There are also rumours about his Barca team being involved in the Fuentes doping scandal for example.
Is Pep the greatest manager of all time?
- Thread starter Irrational.
- Start date
Two of the three teams he's been involved with as manager have serious allegations of cheating against them. It's an extremely hard case to make for him on that basis IMO
There have been separate substantial allegations made during his time as a manager. Surely you rememeber Dr. Fuentes?
Last edited:
It's like flat earth debates; they only happen on the internet and in hushed conversations at the pub. No group of experts in football/astronomy is peddling alternative theories of flat earths or Pep needing to manage at Stoke
He can only be remotely considered one of the best managers if he doesn't go to the dominant side in a league. Hes an exceptional manager with a great team around him but the very best managers do special things. I think Klopp has done far more impressive things at Liverpool than Pep at City.
This is true. The allegations of doping (both chemical and financial) get brought up elsewhere when discussing Pep, but the dismissing of his achievements because he was successful at a big club immediately is something I mainly see here.
It’s not surprising, though. He’ll alway be compared unfavourably with SAF on a United forum and he doesn’t have an Aberdeen-style underdog story in his past.
I do find it a little bit like the Messi - Ronaldo debate, though. For Ronaldo fans, at first the numbers (goals / assists / trophies) were all that mattered. But when Messi began to match or overtake in most metrics, the criteria became ever more esoteric. My favourite example was Neville saying Ronaldo was superior because he’d pick him to take a penalty in the last minute of a final.
Personally, I’d say Pep’s not yet, but if he keeps managing with the same hunger he has now he’ll be in a class of his own by the time he retires.
Since he joined unlimited funds city Real Madrid have won 4 CLs to his 1.
Last edited:
Goat? Impossible to say ….different eras
Best ever Prem manager SAF
Currently worlds best manager Pep
Best ever Prem manager SAF
Currently worlds best manager Pep
I agree with this. SAF is the indisputable GOAT though in my opinion.
I don't think he's the GOAT (I've not watched enough football to know for sure, and I think SAF is top). But he's certainly on the shortlist.
I can't believe a Liverpool fan is writing this tripe.
He cheated you out of multiple titles last few years which would have led you to overtake United.
Had it not been for this doping Arsenal would have won 2 in a row and be in for matching SAFs three in a row and coming close to number 20.
Its sickening
Who was the manager when Rio missed his drug test that earned him a ban? Top players doping. Crazy stuff
I'm a fellow Gooner who very much feels your pain, but both things can be true. City can have been turned into a hollowed-out, corrupt, soulless husk of a football club... and also have hired a Manager of generational talent to lead them to ridiculous heights.
For Liverpool fans, as long as the GOAT is not SAF or Man Utd linked, they are happy. They have been cheated 3-4 years of PL titles but it's ok the focus was SAF/Man Utd.
How about the 115? It makes huge difference in term of resources for the club and manager. As Wenger said, it's financial doping.
If the titles were stripped like what happened to Lance Armstrong, Pep will not have 6 PL titles. Is he still the GOAT?
This thread is the greatest example of cognitive dissonance on the whole site. It's actually fascinating to dip into from time to time from an observational POV.
I thought calling them a “hollowed-out, corrupt, soulless husk of a football club” made my feelings pretty clear, but I’ll try again.
I hate everything about the fact that City have won not one, but two, league titles that would have gone to us had they been found guilty since being charged. Especially as Everton and Forest were punished so quickly. It makes me sad as a fan of Arsenal, but also as a fan of football.
Unfortunately this isn't quite true. The whole fabric of football changes without City/Pep and the financial doping. It's no guarantee that the same 2nd placed teams would have been there to win titles or not.
Ofcourse it does
Right now aside from City, Arsenal are ahead of the others by some distance. So were Liverpool last few years. And this is just now. In the 2000s these cheats gutted our team and we resorted to the mediocrity of 4th and 5th.You're a top poster but last few days utterly baffling some of your posts
I disagree. For example, two players you currently have in your squad were at City (Zinchenko and Jesus). There are also a large quantity of City players that they've taken from the rest of the league and beaten other clubs to in respect of their transfers. If City were not financially doped then they won't make the same transfers, they may not have performed as well and other clubs would have made different transfers and may have performed differently.Ofcourse it does
You're a top poster but last few days utterly baffling some of your posts
It's regularly peddled out that the reason that City and Liverpool managed to reach those maximums is because of the other, we can't absolutely guarantee that would be the same and Liverpool would have reached those heights without City or if another club would have came in and been competing etc.
This isn't me denying you and Liverpool have been the best sides apart from them by the way, of course you have, but there's no guarantee it would have been the same without that doping behind City.
Last edited:
Klopp has more of a right to bitch than any online person, yet he went out of his way to say this:
He didn't have to say all that. But maybe the Saudis got to him.
Of course "we can't absolutely guarantee" it - that's the case for literally all hypothetical situations.
The gap between 2nd and 3rd has 7, 9 and 18 points in the last three season. These weren't three-horse title races, the 2nd best team was decidedly clear of the chasing pack.
I'm just putting forward the argument as to why I don't think we can retrospectively give titles to sides that came 2nd.
Yeah, fair play. I think the 115 charges has left me disillusioned with football and (I believe) uncharacteristically irritable.
Pot kettle black. This whole forum overlooks the corruption of City if it meant Liverpool not winning. We’re in the same boat eating the same shit sandwich
What a shit rivalry. They loved each other way too much.
My granddad could win a title with oil money.
His Barcelona side are entangled in a referring scandal, there was the missing blood samples too. Now there are 115 charges... erm no I don't think he can be called the greatest manager ever especially when you have some that have won more UCLs than he has.
Brilliant manager and tactician he is, always seems to be around a scandal though...
Brilliant manager and tactician he is, always seems to be around a scandal though...
He took over a club that has spent significantly much more than others, not just on players and coaches but on all aspects of the club. Let him take over at clubs like spurs and see how good he really is.
As if Premier League determines who's going to be the GOAT.
We saw how SAF did against Goteborg, Lille, Basel, Benfica, Galatasaray with huge budget advantage. It's crazy those talking about budget differences/financial advantages are conveniently ignoring SAF's shortfalls against team with way lower budgets, trying to create a myth. Not to mention his constant failures in the UCL, regular exits against teams like Real.
And then this implicit delusional assumption that SAF or any top manager would be equally successful at Barca, Bayern or any other team outside the UK, as if that's something every top manager can easily do. We saw what happened to Ancelotti at Bayern. I don't think that SAF would be as successful at Barca or Bayern or any top team in Serie A, he is designed for the Premier League success, and that's where it ends.
Last edited:
It's still Don Carlo for me. As most people have said, there's always an element of controversy with his greatest teams. He's an obvious outstanding candidate to argue the case for though and you won't get that many people vehemently disagreeing.
There are a lot of assumptions and your point of views in your post about SAF. Since it's hypothetical so no point arguing about it.
So outside of PL he only won 1 CL here with all the cheating. Why is he the GOAT? Did he won CL with BM? The league there was 1 horse race for 10 years.
There are tons of manager more successful than him. One being Ancelotti.
Nope. I stated very clear in my last posts that last 2 years the best team and manager should be Arsenal and Arteta. 3-4 years prior to that was Liverpool and Klopp. To me until now I still think Klopp is the better manager than Pep with the budget constraints. Klopp also play better football.
They did it in proper way honestly and play by the rules. This deserves utmost respect especially Klopp. Klopp achievement was incredible especially winning the CL too without cheatings. He was better than Pep
Carlo has 6 league titles in 25yrs coaching the best teams in Europe
Last edited:
Man Utd and Chelsea have a higher net spend than him in the last 5yrs and they are not close to his team
How many CL did Carlo win with Bayern Juve Chelsea PSG etc?
Carlo has 6 leagues and 4 CL in 25yrs, Pep has 12 leagues and 3CL (including 2 trebles) in 15yrs. How is that more succesful?
Has to be Ancelotti especially if he wins the CL again.
Not many agree with you so fair play. I do wonder how many on here would wipe out Peps achievements if it meant the rest of us won what we should have without the City being owned by a state. I would have no issue with it even if it meant united have more titles.
Minus 6 league titles.
How many league titles should we minus from Carlo who coached Calcicopoli era Juve and Milan. Plus oligarch doped Chelsea and PSG?