Is Pep the greatest manager of all time?

[marktan]

Yes they reached the semi final, playing against no strong teams.

SAF did amazing in Scotland, no doubt. Klopp took over a weak squad of a huge club, won a few trophies, nothing amazing considering he spent nearly as much as city and struggled to be competitive for half of it.

Zidane didn't have competition though, was a weak period in football.

SAF has things on his side as well, best youth generation in PL history of any club, bar far. United were a huge club only RM was bigger. We had our pick of English players, more so than any other English club.

Not true at all. "Up to 2020/21, the first five years of Guardiola's reign saw a net spend of £656m, the highest in the Premier League. Klopp, who joined Liverpool in October 2015, had a net spend of £318m over the same period as Guardiola's first five years at City".

In 2023:
Liverpool net spend: £244.68million
City net spend: £661.8million

An extra £400m is a lot of squad depth.

Also the point r.e. Zidane isn't about rivals, it's about how a great starting team and money ensures a higher likelihood of success than without. That's a given. And to answer your point, I don't really buy that there was no comeptition. In 2017/18 they played Juventus, PSG, Bayern and Liverpool. The former three were all champions of their league (not sure on PSG) and were very good teams. Compare that to say Barcelona's 2011 run (since I'm guessing you like Barcelona), where they faced Arsenal, Shaktar, Real and a pretty poor United side (that themselves beat Shalke in the semi finals and had no business being in the final). Real was the only good team they faced that year.

 

[Cassidy]

Because you responded to a comment in a conversation about netball transfer spending. Do you read what was being talked about?

So wages are not a part of making transfers? Hence why I made the comment. Talking about net spending without including wages and agents fees especially when both have reportedly included under the table payments is silly. Look at the Halaand transfer for example of why looking at the fee alone makes zero sense

Its as silly as choosing an arbitrary 5 year period and ignoring the spending prior to it.

 

[njred]

If it’s just England it’s SAF and even Paisley (6 leagues 3 big ears 1 UEFA in nine years)did more than Pep but the other titles in different leagues will unfortunately put him as the best ever in world football.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Barcelona avoided all good teams in that cl. They had a really easy run.

Yes I know what SAF did, it was amazing. Wasn't as good with a top team as Pep has been though.

Did they? Lyon won the French league, Schalke 3rd in Bundesliga and we won the PL and CL yet won by one single goal and worked our socks off.

Funny how they did all that, had some of the best players in the world but apparently Pep took over a struggling team.

Is that like he took over a struggling Bayern? … Bayern, the current CL winners.

Its fine, we get it.

 

[erikcred]

If it’s just England it’s SAF and even Paisley (6 leagues 3 big ears 1 UEFA in nine years)did more than Pep but the other titles in different leagues will unfortunately put him as the best ever in world football.

You're counting his 6 titles in the PL as legitimate? Are you a City fan pretending to be a Liverpool fan on a United forum.

 

[Taribo's Gap]

They wouldn't need to do what Pep has done as they were legendary at what they did and would have taken that to the Nth degree instead.

There's a severe underestimation in the vulnerabilities of an actual, organic squad. Remove them, as Pep has had the luxury of, and the outlook is monumentally different. Give Klopp a whole squad of heavy metal footballers; give Ferguson no dip from starter to subs; give Mourinho a squad of drones; give Wenger a whole collection in his desired image. The landscape is turned upside down; each one of them would be even more formidable than they were at their peaks because there is then absolutely nothing preventing the dips normal squads encounter.

Resources matter, but some of the reduction in vulnerability is still down to Pep's approach as well. His style, particularly in league campaigns, is one that tries to eliminate jeopardy as much as possible through retaining possession and choking opposition. It's seems more sustainable and less taxing than something like Klopp's style over the long run over a season and from year to year. Also in terms of squad composition he is intentional about recruiting or coaching up versatile players that can capably deputize is multiple roles or positions (except Rodri's), making the team overall less vulnerable to shocks from key injuries. In this current squad, you only really have Kyle Walker and Haaland who can only do one role effectively. The rest can do the mixing and matching. Even Ederson can play striker (jk). That is down to their quality and adaptability as players, but also the coaching. Pep intentionally keeps the squad on the smaller side in order to better manage it. Other squads are usually bigger in terms of sheer number, not quality.

You would also need to factor in other aspects of management like man management and squad composition. It's not a given that Klopp's lovey-dovey, against-the-odds, loyal-to-a-fault, we-are-family style would work just as effectively if you throw even more egos of starter-level players into the mix. You already see cracks with Nunez and Salah this year now that Klopp is leaving. I think SAF and Klopp have excellent gravitas, so they could likely pull it off, but it's not a given. With Klopp, I have often wondered if it's a chicken or egg problem with the injuries. For a while, I thought Liverpool were working within financial constraints and chancing it by taking punts on cheaper players with spotty injury records in the hopes that they could turn in around at Liverpool and represent value transfers (Thiago, Konate, Ox). But then you have guys like Matip, Keita etc, that make me wonder if there is something about Klopp's approach that makes players more susceptible to injury, thereby increasing the vulnerability of the squad. And this is only the physical side of it. The constant emotionalism and last-minute comebacks have to be pretty mentally draining as well.

Mourinho has had amazing squads and yet he always burns out everywhere. Man-for-man, I would have Mourinho's Real Madrid squads over this City squad. City have a great squad, but a lot of the names are also just kinda "meh" relative to the hype the squad gets. Discussions of these otherworldly, "two first eleven" City squads used to include guys like Sterling, Jesus and Zinchenko and now they are all pretty much afterthoughts at their new clubs even though they are still prime age.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Funny how they did all that, had some of the best players in the world but apparently Pep took over a struggling team.

Barcelona had 76 and 68 points in the league the two previous seasons, iirc. Nothing amazing. Turning them into a team that won every single title within a year, while playing extremely well, was impressive.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Barcelona had 76 and 68 points in the league the two previous seasons, iirc. Nothing amazing. Turning them into a team that won every single title within a year, while playing extremely well, was impressive.

No one said it wasn’t. In the same way it wasn’t a team of no hopers who were struggling.

Like most things, theres a middle ground, but it seems to be “Pep took Accrington Stanley to a quintuple” or “he was gifted the greatest team ever”. And people cherry picking posts.

 

[ForeverRed1]

It can fade over time but outcome of all this can be a hard hit and more dark clouds over his achivements. I can’t take that club serious or what they do and I know lot of people thinking the same. Not until this have been resolved. Which actually is shame because he is great manager.


We will see. I expect nothing so I don’t get dissapointed. However 115 is not nothing. If it was 1-2 fine but we are looking at 3 digit number. What I do hope is for transparency and maybe even live coverage.

I reckon a fine (which is the outcome they would want as they’re fecking rich) and maybe points deductions. Could result in them losing many of their big names so they’ll turn to their other 38384748 clubs and their very good youth set up and start over. Back in no time with titles to boot.

 

[Gabriel Djemba-Bebe]

This is exactly the way I see it, I don't regard Ferguson that high. Hitzfeld beat him almost regularly save for the last 2mins of the 99 final. What I remember more is Ferguson getting embarrassed in the CL many seasons
Ferguson had the most stability of any manager in that time and won 2 CL titles

And how many CLs has Pep won without Messi?

There is an element of luck involved in tournament football. Quite often the best team in Europe doesn't win the CL. Whereas the best team in the country wins the league over a 38 game season.

 

[kaiser1]

And how many CLs has Pep won without Messi?

There is an element of luck involved in tournament football. Quite often the best team in Europe doesn't win the CL. Whereas the best team in the country wins the league over a 38 game season.

The same number of CL Messi won without Pep. I will expect that Barcelona "that anyone can win with" to have won the CL fairly often after Pep left, but they only made 1 final

If what you say is true then Pep has won 6 in the last 7. a higher rate than Ferguson ever did. I will say the PL is even more competitive and tougher now than in most of Ferguson's years

If you mean element of luck in Hitzfeld vs Ferguson, It was the lone game Ferguson won that felt like luck. Man Utd was trailing till 89th min.

 

[Gabriel Djemba-Bebe]

The same number of CL Messi won without Pep. I will expect that Barcelona "that anyone can win with" to have won the CL fairly often after Pep left, but they only made 1 final

If what you say is true then Pep has won 6 in the last 7. a higher rate than Ferguson ever did. I will say the PL is even more competitive and tougher now than in most of Ferguson's years

If you mean element of luck in Hitzfeld vs Ferguson, It was the lone game Ferguson won that felt like luck. Man Utd was trailing till 89th min.

That definitely isn't true. During the Fergie years, teams would have to get 40 points to survive relegation. Whereas now you only need 27 points.

 

[thisisnottaken1]

That definitely isn't true. During the Fergie years, teams would have to get 40 points to survive relegation. Whereas now you only need 27 points.

Absolutely. The Premier League was way more competitive when Fergie was our manager. We were taken to the final day in 1999 and 2008. We had to face off competition from Wenger’s Arsenal, Mourinho’s Chelsea, and Mancini’s Man City. We were just one point away from winning the title in 2010 and goal difference away from winning the title in 2012. Pep’s only real competition has been Klopp’s Liverpool and Arteta’s Arsenal. Neither of those teams have been consistently pushing him. In 2018 and 2021 for example, he won the title comfortably over us in second both times.

 

[hasanejaz88]

Really? None of those years? Even when he won the Balloon d'Or?

Ronaldo at United wasn't near his prime. It was prime Ronaldo that people said was one of the greatest of all time, not the one at United.

 

[thisisnottaken1]

Ronaldo at United wasn't near his prime. It was prime Ronaldo that people said was one of the greatest of all time, not the one at United.

True. I think what they might be trying to say is that Ronaldo was the best player in the world in 2008. He obviously went on to do even bigger and better things at Real Madrid though.

 

[njred]

You're counting his 6 titles in the PL as legitimate? Are you a City fan pretending to be a Liverpool fan on a United forum.

Talking about Paisley winning 6 in 9 years with 3 European Cups and a UEFA not Pep. Read it again. Saf and Paisley did more than Pep in England

 

[MrMarcello]

I am Italian and confirm what you said. SAF is held in high regard, among the best, but it is extremely rare to hear anyone call him the best ever.
Marcello Lippi is the best Italian manager of all time, dominating in the UCL for years while simultaneously winning the World Cup for Italy.
In the process, he reached 4 UCL finals (three in a row!), won one (his only stain) and also managed to knock out Man United (and SAF).
When United beat Juventus in 1998/1999, Lippi had already left Juventus, and Ancelotti was in fact the one SAF knocked out.

So yes, what you say is absolutely true. Why should we rate SAF as better than, say, Lippi?
Personally, I think an argument about SAF being the best ever could be made, but he has in no way a better case than Lippi.

When did that occur? I only recall United and Juve in group play - both topping the group once each - and never in the knockout round when Lippi managed them.

 

[MrMarcello]

That definitely isn't true. During the Fergie years, teams would have to get 40 points to survive relegation. Whereas now you only need 27 points.

Absolutely. The Premier League was way more competitive when Fergie was our manager. We were taken to the final day in 1999 and 2008. We had to face off competition from Wenger’s Arsenal, Mourinho’s Chelsea, and Mancini’s Man City. We were just one point away from winning the title in 2010 and goal difference away from winning the title in 2012. Pep’s only real competition has been Klopp’s Liverpool and Arteta’s Arsenal. Neither of those teams have been consistently pushing him. In 2018 and 2021 for example, he won the title comfortably over us in second both times.

Should point out there were no super teams until Abramovich and Mourinho tried such in the mid-2000s, SAF ultimately toppled them as well and later toppled a City side built through financial doping via bogus sponsorships. There is no Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, United quartet fighting for cups and titles these days.

It was tight throughout the 90s with no massive squads and foreigner restrictions until around 96. It's fair to say around 99-00 and 00-01 the league weakened and United were just superior to everyone else but soon enough up rises Arsenal, Liverpool, and Chelsea who then lucked out in the gangster oligarch lottery. The league was highly competitive from 2002 into the late 2010s, bar Chelsea running rampant in 05-06 with United in short rebuild/renovate mode and Arsenal pinching pennies.

 

[Galactic]

Man Utd and Chelsea have a higher net spend than him in the last 5yrs and they are not close to his team

Yea. But they spent so heavily before that and they have succeeded in lowering the need to spend as much. I doubt they need to spend much this summer too.

 

[Nevilles.Wear.Prada]

How whatever he won in barca and city are being counted?

 

[Yakuza_devils]

One thing about SAF that everyone missed out and is the most crucial. SAF is the single most important person and almost single handedly build Man Utd to what it is today, a giant in world football, one of the biggest if not the biggest in the world.

His 27 years of sustained pursuit of excellence and giving all he has for the clubs and English football was extraordinary. He was constantly challenging in Europe and raised English football standards at a time when Seria A was the pinnacle of football. Even Spain was better with RM and Barcelona.

His attacking style of play, his longevity and charisma brought many fans to Man Utd and English football. It also coincide with the rise of English football to what it is today. I would say he has done a lot for English football. I am one of those that support Man Utd and English football because of his style of play. No manager has done what he has done and his miracle will not be repeated.

 

[RedRocket9908]

Pep would get nowhere near winning anything with this squad

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[heraklion]

Pep would get nowhere near winning anything with this squad

SAF would not last more than a season or so at ruthless Bayern, Barca or Real. You either deliver quick or are shown the door.
SAF has never been tested in an environment like that, he was given 7 years for rebuilding at United to get a title. People talking as if he made United a winner overnight. He was given all the time, credit, tolerance in the world for rebuilding.

Many people seem to have zero idea about the challenges and risks coming with managing a series of top clubs and still managing to stay at the top.

 

[RedRocket9908]

SAF would not last more than a season or so at ruthless Bayern, Barca or Real. You either deliver quick or are shown the door.
SAF has never been tested in an environment like that, he was given 7 years for rebuilding at United to get a title. People talking as if he made United a winner overnight. He was given all the time, credit, tolerance in the world for rebuilding.

Many people seem to have zero idea about the challenges and risks coming with managing a series of top clubs and still managing to stay at the top.

Sir Alex would probably have won just as much as Pep with those Bayern and Barca teams and resources Pep had

 

[Theonas]

Pep would get nowhere near winning anything with this squad

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

It's really ironic how it's viewed as a betrayal to Man Utd if you as much as suggest Sir Alex isn't the GOAT but it's completely fair game to take a giant shit over our players for the sake of winning some childish argument over who's you know what is bigger. I am just not a fan of belittling some of the players that gave us so many great memories and helped build the club we all love.

That squad has some really good players, players who have done brilliant things for the club and SAF is a genius of assembling it and extracting every last ounce of juice from it. Both Pep and Sir Alex have done things the other one has never shown us they can do. That's just natural because there hasn't been a single manager in history who ticked every single box there is. There is and always will be a "but he didn't do X". At the end of the day, those two alongside maybe 3 or 4 others have done exceptional things that nobody could match and that will leave a lasting legacy for decades.

 

[heraklion]

Sir Alex would probably have won just as much as Pep with those Bayern and Barca teams and resources Pep had

This is just pure speculation. Anyone can make the opposite argument that had Sacchi, Lippi, Heynckes, Pep, Klopp, Trapattoni, Mourinho, Van Gaal, Michels, Cruyff, Ancelotti etc. received zero offers from top clubs, had to start at an underperforming but an iconic team with a strong fan base, been given "7 years" and all the patience in the world to rebuild a side to challenge for the title, they could also succeed if they were interested in and committed to such a project. This rarely happens because most top managers just like top players don't waste much time managing (playing for) low-ranked clubs as they get attention quick from the top clubs and move.

I can also see him easily failing at Bayern, Barca, Real just like many other top managers, this is extremely common for almost any top manager as there is no room for error or failure in those places. His mentality, man management, interaction style with players alone can easily backfire, this is not the English league players or top management he would be dealing with, he'd be in an unknown territory and there's no patience or time.

 

[SilentWitness]

It's really ironic how it's viewed as a betrayal to Man Utd if you as much as suggest Sir Alex isn't the GOAT but it's completely fair game to take a giant shit over our players for the sake of winning some childish argument over who's you know what is bigger. I am just not a fan of belittling some of the players that gave us so many great memories and helped build the club we all love.

That squad has some really good players, players who have done brilliant things for the club and SAF is a genius of assembling it and extracting every last ounce of juice from it. Both Pep and Sir Alex have done things the other one has never shown us they can do. That's just natural because there hasn't been a single manager in history who ticked every single box there is. There is and always will be a "but he didn't do X". At the end of the day, those two alongside maybe 3 or 4 others have done exceptional things that nobody could match and that will leave a lasting legacy for decades.

Don't come here with your balanced views!

 

[Hammondo]

They reached the CL semi final the season before? And only went out to a Scholesy wonder goal. This was their squad: Valdes, Zambrotta, Puyol, Milito, Abidal, Toure Yaya (Gudjohnsen 88), Messi, Xavi, Deco, Iniesta (Henry 60), Eto'o (Bojan 72).

The point is SAF went to Aberdeen and a poor United, and turned them into great teams. Klopp went to a Liverpool team with a terrible squad and made them great, despite competing at a significant financial disadvantage to City. I'm not denying Pep is great at managing top teams, but SAF and Klopp would achieve just as much if they had those squads and then the level of investment City has had.

Take for example Zidane. Is he a great coach for winning 3 CLS in a row? He's likely very good.. but it's also true that he was massively helped by having one of the best squads in modern football. Would he have done the same managing United in 2016? No.



Whilst it's true that Pep is the best at that style of football (controlling possession, strangling teams), I don't think you can realistically argue that someone like Klopp or SAF wouldn't have had similar success if they had been at City. I think Klopp in particular would have done it rather easily. Since they both took over, he had a significantly worse first squad, and spent something like half the net spend of City, and he still managed to win a league, a CL, and finish a point behind twice. And the primary reason for those two 2nd place finishes was squad depth - City rotated the front 3 between the PL and the midweek CL games almost always, whereas Klopp almost always played the same front 3 of Mane/Firmino/Salah and Mane/Jota/Salah (in the other season) in the weekend and midweek games. Switch the financial resources of the two around and thus the squad depth and I'm almost 100% certain City finish behind Liverpool more often than not.

Semi final after meeting np strong teams. A lot of tose players didn't last long with him.

SAF did have squads that good though, 2 of them, they were not as good.

City didn't have wide players as strong as what Liverpool did, yes a deeper squad means you can rotate more, but also if you don't have such standout players it's easier to.

Zidane didn't have much competition at the time.

Did they? Lyon won the French league, Schalke 3rd in Bundesliga and we won the PL and CL yet won by one single goal and worked our socks off.

Funny how they did all that, had some of the best players in the world but apparently Pep took over a struggling team.

Is that like he took over a struggling Bayern? … Bayern, the current CL winners.

Its fine, we get it.

Yea, that wasn't good, they were not strong at all. Neither team were strong. We were the only strong team they played, and we won.

They did poorly in la liga, RM won it with ease.

Bayern whataboutism.

 

[Hammondo]

Ronaldo at United wasn't near his prime. It was prime Ronaldo that people said was one of the greatest of all time, not the one at United.

I'm not saying he was at his prime, but he was the best player in the world at that point.

 

[Gabriel Djemba-Bebe]

It's really ironic how it's viewed as a betrayal to Man Utd if you as much as suggest Sir Alex isn't the GOAT but it's completely fair game to take a giant shit over our players for the sake of winning some childish argument over who's you know what is bigger. I am just not a fan of belittling some of the players that gave us so many great memories and helped build the club we all love.

That squad has some really good players, players who have done brilliant things for the club and SAF is a genius of assembling it and extracting every last ounce of juice from it. Both Pep and Sir Alex have done things the other one has never shown us they can do. That's just natural because there hasn't been a single manager in history who ticked every single box there is. There is and always will be a "but he didn't do X". At the end of the day, those two alongside maybe 3 or 4 others have done exceptional things that nobody could match and that will leave a lasting legacy for decades.

I get the impulse to defend those players, but you only need to look at how the careers panned out for the likes of Smalling, Fabio, Cleverley and Anderson to appreciate that Fergie was working with a more limited squad compared to the squads Pep has had at his disposal. The fact that he won so many titles in spite of being hamstrung by the Glazers during his last 6 or 7 years in charge is incredible. Whereas you don't exactly get the same feeling that Pep is working miracles on a limited budget.

 

[Kwabs]

One thing about SAF that everyone missed out and is the most crucial. SAF is the single most important person and almost single handedly build Man Utd to what it is today, a giant in world football, one of the biggest if not the biggest in the world.

His 27 years of sustained pursuit of excellence and giving all he has for the clubs and English football was extraordinary. He was constantly challenging in Europe and raised English football standards at a time when Seria A was the pinnacle of football. Even Spain was better with RM and Barcelona.

His attacking style of play, his longevity and charisma brought many fans to Man Utd and English football. It also coincide with the rise of English football to what it is today. I would say he has done a lot for English football. I am one of those that support Man Utd and English football because of his style of play. No manager has done what he has done and his miracle will not be repeated.

Matt Busby made Manchester United, not Fergie. Fergie brought United back to the summit but Busby put them there first.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Anyone can make the opposite argument that had Sacchi, Lippi, Heynckes, Pep, Klopp, Trapattoni, Mourinho, Van Gaal, Michels, Cruyff, Ancelotti etc. received zero offers from top clubs, had to start at an underperforming but an iconic team with a strong fan base, been given "7 years" and all the patience in the world to rebuild a side to challenge for the title, they could also succeed if they were interested in and committed to such a project.

That's absurdly hypothetical.

The fact remains that SAF did stay at one of the biggest clubs in the world for a long time (after having transformed said club), won a lot of trophies and reinvented himself more than once while doing so.

None of those you mention above did that or anything remotely comparable.

The longevity combined with the reinvention is - essentially - the argument for SAF.

Saying that someone else could have done the same under similar circumstances is - to be blunt - plain stupid if it's meant to be an actual argument against SAF.

I might as well say that SAF could have replicated what he did at Aberdeen (which was remarkable in its own right) several times over at different clubs (rather than going to United and remaining there for all those years).

Again: it's absurdly (stupidly) hypothetical.

 

[Theonas]

I get the impulse to defend those players, but you only need to look at how the careers panned out for the likes of Smalling, Fabio, Cleverley and Anderson to appreciate that Fergie was working with a more limited squad compared to the squads Pep has had at his disposal. The fact that he won so many titles in spite of being hamstrung by the Glazers during his last 6 or 7 years in charge is incredible. Whereas you don't exactly get the same feeling that Pep is working miracles on a limited budget.

Whereas it’s not to the same extent, but let’s look at the careers of Aké, Akanji, Ferran Torres, Cancelo, Delph, Jesus,… without Pep. If we make a Pep best XI out of his 3 teams, I don’t think I’d have a single City player in it. No it’s not Clough winning a European Cup with Forest or even Alonso winning the Bundesliga with Dortmund but it’s not some squad full of all time greats either.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

That's absurdly hypothetical.

The fact remains that SAF did stay at one of the biggest clubs in the world for a long time (after having transformed said club), won a lot of trophies and reinvented himself more than once while doing so.

None of those you mention above did that or anything remotely comparable.

The longevity combined with the reinvention is - essentially - the argument for SAF.

The issue is that longevity is not important in continental football.

Look at this list of longest managerial reigns post-1946. There are only 3 managerial stints in the top 20 that aren't from the British Isles.

That's not because British managers are better than continental managers.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

No it’s not Clough winning a European Cup with Forest or even Alonso winning the Bundesliga with Dortmund but it’s not some squad full of all time greats either.

No. But it's a squad (from his second season or thereabouts) comprised of pretty much two separate XIs capable of challenging.

It's miles and miles off Clough or Alonso.

And that incredible squad depth doesn't have anything to do with Pep's ability as a tactician, a man manager...or anything else directly attributable to him.

Some might call it a cheat code.

(You could still be a great coach/a great tactician even if you're essentially playing with a cheat code enabled - that's not the point. But the cheat code is kinda hard to ignore if you're assessing the man in an all-time context.)

 

[Dancfc]

In terms of British football it's hard to imagine he'll get near Fergie.

In terms of European/world football he's got a big argument, you don't three peat three major leagues if you're not a serious manager no matter what advantages you may have.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

The issue is that longevity is not important in continental football.

It's not longevity in itself.

It's longevity combined with the ability to reinvent yourself and build new teams at the highest level.

Fergie didn't just hang around for a quarter of a century. He remained an actual top manager until the very end (he was past 70 when he finally stepped down, and while he obviously wasn't in his prime at that point, he was still a top manager).

ETA Fergie was well into his 60s when Roman's Chelsea emerged (as an absolute monster, and a new kind of monster at that) - and at the time he also had to deal with Wenger's Arsenal. He ended up overcoming both. When his last truly great United team won the league and the CL in 2008, Fergie was 66.

Again - it's not longevity in itself. It's the remarkable fact that he managed to stay on top of his game for so long.

 

[Red the Bear]

No. But it's a squad (from his second season or thereabouts) comprised of pretty much two separate XIs capable of challenging.

It's miles and miles off Clough or Alonso.

And that incredible squad depth doesn't have anything to do with Pep's ability as a tactician, a man manager...or anything else directly attributable to him.

Some might call it a cheat code.

(You could still be a great coach/a great tactician even if you're essentially playing with a cheat code enabled - that's not the point. But the cheat code is kinda hard to ignore if you're assessing the man in an all-time context.)

Obviously fergie didn't end up hopping top clubs and leaving when things had run it's course but perhaps he could have been good at that too, after all he did get united second in his first full season here before realising he had to change things wholesale.

 

[Gehrman]

This is just pure speculation. Anyone can make the opposite argument that had Sacchi, Lippi, Heynckes, Pep, Klopp, Trapattoni, Mourinho, Van Gaal, Michels, Cruyff, Ancelotti etc. received zero offers from top clubs, had to start at an underperforming but an iconic team with a strong fan base, been given "7 years" and all the patience in the world to rebuild a side to challenge for the title, they could also succeed if they were interested in and committed to such a project. This rarely happens because most top managers just like top players don't waste much time managing (playing for) low-ranked clubs as they get attention quick from the top clubs and move.

I can also see him easily failing at Bayern, Barca, Real just like many other top managers, this is extremely common for almost any top manager as there is no room for error or failure in those places. His mentality, man management, interaction style with players alone can easily backfire, this is not the English league players or top management he would be dealing with, he'd be in an unknown territory and there's no patience or time.

SAF did get offers from the biggest clubs in the world when he succeeded at United. I don't think there were many boards back then that wouldnt trust him. He did say he was tempted at times, but in line with being the spiritual successor to Busby I think he became completely synonymous with United. He'd never leave. Its hypothetical what his succes would. Fergie was regularly equated with being the best manager in the world and still tops mosts lists for the greatest manager ever. Its not just an English bias. I don't think its heresy to say he's not the greatest ever i just believe he is.

 

[kaiser1]

This is just pure speculation. Anyone can make the opposite argument that had Sacchi, Lippi, Heynckes, Pep, Klopp, Trapattoni, Mourinho, Van Gaal, Michels, Cruyff, Ancelotti etc. received zero offers from top clubs, had to start at an underperforming but an iconic team with a strong fan base, been given "7 years" and all the patience in the world to rebuild a side to challenge for the title, they could also succeed if they were interested in and committed to such a project. This rarely happens because most top managers just like top players don't waste much time managing (playing for) low-ranked clubs as they get attention quick from the top clubs and move.

I can also see him easily failing at Bayern, Barca, Real just like many other top managers, this is extremely common for almost any top manager as there is no room for error or failure in those places. His mentality, man management, interaction style with players alone can easily backfire, this is not the English league players or top management he would be dealing with, he'd be in an unknown territory and there's no patience or time.

First problem Ferguson will have is managing with ex players in top management hierarchy like they have in Madrid Bayern and Barcelona. Who will simply throw a player at him and tell him use him or shut up otherwise get fired

Perez/Laporta/Hoeness: Yo Alex, I was just driving round town (or just browsing youtube) and found this nice player I think will fit our club, I already signed him, Its your business to find how he fits into your system. You must use him to get results or get fired. Note he cannot be benched