All your words boil down to City having a better manager in your opinion. What are Man United to do about that?

 

[Jim Beam]

No argument there, it makes a gigantic difference. Fans focus way too much on the players quality instead of their profile. I think with the exception of Barcelona because of Messi, Real Madrid and maybe PSG, the other top clubs have very equal level of top quality players. Maybe some are slightly better than others but certainly not a decisive difference. Profile of players and how incorporated they are within the team becomes more of an influential factor as a consequence of this relative equality.

Having said that, Mourinho has very little if any history of having a clear vision of how he wants his teams to play. In fact that's one of the pluses about him according to his fans which is an argument not without merit. The other side of this potential advantage is he is hired almost exclusively to win trophies using every trick in the book to navigate each test. You don't hire him if you have a specific vision of how you want to play because he's never shown a particular commitment to that. So in a way, the man has already done what he came here for, he relatively stabilised us, won us a couple of trophies which whereas they do not indicate high quality, are still great memories and help the status of the club, and got us on course to reaching 80+ points in the PL. Unfortunately for him, his approach will always have a lower ceiling and will need others to not be at their best.

Just to add from last night.

In the first point, we definitely agree. People pay too much attention to individual ability or quality of players instead of their profile or how they fit in a team system. For instance, there is a reason why Salah looks like a world-class player in Klopp system, or many of their attackers like Mane last season. Because they're exactly the kind of players that fit the profile for their attack. Put another system or manager there and they will not be half effective as they are.
On the other hand, there is no doubt that Liverpool system does a disservice to their defenders and make them look worse than they are.
I used Liverpool as an example but you can choose many other teams such as Napoli, Atletico, Chelsea, City and so on. The quality of system and profile of the players in it is what makes more of a difference nowadays and that's the reason why buying for the sake of buying won't get you anywhere.
Yes, you could hit a jackpot and get yourself a player like Messi but you could argue that even Barcelona system is the one that really elevated Messi to the status he has, looking how he functions in Argentina team.

As for the second point, there we definitely don't agree. To be more honest, I hope Jose isn't past it and has the patience to build some of his teams from the past. Mourinho does have a specific vision of how he wants his team to play. His approach also doesn't have a lower ceiling and isn't in need for others to not be at their best. You can't win EPL twice in a row and still hold records with most home wins (2005/06), most away wins (2004/05), along with a record most points without a clear vision of the way your team play. If that's ancient history, you don't win La Liga against one of the best teams in world history with record points and goals, but no clear vision.
What's also evident is that both of those teams played in a similar manner. A highly productive counter-attacking team who's efficiency depends on a quick transition, creating width and stretching the defence on the counter or not with a highly mobile striker on top who is good on crosses.
Now, it's perfectly clear that he is trying to make such a team in United. In attacking sense, Leicester away was a pretty much very good example of his playing style and the way he attacks.

Whether will he take us there or not is another question and I have my own worries about his patience when things aren't going his way. But, to say this particular team is an example of a Mourinho one and his vision is pretty much wrong. It's a work in progress at this stage.

 

[Bobski]

TBH I think 4th; I think City, Liverpool and Chelsea each have more balanced first XI's.

Headline players - for Pogba, see Coutinho and Hazard.

The rest of the first XI is nothing special, but at least Chelsea and 'pool have proper full backs playing at full back; wingers playing on the wing etc.

In that context Jose is doing a good job - he's probably got more points than the squad deserves. However the concern is form is heading in the opposite direction to Chelsea and the Victims, who I can see taking 2nd & 3rd by the end of the season.

Liverpool have a more balanced first 11? Seriously? They are ABYSMAL at the back.

Liverpool having a better squad than Utd is hilarious. Great selection of attacking talent but from their keeper-defenders and midfield pool I might only take Can as a squad option, maybe Robertson. Have to see how VVD looks.

 

[wolvored]

Oh yes.

Jones
Smalling
Valencia
Young

Are all better under José - the mistake he's made imo though, is ditching the back 3. When that was starting to gel, we were looking really nice at the back (@SteveJ pun incoming...), but since he ditched it, we've lost a lot of that.

But in terms of their performances, all those players look better under José.

People would well to actually remember that last season under LvG - going out of CL, how boring it was to watch.

José's doing a good job. Needs to get back to 352 fecking asap imo, but he's rebuilding a European giant and winning trophies while doing so.

I dont see it myself. Smalling looks worse than when he played under VG. Valencia is getting steadily worse, but thats his age. Young has always had this in him. He showed it under VG as well. Jones is good but injury prone. I'm not a VG fanboy either.

 

[Quizierda]

Might be right with a lot of things he says. Mou's tactics are outdated especially for a club like Chelsea/United.

 

[Trophy Room]

Lack of development is one reason why he doesn’t last long at clubs.

 

[manunited1919]

I think developing entitles more than allowing a player adequate game time, rather developing is improving the weak areas of a player and inculcating a certain mindset ala Sir Alex and CR7.
In this regard, how has Mou developed Rashford or Martial or even Pogba?

Yes, you have a good point. But SAF was also able to develop CR7 within a great team that included Rooney at his prime, RVN, Scholes, Keane & Giggs. All of them were settled players in a settled team without having the full pressure of scoring for tge team fall on CR7 shoulders. We don’t have that luxury today, we need Martial and Rashford to produce and at times to carry the team.

 

[TRA007]

Yes, you have a good point. But SAF was also able to develop CR7 within a great team that included Rooney at his prime, RVN, Scholes, Keane & Giggs. All of them were settled players in a settled team without having the full pressure of scoring for tge team fall on CR7 shoulders. We don’t have that luxury today, we need Martial and Rashford to produce and at times to carry the team.

Agree, too much pressure for the development to proceed at a normal rate. If only their development could be put in fast forward somehow...

 

[manunited1919]

Agree, too much pressure for the development to proceed at a normal rate. If only their development could be put in fast forward somehow...

Rashford needs some time out, he is not making the right decisions. Maybe a rest would do good, but can we afford it?

 

[Escape Goat]

Liverpool have a more balanced first 11? Seriously? They are ABYSMAL at the back.

Swap keepers and we'd be the ones in 4th (or lower) and an "abysmal" record.

 

[Greck]

In fact I think a case could be made for Spurs' first XI being equal, if not slightly superior.

Now you're taking the piss. Just because their football is better doesn't suddenly make their squad a better one

 

[Escape Goat]

Now you're taking the piss. Just because their football is better doesn't suddenly make their squad a better one

Probably being skewed due to current form but based on that current form, other than DDG, Matic and Pogba I'm not sure I'd take any of the rest of the first XI that's just drawn against Burnley, Leicester and Southampton over their counterparts in the Spurs XI.

 

[Treble]

Today was a bad day for Carragher's critics in this thread. The team looked like a randomly collected bunch of players.

 

[Greck]

Probably being skewed due to current form but based on that current form, other than DDG, Matic and Pogba I'm not sure I'd take any of the rest of the first XI that's just drawn against Burnley, Leicester and Southampton over their counterparts in the Spurs XI.

The likes of Son are made to look better than they are in Pochettino's system. He would look no better than Lingard in a lesser system.

 

[Hasan Waqar]

Carragher was talking about players improving from when the managers inherited the squad. Are they both better now than their first season? Bit debatable but no doubt they're better than last season and I agree about young players having a wobble.

I agree with your first point too about Carragher thinking the clubs had equally strong squads when City have actual fullbacks and we don't.

One fullback. A nearly discarded cm is playing left back right now and doing mightily fine. Have to hand it to Pep.

 

[Theonas]

Just to add from last night.

In the first point, we definitely agree. People pay too much attention to individual ability or quality of players instead of their profile or how they fit in a team system. For instance, there is a reason why Salah looks like a world-class player in Klopp system, or many of their attackers like Mane last season. Because they're exactly the kind of players that fit the profile for their attack. Put another system or manager there and they will not be half effective as they are.
On the other hand, there is no doubt that Liverpool system does a disservice to their defenders and make them look worse than they are.
I used Liverpool as an example but you can choose many other teams such as Napoli, Atletico, Chelsea, City and so on. The quality of system and profile of the players in it is what makes more of a difference nowadays and that's the reason why buying for the sake of buying won't get you anywhere.
Yes, you could hit a jackpot and get yourself a player like Messi but you could argue that even Barcelona system is the one that really elevated Messi to the status he has, looking how he functions in Argentina team.

As for the second point, there we definitely don't agree. To be more honest, I hope Jose isn't past it and has the patience to build some of his teams from the past. Mourinho does have a specific vision of how he wants his team to play. His approach also doesn't have a lower ceiling and isn't in need for others to not be at their best. You can't win EPL twice in a row and still hold records with most home wins (2005/06), most away wins (2004/05), along with a record most points without a clear vision of the way your team play. If that's ancient history, you don't win La Liga against one of the best teams in world history with record points and goals, but no clear vision.
What's also evident is that both of those teams played in a similar manner. A highly productive counter-attacking team who's efficiency depends on a quick transition, creating width and stretching the defence on the counter or not with a highly mobile striker on top who is good on crosses.
Now, it's perfectly clear that he is trying to make such a team in United. In attacking sense, Leicester away was a pretty much very good example of his playing style and the way he attacks.

Whether will he take us there or not is another question and I have my own worries about his patience when things aren't going his way. But, to say this particular team is an example of a Mourinho one and his vision is pretty much wrong. It's a work in progress at this stage.

I wouldn't say he's past it. I think his approach to coaching is limited when considering the way the game and tactics developed over the past decade or so. In his first stint at Chelsea, teams were not as good at pressing and ball circulation. The PL was more physical and less tactically oriented than it is today. The main competition after us was Liverpool and Arsenal, one was happy to sit back and allow you to play and the other were too soft just like they are today. This meant that his Chelsea did not need to be particularly brilliant at possession and moving the ball to dominate the league.

His time at Real Madrid is really difficult to judge when Ronaldo scores as many goals as he does. Rafa Benitez got them to win by 10 goals once. It's not because La Liga is weaker, it is because the mentality is different. Teams over there do not worry about goal difference the way they do in England. It makes them play a more open game. That Real Madrid side also had a level of individual quality up front that we simply cannot match with all the money in the world. This meant he was the perfect fit as no one in the world can be more trusted than him when it comes to bringing solidity and discipline. No one is better than him also at instilling an us against the world mentality which again was fitting considering where Real were at the time compared to Barcelona. His limitations when it comes to implementing a team that can play on the front foot was however exposed when they were playing the top sides like Dortmund, Bayern or Barcelona. They looked unable to push up in those games and were forced to play a reactive game.

This brings us to now. His ability to solidify and buy the right players to fit that mindset has been in full sight with us. He got us resilient, direct and with a strong winning mentality up until last month obviously. His limitations are just more exposed now because the teams around us are better at dealing with his methods. Chelsea are hardly a possession team but the way they controlled every aspect of the game against us was telling. We don't even stand a chance to take the game to Liverpool, let alone City. This combination of strengths and weaknesses is what leads me to believe that the limit with him will be 80+ pts with some strong wins vs mid table teams and an average or mediocre record against the rest. This will be enough to win the league if it had the same quality it did the past few years. But when Guardiola has the tools to build a team to his vision, his ceiling is simply much higher.

 

[Jim Beam]

I wouldn't say he's past it. I think his approach to coaching is limited when considering the way the game and tactics developed over the past decade or so. In his first stint at Chelsea, teams were not as good at pressing and ball circulation. The PL was more physical and less tactically oriented than it is today. The main competition after us was Liverpool and Arsenal, one was happy to sit back and allow you to play and the other were too soft just like they are today. This meant that his Chelsea did not need to be particularly brilliant at possession and moving the ball to dominate the league.

His time at Real Madrid is really difficult to judge when Ronaldo scores as many goals as he does. Rafa Benitez got them to win by 10 goals once. It's not because La Liga is weaker, it is because the mentality is different. Teams over there do not worry about goal difference the way they do in England. It makes them play a more open game. That Real Madrid side also had a level of individual quality up front that we simply cannot match with all the money in the world. This meant he was the perfect fit as no one in the world can be more trusted than him when it comes to bringing solidity and discipline. No one is better than him also at instilling an us against the world mentality which again was fitting considering where Real were at the time compared to Barcelona. His limitations when it comes to implementing a team that can play on the front foot was however exposed when they were playing the top sides like Dortmund, Bayern or Barcelona. They looked unable to push up in those games and were forced to play a reactive game.

This brings us to now. His ability to solidify and buy the right players to fit that mindset has been in full sight with us. He got us resilient, direct and with a strong winning mentality up until last month obviously. His limitations are just more exposed now because the teams around us are better at dealing with his methods. Chelsea are hardly a possession team but the way they controlled every aspect of the game against us was telling. We don't even stand a chance to take the game to Liverpool, let alone City. This combination of strengths and weaknesses is what leads me to believe that the limit with him will be 80+ pts with some strong wins vs mid table teams and an average or mediocre record against the rest. This will be enough to win the league if it had the same quality it did the past few years. But when Guardiola has the tools to build a team to his vision, his ceiling is simply much higher.

Some very good points here must admit. It also is a fact that most clubs in his first Chelsea stint played usually with a 4-4-2 which allowed him to have control of the midfield with an extra man and he can't do that anymore after change of playing style in almost every club.

Real Madrid team as you say is also individually brilliant and it's hard to deny that this particular element was very important in him being able to succeed in implementing his strategy. But, they were individually brilliant even before him and couldn't get past clubs like Liverpool and Lyon in the last 16.
You could argue that he took them at the right time with some of those players entering or being in their prime. But, you can't deny he did elevate them to another level, especially in his second season and managed to reduce the gap in quality between them and Barcelona, especially looking at their first 5-0 fixture. Not only he didn't suffer that kind of defeat later, he managed to get La Liga in his second season by winning at the same ground in the deciding fixture when the gap was 4 or 5 points at the time. Also, although Pep overall had a better record, most matches very pretty close and went to one or the other side by one goal difference mostly, if there wasn't a draw.
That progress can't be only down to him bringing solidity and discipline as you say, although they were certainly factors in it, but also in changing the way team operated and attacked on the field as I never seen a team who could get so fast from one side of the field to the other.

Which takes us to the issue of the players at his disposal and today. We don't have that kind of players. So, do we give him another big check to try and do it or should we look at the progress he made so far and based on that say it is, or it isn't enough to trust you and start over again if the answer is the latter? That assessment imo can obviously be made only at the end of the season and I find calling for his head in this moment way premature and unjustified.
Not just that we have plenty to play for, but even a single game can be a change of perception if we, for example, convincingly beat Liverpool/Chelsea at OT or beat City away.

Whatever happens, although he has my support and I think he steady the ship, my two biggest complaints are obvious stagnation of our attacking players and not much fluidity in our game for which he must take some responsibility. The second one is with the board as it's almost certain now that behind their actions there is no clear and bigger vision in the way which club should go after Fergie's retirement.

 

[Theonas]

Some very good points here must admit. It also is a fact that most clubs in his first Chelsea stint played usually with a 4-4-2 which allowed him to have control of the midfield with an extra man and he can't do that anymore after change of playing style in almost every club.

Real Madrid team as you say is also individually brilliant and it's hard to deny that this particular element was very important in him being able to succeed in implementing his strategy. But, they were individually brilliant even before him and couldn't get past clubs like Liverpool and Lyon in the last 16.
You could argue that he took them at the right time with some of those players entering or being in their prime. But, you can't deny he did elevate them to another level, especially in his second season and managed to reduce the gap in quality between them and Barcelona, especially looking at their first 5-0 fixture. Not only he didn't suffer that kind of defeat later, he managed to get La Liga in his second season by winning at the same ground in the deciding fixture when the gap was 4 or 5 points at the time. Also, although Pep overall had a better record, most matches very pretty close and went to one or the other side by one goal difference mostly, if there wasn't a draw.
That progress can't be only down to him bringing solidity and discipline as you say, although they were certainly factors in it, but also in changing the way team operated and attacked on the field as I never seen a team who could get so fast from one side of the field to the other.

Which takes us to the issue of the players at his disposal and today. We don't have that kind of players. So, do we give him another big check to try and do it or should we look at the progress he made so far and based on that say it is, or it isn't enough to trust you and start over again if the answer is the latter? That assessment imo can obviously be made only at the end of the season and I find calling for his head in this moment way premature and unjustified.
Not just that we have plenty to play for, but even a single game can be a change of perception if we, for example, convincingly beat Liverpool/Chelsea at OT or beat City away.

Whatever happens, although he has my support and I think he steady the ship, my two biggest complaints are obvious stagnation of our attacking players and not much fluidity in our game for which he must take some responsibility. The second one is with the board as it's almost certain now that behind their actions there is no clear and bigger vision in the way which club should go after Fergie's retirement.

I just want to first say that this is one of the very few discussions I had with someone who supports Mourinho who doesn't come across like a fanboy and I do appreciate that.

I agree that it is not only down to him bringing in solidity and discipline. His work on transitions has been a stand out and I would say that was at full view even more at Inter. Their performance in the semi final versus Barcelona at the San Siro was really brilliant in that regard and to me, the most impressive Inter performance under him. Although, I go back to the point that this strength weighs less now with the current competition. Liverpool, Spurs and Chelsea are not necessarily great teams but they are particularly more equipped to deal with counters due to how much work they put in on their positional and possession game.

When Mourinho came out to complain about Klopp's tactics at Anfield. Most of it was classic deflection to distract from the aircraft he parked over there but he did have a point. Liverpool were extremely solid in dealing with any attempts to transition from us. In Spain also, the likes of Dortmund and Bayern had a strongly implemented game higher up the pitch to the point where they did also feel comfortable leaving space in behind, something which the La Liga side have caught up with sufficiently by his third year.

When it comes to the top teams, when you do not play a particularly high line on a regular basis, you are less equipped to go up 10 or 20 yards, it kills you as it is not something you are used to. This is something that Mourinho used to full effect in his first time at Chelsea against the top English teams and how they were set up. Since Barcelona however, a lot of teams have started pushing higher up meaning they started putting in more work to deal with transitions and killing off the counters early on. This led to a huge improvement in that department that negates one of Mourinho's main offensive strengths.

Against the smaller teams, this has been working for us in that early run. We'd huff and puff to get a goal and after that, we saw some brilliant transitions with Martial, Lukaku, Pogba, Rashford and Mkhitaryan at the centre of them. The problem obviously comes when he can't get that first goal. There are 14 teams now in the PL who will take a 0/0 happily, some of them will even take a 1/0 defeat. All of these factors is what leads me to believe that what he is good at can still be efficient. He still has enough players to get that first goal in 28 games a season. The other 10 games, they will always be ones when a set piece wins it or a quick break or the other team missing chances. This will always have the potential to end up with 80+ points which is not bad at all. It's just not at the level of the great teams.

 

[Jim Beam]

I just want to first say that this is one of the very few discussions I had with someone who supports Mourinho who doesn't come across like a fanboy and I do appreciate that.

I agree that it is not only down to him bringing in solidity and discipline. His work on transitions has been a stand out and I would say that was at full view even more at Inter. Their performance in the semi final versus Barcelona at the San Siro was really brilliant in that regard and to me, the most impressive Inter performance under him. Although, I go back to the point that this strength weighs less now with the current competition. Liverpool, Spurs and Chelsea are not necessarily great teams but they are particularly more equipped to deal with counters due to how much work they put in on their positional and possession game.

When Mourinho came out to complain about Klopp's tactics at Anfield. Most of it was classic deflection to distract from the aircraft he parked over there but he did have a point. Liverpool were extremely solid in dealing with any attempts to transition from us. In Spain also, the likes of Dortmund and Bayern had a strongly implemented game higher up the pitch to the point where they did also feel comfortable leaving space in behind, something which the La Liga side have caught up with sufficiently by his third year.

As for the first sentence, only persons who do annoy me here are the one who moan just for the sake of it. Personally, many posters who have a different opinion than mine, but post it in a coherent and reasonable way, are among my favourites to read because it gives me another and different perspective on things. I may, or may not agree in the end, but that's not the point. To cut it short, appreciation is mutual.

As for the post, mostly agree, especially about Inter game vs Barcelona and that Liverpool match. Our transition went completely out of the window after first 10 minutes. We even tried to counter in the beginning and I've got feeling when he saw he couldn't do anything about it he just completely closed the shop. He definitely has more problems implementing his tactics because of the things you mentioned and is even more dependable on the money or individual brilliance of his players up top.

Against the smaller teams, this has been working for us in that early run. We'd huff and puff to get a goal and after that, we saw some brilliant transitions with Martial, Lukaku, Pogba, Rashford and Mkhitaryan at the centre of them. The problem obviously comes when he can't get that first goal. There are 14 teams now in the PL who will take a 0/0 happily, some of them will even take a 1/0 defeat. All of these factors is what leads me to believe that what he is good at can still be efficient. He still has enough players to get that first goal in 28 games a season. The other 10 games, they will always be ones when a set piece wins it or a quick break or the other team missing chances. This will always have the potential to end up with 80+ points which is not bad at all. It's just not at the level of the great teams.

This is what really interests me in all the discussion. So, you practically have a manager who pretty much (if he doesn't implode and lose dressing room) will get you 80+ points in most league races. I think he even has potential to get 90+ if everything goes his way, but nevermind. How do you justify his sacking in that case? Because there are really very few ones out there for whom you know that can do a similar job in terms of getting you to that amount of points. Most of them in other clubs. Would you even consider sacking him if he doesn't lose the dressing room?