Obviously winning is necessary and what will be remembered years from now. But the true judge of your performance in the CL is not winning it, it's being regularly involved in the latter rounds year in year out which is impossible to do if you are not good enough, you can't say that about winning the thing in the odd year like Chelsea did. Being involved is not enough overall as you must supplement it with a win to establish your place but taking City from the fringes in that competition and making them regular fixtures and favorites is a feat on its own.
If Pep leaves City without winning the CL, would he have been a success or failure?
- Thread starter Fortitude
- Start date
That’s a good point.
This basically. For most normal clubs of course he's a success. But he's backed by an oil state. He's had the environment set up for him before he even arrived, the entire structure is ex barca. If he still can't win it, of course it's a black mark on his CV.
Ok fair enough, but that's more your opinion on him than his "legacy" (which refers more to a general opinion on his achievements as a manager). If he never wins the CL again, it will affect the way people view his career as a manager.
Would anyone consider Mourinho a failure at Chelsea for not winning them the Champions League? Of course not. And City have won more than that Chelsea team. Success. Even greater success if they win the CL.
No it won't be any mark at all. Just like no one will remember that Mourinho came at a time when United and Arsenal were at their worst. Add to it being backed like no one else at the time with Abramovic's money. Once United got back on track, he did not win the league with Chelsea and was sacked.
Even us, in the '90s, our spending power was unmatched. We could cherry pick whoever we wanted domestically not too dissimilar to what Bayern have been doing in Germany. We had a monopoly over the British market and were by far the richest club in the land. You can argue that the black mark is about the club for how they collected that money. But from the managerial point of view, it is exactly the same, all three had a big helping hand just like the best Formula 1 drivers drive the best cars. No one will remember which helping hand is more or less morally acceptable.
With much harder competition. Mourinho competed against our worst team under Fergie and he is still easily one of the top success stories in the PL. One can point holes in literally every single success story in football.
A legendary failure.
Just like Messi, Guardiola could only do it with Barcelona, xavi and iniesta
Failed at Bayern and City.
Just like Messi, Guardiola could only do it with Barcelona, xavi and iniesta
Failed at Bayern and City.
success.
SAF, managed it twice in a 26 glorious years.
Pep also twice only in a 14 trophies laden years with Barca, Bayern & City
Klopp won it once and lost 3 finals.
It's an incredibly hard competition to win, Zidane and Ancelotti are the only coaches to win it more than 2 times in recent history.
Pep also twice only in a 14 trophies laden years with Barca, Bayern & City
Klopp won it once and lost 3 finals.
It's an incredibly hard competition to win, Zidane and Ancelotti are the only coaches to win it more than 2 times in recent history.
He has been a great manager for City. Winning the CL was the target but he has won everything else many times over. He will probably be missed by City fans.
Why is his infinite budget continually brushed over? It’s hardly the same thing.
What do you mean?
Funny you mention Mourinho, because I was just about to say that I rate him more. His achievements with porto and inter are better. Wenger with arsenal as well. He's not even the best manager in the league right now...its klopp
If Pep's City spell is to be considered a failure then it means one or both of the following:
1. Fergie is pretty much the only successful manager ever
and/or
2. The Champion's League is pretty much the only thing that matters
Of course the bald psycho is a success.
1. Fergie is pretty much the only successful manager ever
and/or
2. The Champion's League is pretty much the only thing that matters
Of course the bald psycho is a success.
Everything said here is an opinion. Objectively he has 10 league titles, 2 champions league and 1 CL final in 14-15 years.. That's a great legacy by any standards, winning 1 more CL won't change much unless we go into subjective debates.
Anyone who thinks 0 CLs would make Pep a failure is either deluding themselves or seriously overestimates how much we (fans and board) care about it.
He spent more than the rest of the league and won titles off the back of it. Hardly a revelation. Not like City hadn’t been successful before he arrived, he was simply continuing the trend.
You can only rate them more if you cherry pick your criteria, which is fair game. But in every walk in life... The most resourceful will pay for the best. Pep was lucky enough to not have to prove himself because in his first job, every big club in Europe saw that this was special. It's like punishing players who happen to start at a big club for not being able to prove it at a lower level.
As for your picks, all great managers obviously but as I said previously, one can pick holes in everything. Wenger barely managed a CL final, his European record is truly average and at times abysmal. I am not even talking about the time when he had no money after the new stadium, I am talking about when his team were dominating domestically. Look at their record in the late '90s and early '00s and let's not forget that in those years, the likes of Leeds, Deportivo, Monaco and Porto were making it to the latter stages. I am a big fan of Wenger and think his work at Arsenal is extraordinary in a very different way to the other top managers though, but to elevate him above the others is just illogical.
We can also criticize Klopp for how often he is the bridesmaid. Also, just like we can ask questions of Pep not proving it with a lower club, how can we know if Klopp can handle a club that is under pressure to win immediately like Bayern or Barcelona? How is he proven when it comes to managing the elite talent from the get go? He never had to deal with that in his career. Again, I think Klopp is one of the best PL managers ever but we can always find a question mark and asterisk. As for Mourinho, obviously one of the greatest ever but where do we start? How many things can you point at the man that others do not lack?
In short, all the names you mentioned happen to be good at different things and lacking in different managerial aspects. I think they all belong to the greats and depending on the context and what we are trying to evaluate, they all have a claim. But to make things simple, trophies and sustained title challenges married with pro active dominant football will always be remembered most which is why Sir Alex and Pep stand above all at this point in time.
I would say it has been a success. He is what city were building towards. Playing pep's style of football. And he also has been very successful in the league. However when you have the best team with the biggest budget winning the league is what is expected. So I'd say it would of been a bigger story if he hadn't won the league as much. Any other manager for city would have the same expectations to win the league.
Imo winning the champions league would make it a huge success. It would bring city to that next level as a club. Failure to do that will make it just a mediocre success.
Also if Pep didn't have the brand of football that city wanted to play, then not winning the champions league would be considered a failure.
Imo winning the champions league would make it a huge success. It would bring city to that next level as a club. Failure to do that will make it just a mediocre success.
Also if Pep didn't have the brand of football that city wanted to play, then not winning the champions league would be considered a failure.
Ever since the Barca days Guardiola has regarded the league as the most important throphy because it shows how good you are on a regular basis not luck.
A success. 4 of the last 5 titles including a 100 points and fending off a very good Liverpool twice at the wire. The premier league is harder to win than the champions league. Just look at Tuchel's Chelsea.
I think from a fans point of view no, he's been great for city. From the owners and his point of view it will be viewed as a partial failure as he is there to win the champions league.
Might be controversial but CL wins are overrated. So is tuchel a success at Chelsea but Pep not at City? Is Di Matteo a success but Jose not at Chelsea.
Pep is a success and there is no other way about it.
Pep is a success and there is no other way about it.
Put him in charge of Man City for the past 8 years and he'd have a few.
I'd have at least 1.
How could you possibly consider Pep at City at anything else than a succes?
It’s a cup, you need some luck and a know-how as Madrid showed it.
Real win it three times in a row while having only a Spanish championship at the same time. Does that mean they were better then Barcelona who won the championship ? I don’t think so. The championship is consistency, you can’t really question the team who won it.
Guardiola is as Fergie in terms of championship. Of course, his teams are highly expansive, but it’s not an easy feat to win it year after year. You have to know how to motivate players. And Pep is as good as Fergie in that sense. It pains me to see him in that little club instead across the street, but as we can see the state of us I can almost understand his decision. If only we didn’t have incompetent buffons running the club, he would be our manager.
Real win it three times in a row while having only a Spanish championship at the same time. Does that mean they were better then Barcelona who won the championship ? I don’t think so. The championship is consistency, you can’t really question the team who won it.
Guardiola is as Fergie in terms of championship. Of course, his teams are highly expansive, but it’s not an easy feat to win it year after year. You have to know how to motivate players. And Pep is as good as Fergie in that sense. It pains me to see him in that little club instead across the street, but as we can see the state of us I can almost understand his decision. If only we didn’t have incompetent buffons running the club, he would be our manager.
Sorry but, 1999?
On topic, the MO was for him to bring City a CL title and he didn’t (or doesn’t), i’d argue he’s been more of a failure than a success, if you compare this scenario in any other professional / career sense especially.
If he is a failure I don'y know how to describe all our managers during post-Fergie era.
Our managers have spent similar amount of money as Pep at City by the way.
Our managers have spent similar amount of money as Pep at City by the way.
If pep doesnt win the CL during his career as a manager, the question will always remain, "Can he win it without Messi?" The answer will be no.
The other question will be did peak Messi, Iniesta and Xavi win the CL inspite of guardiola being the manager at the time?
Guardiola has made alot of cockups in the knockout stages of CL over the years at Bayern and City.
Dont get me wrong, fantastic coach, great football to watch. Its just that with the exception of Madrid, defences normally win you CL trophies. Guardiola is never going to build a misery defence that celebrates a clean sheet as much as a goal.
The other question will be did peak Messi, Iniesta and Xavi win the CL inspite of guardiola being the manager at the time?
Guardiola has made alot of cockups in the knockout stages of CL over the years at Bayern and City.
Dont get me wrong, fantastic coach, great football to watch. Its just that with the exception of Madrid, defences normally win you CL trophies. Guardiola is never going to build a misery defence that celebrates a clean sheet as much as a goal.
It would had been a success but a mild one and personally wouldn't make much out of it. As an institution Manchester City have done to improve and be a succesful modern club but it feels their dominance is something they can achieve without Guardiola as they're bound to hire another top coach, so it should be a success for them as a club but they would still need to win a UCL if they want to break through and reach a level beyond of prestige to their current status.
As for Guardiola his high point will always be his time with Barcelona and if he wasn't able to win a Champions League with Bayern and also fails with City then I don't think he will ever will.
As for Guardiola his high point will always be his time with Barcelona and if he wasn't able to win a Champions League with Bayern and also fails with City then I don't think he will ever will.
Hence the 3 mins?
He was lucky, yes, in a way like comparing yourself with someone who was born into a wealthy family with connections. It doesn't mean that person isn't just as good or better than you, but it's a factor that will always be considered.
I mostly agree, except for the Klopp part. If a kid like Nagelsmann can step in and continue the domestic dominance, then I dont see how Klopp can't do the same if not better, seeing as he already went through a much tougher title challenge with BVB. Yes expectations are a bit differnt, but he's shown that he has the mettle to see through a title challenge and there's really no reason to even doubt whether he could do the same with Bayern, or even Barca, with that team. I think he's a better motivator as well as he can make even average players look really good in his system.
Zidane says hi.
Unlimited budget, knocked out by Lyon Spurs Monaco and Oxlade Chamberlain, can’t ignore it
His City Legacy a success but his actual legacy it leaves another stain.
Not winning a CL with any other team other then that Barca team despite coaching two of the strongest teams in the world at the peak of their powers leaves him behind guys like Jose and Fergie in the All time tanking.
Not winning a CL with any other team other then that Barca team despite coaching two of the strongest teams in the world at the peak of their powers leaves him behind guys like Jose and Fergie in the All time tanking.
With the money he's spent, what 1.5 billion, only winning domestic leagues and cups won't cut it, City was winning that before he arrived,
Failure in my eyes.
Failure in my eyes.
failure giving all the money spent just to win domestic leagues
Success, no matter how you paint it. Winning 5 premier leagues is no easy task, when Pep leaves City will remain as a consolidated club with a winning structure. Obvioulsy the UCL is the main goal for the plastic clubs but they have won so many titles that only a fool would label Pep's ternure like a failure.
Hi Zidane