Ole hasn't managed football clubs anywhere near the length of time Klopp and Pochettino have.
The similarity is that all of them lacked experience of managing at the top level before being appointed. The post I quoted claimed that no other big club would make these kind of decisions.
Nepotism it was at Barca, Madrid, Juventus, Atletico
You've inadvertently proved rafaelgold's point.
Why exactly do you think Ole was offered the job permanently and so early? I'm more optimistic than some here and I believe some of it just came down to his character. However, I also think the Board should have waited to see if other options became available.
As already mentioned, the same can be said for both Guardiola and Zidane, to use the two most obvious examples.
But the circumstances couldn't be more different. This is not really a valid objection that Ole will succeed here, just because those two did.
Ole has managed football clubs since 2010. Poch since 2009.
Yes and the post you quoted was correct.
I actually meant in terms of length of time involved at management level. Correct me if I am wrong but I think Ole has spent less actual time in management than both Klopp and Pochettino.
That's not the point he made. It was very clear what he was saying. See the post he was replying to.
It's nonsensical question, it speaks for itself that if you remove the very reason someone was hired in the first place, the outcome is unlikely to be the same. Would Guardiola have been appointed Barcelona B manager if it wasn't for his history with the club, what would his career path have looked like then, would it have been exactly the same ?
Amazing how people can read posts he was replying to and still can't get the point.
It's not good example since Barca have very strict structure, hence it's more viable to appoint a internal man. Pep himself is a disciple of Cruyff and was closely taught by him, a lot of his ideas have been carried from Cruyff. Ole played under Fergie like bunch of other players.
Both Ole and Poch have very similar length of time involved at management level. Poch became manager of Espanyol in January 2009. Ole became manager of Molde in November 2010.
It is. If he wasn't a Barca player, he wouldn't have been appointed. That's the Nepotism nonsense that was posted.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...otball-news/sir-alex-ferguson-tips-ole-679923
Oh dear! Pep was appointed after Rijkaard had a disastrous season - finishing third in a two-team league; 18 behind Madrid and with just 67 points for the season. He saw a massive overhaul of the team in the summer and that's how he built forward. The myth of his "inheriting the greatest team of all time" is just that - a myth.
Yeah Rijkaard is a good example. Win percentage of 15% and he was hired as Barca manager. Nepotism FTW.
Pep inherited fantastic academy players. Rijkaard might have had disastrous season but won the CL and La Liga before that. That doesn't mean the crop he got wasn't good,far from it.
Again, very different circumstances. I would also take Fergie's view on managers with a pinch of salt considering the names he threw when he first thought of stepping down and then promoting Moyes.
One could argue that, at the time of their respective appointments, they were both unknown quantities while Solskjaer is not. In fact, you can claim that he won the Cardiff gig on merit after he had done well in a smaller league but he ultimately failed in England. He's been around for a decade or so without his managerial career showing an upward trajectory such as the ones of Allegri, Klopp, Conte, Pellegrini or whoever had to work his way up. Simeone, who gets mentioned a lot, first won titles in Argentina by trademarking his own version of 442 and helped Catania avoid relegation and then he was offered the Atletico job.
I believe it to be so. We have the war chest and we have the prestige but the truth of the matter is that the job isn't very appealing atm. The comparisons will always be made with City and Liverpool who seem to be miles ahead with the best managers in the world in charge of both. Poch, or whoever, will have to come here knowing that the title will be decided on 90+ points and that the squad cannot compete for any major title. On top of that, we've already had two top-class managers who have failed spectacularly and they have both very recently implied that the board wasn't either willing or capable to grant their wishes in the market. A board that seems to believe that the backbone of what will be a good side is already in place. A board that appoints managers without discussing their respective philosophies first.
Rijkaard was also a past player and he was offered Barca job after relegating a team for the first time in their History in Dutch league, with a win percentage of 15%. The very next job he landed was Barca.
So now inheriting good youngsters counts as inheriting the "greatest ever team"? He bought 7 players and promoted only Busquets. He sold Deco and Ronaldinho. He actually made over the entire squad and no, promoting youngsters does not qualify as "inheriting the greatest..." If you do it that way, why credit Fergie for our achievements? He just "inherited" the Class of '92, surely?
Whose darling was Rijkaard? Or Enrique? Or Tito? Tata? Bizarre... Do we now write-off the treble Enrique won? What about Rijkaard's success which you've just cited before? Unheralded manager succeeding at winning it all with Barcelona after building the team. How is Pep the "one-off"? He may be the best, but he's not "one-off" in terms of being successful.
Again, Rijkaard by that token, should be considered a "known quantity" as a failure when Barca appointed him. Not every manager can succeed everywhere. Allardyce excelled with lower level teams; Pulis as well; same for Warnock - which would succeed with a big team? Similarly, it's not assured that Zidane would lead Cardiff to Cup glory or Top 4, regardless of all else.
Rijkaard didn't play for Barca so I'm not sure why nepotism is mentioned?
You talking about 3rd and a Semi Final in UCL being Disastrous? you might need to check your ambitions mate.
For some reason I thought Rijkaard played for Barca, my mistake.
I'm not sure why Rijkaard is kept being mentioned when it comes to nepotism.
Yep; sold Ronaldinho off the bat. Got rid of Eto'o soon after that and then Henry too. For the record, Messi was barely the big influence then. You could argue that a lot of these players became great because of Pep and not vice versa. Hindsight of his effect at City for example, would back this up. The fact is that Barcelona were considered a crisis club when he was appointed. If all he did was "inherit", he wouldn't be the success he is today.
I didn't say it was "nepotism". Read what I said. I was countering the point of "no big club would appoint a manager with a profile like Ole's".
If we were in the same state when Barca and Real appoint Zidane and Pep you will see only handful complaining about that mate, there lies the difference
If we had Barca's structure - the one that Cruyff build for over 20 years I, myself, wouldn't be against Ole type of appointment.The original quote was in regards to "nepotism" and this is the argument I replied on. The broader argument you mentioned has been discussed plenty of times in the thread and I've already shared my views on it.
Barca were shambles when Rijkaard was appointed. Madrid humiliated Barca before Pep was appointed and there was article by Sid Lowe on Barca's state when they gave guard of honor to Madrid side.If we were in the same state when Barca and Real appoint Zidane and Pep you will see only handful complaining about that mate, there lies the difference
But we don't. We are neither like Real. This is what makes Ole inappropriate choice, IMO.
For any Rijkaard you put on the table, i can raise you a Gattuso, a Zola, a Souness, a van Basten, a Tony Adams, a Stuart Pearce or even some of our own: Bruce, Keane, Giggs.
Klopp made Dortmund into a team that could challenge for the Champions League victory frequently, and won Bundesliga. Every time Dortmund became close to a powerhouse bigger clubs came and swooped his star players away only for him to be forced to restart.
We're not like Real? Real actually have just Florentino at the top and then the manager. Flo isn't a football man, has been very random in literally everything and is trigger-happy to boot. He lurches on all matters - from signing policy to the managerial choices. Real has no philosophy as a club either. Go back before Zidane. They won CL under Ancelotti and LL under Mou (once each) and that was about all they were doing for ages. Yet, somehow, they were in a great position when Zizou was given the job?
It has been mentioned many times before and yes it is not something new. But context is very different. If we are like Real Ole would've been sacked on the spot after that string of results. If we are like Barca we would have a top notch footballing structure which would allow room for experiment.
Those who create a mess are usually not those who clean it up. I just cant see that Woodward will leave anytime soon or that the Glazer will install a professional setup with the right people who understand their business
As mentioned. If you give Real's management that means Ole would have been sacked long time before. Look at Solari, look at Lopetegui. You can't have it both ways. If you give Real as an example, the only way Ole should've "won" the job is winning silverware (CL) or top 4. He achieved neither.
