Jose Mourinho | 2017/18 Assessments | Poll Added

[LeftyBlaster]

It's his second season for feck sake. We're second to another world class manager who has spent £480m on a squad that was already far better than Uniteds. Jose's spent £310m. Maybe give him time to complete the job?



Pochettino is in his fourth season with Spurs now and still hasn't won anything. You can argue that he's spent less but the likes of Kane, Vertonghen, Erikson, Dembele and Lloris who make up the core of his squad were already there. If Mourinho had Kane, Vertonghen and Erikson he might not have spent the best part of £200m on Lukaku, Bailly and Pogba.



See above, it's his fourth season with the club. He's done well in the league, no denying that but he's sacrificed every cup run for it. We basically had to drop the priority of the league last season and focus on the EL due to injuries and it paid off. We have two trophies in the cabinet and are in the Champions League this season.

We're also second and as I said in another thread, our poor form consists of away losses to Spurs and Newcastle and an away draw to a revitalised Sevilla in a tough stadium. So in the last 10 games, aside from those three mentioned we've won all 7 of them scoring 16 and conceded 0.

Time for a bit of fecking perspective, please? Our midfield has been riddled with injuries for months and we're now trying to introduce Sanchez. It's no surprise things are a bit disjointed at the moment.

Yes City's squad is better, yes we are trying to integrate Sanchez. But do we see any semblence of an identity forming under Jose except negative ones? No. Do we see any sign of progressive football? Rarely. Do we play well against top teams? Feck no barring last season against Chelsea. Pep has created a fear for City in any game they go into. Jose has created a fearful atmosphere for our own team going into big games.

Also, season's not over. We are second for now. The amount of initiative we yield in big games against better sides will see us drop points. I would not be surprised to see us lose second spot by the end.

 

[R'hllor]

JM a fraud, i mean...no i got nothing.

 

[Tom Van Persie]

- Chelsea spent more money compared to their rivals than any clubs in modern history,
- Inter was an established serial winner without competition in Serie A (he added some spice and did a great job winning the CL, but the foundation was there),
- Real Madrid had been going through a rough patch before Mourinho came, but look at the quality of players at his disposal after a year of two!

I think Mourinho is quite good at assessing players, and identifying quality players. He has been lucky enough to be in charge of clubs where he has had several world class players. Players that dont need a system or a structure to guide them. And this is the only way Mourinho will ever succeed.

Because Mourinho, unlike his peers, do not establish a system or structure on how to play out from the back or an attacking pattern/system on the last third. Consequently, the weakness of our players are easily exposed.

Unlike the average players of Liverpool, Chelsea or Spurs who have a system to develop within. Both in attack and in defence.

That is also the reason why I think Mourinho is a fraud, and why I have never understood his rating in the UK.

Oh dear.

 

[Kapardin]

What's the big deal? So he only referred to one of the most decorated and successful managers on the planet as a fraud. Just a normal day on the forum.

 

[L1nk]

As much as I would like to see Mourinho replaced, for a multitude of reasons, in the summer, calling one of the most successful managers ever a fraud is a bit OTT, although i'm pretty sure a lot of people here were saying LVG was a fraud and he's also a highly decorated manager, so it clearly seems to be personal preference based on a managers name whether they are a fraud or not. Personally i think neither were fraud's, Mourinho is, as i said, one of the best maagers this game has ever seen, whether you like his football or not, this is undenieable. However i think its head in sand stuff to suggest his influence and success hasn't waned over the years, because it has, from 2002 to 2012 he won at least a minimum of 1 trophy every season, since 2012 he's won 5 in 6 seasons, which is still a decent return but it indicates a pattern that he's slowing down. I think the main issue is that, Jose Mourinho does have an identity for his teams, we've seen it time and time again, really hard to beat, a fortress, a towering collossus, football that wasn't fantastic to always watch but was brutal in its efficiency, all hallmarks of his great teams. It's been nearly 2 years here and we're seeing nothing of the sort, if anything the fear is that results are always going to go against us, not for us, we're soft, not a fortress, we cant play vs a press, we can't attack properly, we can't defend properly, transitioning from def to att is a mess at times, the midfield is sometimes invisible, our attack has a young exciting cutting edge to it that's been completely blunted for some reason. I'm tired of seeing us shut up shop against 5th placed La Liga teams like Sevilla, i'm tired of seeing Huddersfield run rings around us like they are Manchester United and not us, i'm tired of going into a big match thinking well we don't have a chance because we don't go for it, i don't mind losing, just damn well do something don't just cower in the corner and wait for something to drop in your laps.

Any Mourinho fan, whether you want to talk about "perspective" or "rebuilding" or whatever it is, even you have to admit there are some worrying signs, particularly in comparison to Mourinho and his teams of old, and our team now. I believe his influence is waning in this modern game, it may not be completely gone, but it's not heading in a good direction for either him or us from my perspective, we've pretty much stalled since last season, not progressed, and it could yet get worse by seasons end.

 

[Adisa]

We're second in the table but no player has performed at any high level for a while now.
That tells me the squad is underachieving and he's ultimately responsible.
Not saying we should be first but this team should be play

 

[andersj]

This is the typical reaction you get when you are critical of Jose Mourinho on RedCafe. Fraud might be a bit OTT. He has some good qualities. But he also lacks some important ones.

In my opinion Mourinho merits after Porto has been built on five attributes;

1. Being in charge of clubs with great resources,
2. Being a good motivator and inspirational,
3. Playing an extremely cynical football with high quality players,
4. Ten years ago he had an advantage in terms of physical coaching (he dont anymore),
5. I think he is very good at recognizing and bringing in quality players and hence able to build on the big advantage his clubs have,

Porto is the big exception for 1). But I also think he had more than a bit of luck with Porto. In the KO-stages he met Man Utd (which was in a transition period and not very good at the time), Lyon, Deportivo and Monaco in the final. I would argue that you do not get a much easier route than that. And he also had margins on his side (luck) in several of these games.

But in my opinion few of these attributes makes him a good coach. I would argue that the only of these attributes that makes him a good coach is number 2. And I'm not sure he is as good as he once was.

His faults as a coach is quite evident;

1. His teams don't have a system of how to play out from the back. Instead he rely on the quality of his players. Weaker players are exposed. While Liverpool and Spurs have defenders and midfielders that very few rated a couple of years ago, they look comfortable in Klopp and Pochettinos system, (both Spurs and Liverpool have a lower ex goals against than Man Utd. David de Gea makes up the difference that gives us an advantage on them.)
2. His teams don't have an attacking structure, but rely on the quality of exceptional talents,
3. The cynical football he prefer are unable to get the best out of some very talented footballers (KdB, Salah, Mhikitarian),
4. He has been a coach for top team for 15 years, but has proven very little in terms of player development compared to several of his peers,

His weakness for "a big name"-player also appears to become a bit of a problem. While Ferguson was ruthless and kicked out "big time Charlies" on several occasions, JM appears to have a fan-mentality on the matter. Players with big egos often let him down, creating issues of pitch.

Maybe a fraud is to harsh. Maybe I should have gone with overrated. Don't really matter. The point is that if you just look at results you will often miss big picture.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

No it is completely laughable. You may be conveniently leaving out the teeny tiny detail that Sir Alex turned this club into an absolutely giant one over those twenty years with absolutely top class resources and money flowing out of our ears.

The scale of the jobs couldn't be more different.

You’re misunderstanding the point. I’m not comparing the two managers tenure at the club. I’m taking about the recent performance of the club BEFORE they both arrived. Both in terms of league standings and cup wins.

It’s not rocket science.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

When Jose was Jose he took over an unknown Chelsea and turned them to serial PL winners in one season, same with Inter. Several years later you claim him taking over United is similar to Fergie 20+ years ago and he needs several years to 'get it right'. Maybe we're a bigger challenge than Chelsea right? I thought I was done reading this nonsense when the LVG defence squad used it throughout his tenure , I'm shocked a anyone would use it to defend Jose in his second season seeing as he's hardly stayed anywhere beyond the 3rd season. Similar scale of job my arse

You can be ‘shocked’ all you like. Chelsea had finished 2nd the season before Jose took over. When was our last title challenge?

We are a big project following the damage to the squad done by Moyes and then LVG. The football landscape now is very different now in terms of other clubs spending power. If anything it’s more difficult now because other clubs have more resources.

This isn’t a staunch defence of Mourinho (which is also where you seem to missing my point), I too have my reservations about him. If you 100% don’t think Mourinho is the right man to take us forward with his defensive style of play, questionable man management etc. Then obviously no amount of time will satisfy.

My point is that there was a lot of change needed when he joined the club following 3 years of poor league finishes, in that respect it is similar to when Fergie took us over. If it takes one of the greatest managers in our history 4 years to turn us around then maybe the current knee jerk, short termist response from fans, especially in the context of state owned clubs and more TV money for other competitor clubs, is just not realistic.

 

[Arruda]

Porto is the big exception for 1). But I also think he had more than a bit of luck with Porto. In the KO-stages he met Man Utd (which was in a transition period and not very good at the time), Lyon, Deportivo and Monaco in the final. I would argue that you do not get a much easier route than that. And he also had margins on his side (luck) in several of these games.

Nah. His work at Porto was extraordinary. When he arrived we were 6th in the league and hadn't been champions for three seasons, our worst period in about 20 years at the time. He then made a triplet, winning League, Cup and UEFA Cup in his first season. The CL in his second season was like one of those long, splurge, tasty meals in which the best dished served is the final desert. If you were watching that CL from the eyes of a Porto fan, there was nothing lucky or even surprising about it. It seemed like an almost natural conclusion to what we witnessed during the previous two and a half years. Mourinho was almost certainly Chelsea bound far before we won the final (which led to some problems with fans and him not even celebrating the victory much).

We had that moment of luck with the outrageous Scholes offside, but find me a team who wins a long competition that doesn't end up having a bit of luck along the way, most of the more powerful recent CL winners had those moments. That was the lucky margin, we won that tie in the final minute, but it was still a more than deserved ending, we were quite better than United on both of those matches.

Of course it was an "atypical" CL year. You had Monaco and Coruña in the semi-finals but look at what they've done to get there. The same Coruña who managed to lose 8-3 (!!!) to Monaco in the group stages was also capable of turning around a 3-0 loss against AC Milan in the second leg, the best team in Europe at the time. Morientes was having an absolutely ridiculous season, ripped his own Real Madrid apart. There were some very crazy matches in there and those teams were very good at that time (even if by "that time") one means only that season. All those teams were very good then. Short peaks maybe, but they were definitely good at the time.

Anyone could have made history for their clubs. Ranieri, Deschamps, Irureta, Le Guen, all were presented with an equally golden opportunity for something unique and it was Mourinho who took it, and he did it by being clearly superior against everyone he faced. There were no more close margins than other winners. We dispatched Lyon and Monaco, and controlled a difficult tie against Coruña.

Also what he did at Chelsea was extraordinary too. A different kind of extraordinary, but superb nonetheless. Very methodical, effective, gave no chance to anyone. Took a new league by storm. It's quite sad that it seems he's not at his best anymore, I certainly didn't expect this. He seems out of date, and having difficulty reinventing himself. Which shouldn't be the case for someone of his age.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

His faults as a coach is quite evident;

1. His teams don't have a system of how to play out from the back. Instead he rely on the quality of his players. Weaker players are exposed. While Liverpool and Spurs have defenders and midfielders that very few rated a couple of years ago, they look comfortable in Klopp and Pochettinos system, (both Spurs and Liverpool have a lower ex goals against than Man Utd. David de Gea makes up the difference that gives us an advantage on them.)
2. His teams don't have an attacking structure, but rely on the quality of exceptional talents,
3. The cynical football he prefer are unable to get the best out of some very talented footballers (KdB, Salah, Mhikitarian),
4. He has been a coach for top team for 15 years, but has proven very little in terms of player development compared to several of his peers,

His weakness for "a big name"-player also appears to become a bit of a problem. While Ferguson was ruthless and kicked out "big time Charlies" on several occasions, JM appears to have a fan-mentality on the matter. Players with big egos often let him down, creating issues of pitch.

Maybe a fraud is to harsh. Maybe I should have gone with overrated. Don't really matter. The point is that if you just look at results you will often miss big picture.

The manager who has built his whole reputation around quick transitions from deep defensive positions doesn't have a system to play out from the back. You're right about one thing: "fraud" is a bit OTT when it's compared to this. This is just abysmal.

All his title winning sides had attacking structure, maybe you didn't watch them quite often. They were following the same instructions week in and week out.

And some others like Sneijder, Ozil, Deco, Ronaldo, Hazard and Fabregas had the seasons of their lives under his management. So, maybe the players have to do their part in adapting to the manager's orders as the manager does in order to meet halfway there. Just saying...

True, but has he ever been given the opportunity to work with a whole bunch of super talented youngsters like Pep At Barcelona, SAF at United or even LvG at Ajax. Because what Pep is doing now is utilizing and buying ready-made solutions. Even when he was at Bayern, not many youngsters were given that many chances. Goetze ended up a flop, Coman hasn't set the world alight yet and Thiago only recently has shown that he can become a truly great midfielder. Has it ever crossed your mind that we maybe don't possess the world class talent we think we have? After all both Martial and Rashford's numbers are as good as they've ever been for us and Lingard is having the season of his life.

 

[SwSw]

- Chelsea spent more money compared to their rivals than any clubs in modern history,
- Inter was an established serial winner without competition in Serie A (he added some spice and did a great job winning the CL, but the foundation was there),
- Real Madrid had been going through a rough patch before Mourinho came, but look at the quality of players at his disposal after a year of two!

I think Mourinho is quite good at assessing players, and identifying quality players. He has been lucky enough to be in charge of clubs where he has had several world class players. Players that dont need a system or a structure to guide them. And this is the only way Mourinho will ever succeed.

Because Mourinho, unlike his peers, do not establish a system or structure on how to play out from the back or an attacking pattern/system on the last third. Consequently, the weakness of our players are easily exposed.

Unlike the average players of Liverpool, Chelsea or Spurs who have a system to develop within. Both in attack and in defence.

That is also the reason why I think Mourinho is a fraud, and why I have never understood his rating in the UK.

- That defensive solidity of his Chelsea team was legendary. Can't say i wasn't envious.
- but yet they never did much in the UCL.
- RM being RM is a poison chalice and Mourinho's signings were key to them winning the UCL.

I disagree that Mourinho doesn't establish a system or structure. He generally places a greater emphasis on attack. In my opinion, is really not that big of a difference that Pep's offensive system. Mourinho's idea is to lay a solid defensive foundation for the attackers to flourish. He generally sets up the team up till say the half way line and from there onward, is up to the players. If i remember correctly, there's this clip of Henry on Pep's system where he specifically mentioned that Pep's sets up the team up up till the attacking third and from there onward, is up to the players. So, is pretty much the same concept just that Pep sets his team up closer to the opponent's goal by lengthening their own defensive third. Mourinho does the exact opposite.

Let's not forget his quick transition from defense to attack. How is that not a system/structure?

 

[3KDré]

True, but has he ever been given the opportunity to work with a whole bunch of super talented youngsters like Pep At Barcelona, SAF at United or even LvG at Ajax.

Yes, he has, right now. Bailly, Pogba, Martial and maybe Rashford too. When Pep got Sane he was considered around the same talent as Martial, Rashford similar to Jesus, Sterling was seen to lack end product and De Bruyne wasn't seen as the best in the PL. I could accept that if he has improved our defenders a lot, but he hasn't. Perhaps you could say he has improved Rojo and Bailly in fairness but our defence is still reliant on De Gea, which means that he's setting his team defensively but it's not effective.

 

[haram]

This is the typical reaction you get when you are critical of Jose Mourinho on RedCafe. Fraud might be a bit OTT. He has some good qualities. But he also lacks some important ones.

In my opinion Mourinho merits after Porto has been built on five attributes;

1. Being in charge of clubs with great resources,
2. Being a good motivator and inspirational,
3. Playing an extremely cynical football with high quality players,
4. Ten years ago he had an advantage in terms of physical coaching (he dont anymore),
5. I think he is very good at recognizing and bringing in quality players and hence able to build on the big advantage his clubs have,

Porto is the big exception for 1). But I also think he had more than a bit of luck with Porto. In the KO-stages he met Man Utd (which was in a transition period and not very good at the time), Lyon, Deportivo and Monaco in the final. I would argue that you do not get a much easier route than that. And he also had margins on his side (luck) in several of these games.

But in my opinion few of these attributes makes him a good coach. I would argue that the only of these attributes that makes him a good coach is number 2. And I'm not sure he is as good as he once was.

His faults as a coach is quite evident;

1. His teams don't have a system of how to play out from the back. Instead he rely on the quality of his players. Weaker players are exposed. While Liverpool and Spurs have defenders and midfielders that very few rated a couple of years ago, they look comfortable in Klopp and Pochettinos system, (both Spurs and Liverpool have a lower ex goals against than Man Utd. David de Gea makes up the difference that gives us an advantage on them.)
2. His teams don't have an attacking structure, but rely on the quality of exceptional talents,
3. The cynical football he prefer are unable to get the best out of some very talented footballers (KdB, Salah, Mhikitarian),
4. He has been a coach for top team for 15 years, but has proven very little in terms of player development compared to several of his peers,

His weakness for "a big name"-player also appears to become a bit of a problem. While Ferguson was ruthless and kicked out "big time Charlies" on several occasions, JM appears to have a fan-mentality on the matter. Players with big egos often let him down, creating issues of pitch.

Maybe a fraud is to harsh. Maybe I should have gone with overrated. Don't really matter. The point is that if you just look at results you will often miss big picture.

All this fecking revisionist garbage downplaying everything he has done.

 

[andersj]

Has it ever crossed your mind that we maybe don't possess the world class talent we think we have?

Thats my point. We don’t. And Mourinho needs it. I think Mou would have won easily with Man City.

 

[Smores]

We're second in the table but no player has performed at any high level for a while now.
That tells me the squad is underachieving and he's ultimately responsible.
Not saying we should be first but this team should be play

Surely second place with players not firing on all cylinders is actually a good management feat?

Anyway this has got ridiculous now in the last week. Yes we're going through some bad form but thats it, for large parts of the season we've been decent. We can't be arguing Martial and Pogba have had decent seasons whilst then slagging of the manager for misusing them.

Its as if our season started when Sanchez joined ffs

 

[haram]

Surely second place with players not firing on all cylinders is actually a good management feat?

Anyway this has got ridiculous now in the last week. Yes we're going through some bad form but thats it, for large parts of the season we've been decent. We can't be arguing Martial and Pogba have had decent seasons whilst then slagging of the manager for misusing them.

Its as if our season started when Sanchez joined ffs

We are good at home, not so good away. It’s clear we can break down teams that sit back but now we have to improve on breaking and transitions.

 

[MDFC Manager]

Surely second place with players not firing on all cylinders is actually a good management feat?

Not when the misfiring players are amongst the most expensive players in the league.

 

[redNATION]

Thats my point. We don’t. And Mourinho needs it. I think Mou would have won easily with Man City.

Jose wouldnt win anything 'easily' with City. For a start, he would never line up City in the way Pep does - Fernandinho is 5'9", Silva is 5'7", De Bruyne is 5'10", and Aguero is 5'7". There is no way Jose would have a central core that short and 'weak' (as technically gifted as they are). Aguero is too short for a Jose striker, which is why we have Lukaku up front. City's tactics and approach come from Pep, the same group of players were not exactly brilliant under Pellegrini.

The City team isnt exactly littered with world class players either - Otamendi, Delph, Sterling, Stones - all were a laughing stock.

 

[TheRedDevil'sAdvocate]

Yes, he has, right now. Bailly, Pogba, Martial and maybe Rashford too. When Pep got Sane he was considered around the same talent as Martial, Rashford similar to Jesus, Sterling was seen to lack end product and De Bruyne wasn't seen as the best in the PL. I could accept that if he has improved our defenders a lot, but he hasn't. Perhaps you could say he has improved Rojo and Bailly in fairness but our defence is still reliant on De Gea, which means that he's setting his team defensively but it's not effective.

As i mentioned earlier Rashford and Martial are both on their way to have the best season of their careers thus far in terms of assists and goals. Baily has been unlucky. Pogba's numbers are good too and when he steps up he has really run the show for us more than once. Whenever these three are on the pitch (not all of them) our play goes through them. It's not that we don't trust them to win matches for us. I won't argue that they wouldn't look better in a different system but..hindering and stagnating their careers as some suggest? I honestly can't tell for sure. Oh, it goes without saying that this is one of Mourinho's weaknesses as a coach. I'm referring mostly to the polarizing opinions on the matter.

@andersj

Oh, i get it now. And sorry if i seemed a bit harsh on you in my initial response. Just to clarify things, i meant that you can't say Mourinho doesn't know to build attacks from behind throughout his career in general. His failure to do the same for us after almost two seasons, it's definitely something he should be criticized for.

 

[Adisa]

Thats my point. We don’t. And Mourinho needs it. I think Mou would have won easily with Man City.

Doubt it.
KDB, Silva, Sane and Sterling won't be playing this well under him.
Doubt they'd even be playing.

 

[Garethw]

Doubt it.
KDB, Silva, Sane and Sterling won't be playing this well under him.
Doubt they'd even be playing.

Exactly. None of those players are physically imposing enough for Mourinho. The ones that did get to play would not have anywhere close to the level of freedom they get under Pep to go and win games.

A couple of weeks ago John Barnes was on talksport and he said that Salah wouldn’t be half the player he is if he was at United under a Mourinho. He was spot on imo.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

You’re misunderstanding the point. I’m not comparing the two managers tenure at the club. I’m taking about the recent performance of the club BEFORE they both arrived. Both in terms of league standings and cup wins.

It’s not rocket science.

Yeah so I understood a fairly simple point. The two states of the club's are not incomparable. That isn't rocket science.

 

[haram]

Players like Mata and Lingard play often under Mourinho and people have decided players like Sterling, Sane and Silva wouldn’t get a game.

So when he didn't utilise Mata at Chelsea and does so here, he wouldn’t do the same with de Bruyne? Some of you have zero perspective.

 

[Adisa]

Players like Mata and Lingard play often under Mourinho and people have decided players like Sterling, Sane and Silva wouldn’t get a game.

So when he didn't utilise Mata at Chelsea and does so here, he wouldn’t do the same with de Bruyne? Some of you have zero perspective.

They might be playing, but I have no doubt in my mind they won't be playing this well.

 

[haram]

They might be playing, but I have no doubt in my mind they won't be playing this well.

There would be a different balance, yes. Pep doing a good job shouldn’t be used as something to criticise Mourinho with.

 

[haram]

A couple of weeks ago John Barnes was on talksport and he said that Salah wouldn’t be half the player he is if he was at United under a Mourinho. He was spot on imo.

On another note, yes, someone like Salah wouldn’t be as good as a player but the midfielders and defenders would benefit. If Liverpool actually win something with their team geared towards Firmino and Salah the way it is, we can have a different discussion. As it stands, why does no one mention the lack of progression of the midfielders and defenders under Klopp?

It’s easy to talk about forwards progressing.

 

[Adisa]

There would be a different balance, yes. Pep doing a good job shouldn’t be used as something to criticise Mourinho with.

I'm not using it to criticise Mourinho.
I'm saying the idea that Mourinho would obviously be winning the league with this City side is a myth.

 

[haram]

I'm not using it to criticise Mourinho.
I'm saying the idea that Mourinho would obviously be winning the league with this City side is a myth.

How is it a myth? They have the best squad for starters. The idea that he wouldn’t use players like de Bruyne and Silva is also bollocks.

This man won the league 3 years ago.

 

[Adisa]

How is it a myth? They have the best squad for starters. The idea that he wouldn’t use players like de Bruyne and Silva is also bollocks.

This man won the league 3 years ago.

I haven't said he wouldn't have use for them.
I said they won't be playing this well.
Of course, I have no way to prove it, it's my opinion but I'm convinced they won't be playing as well as they are.
What I've said has nothing to do with Mourinho's past record.
We are talking about City's set of players and I am saying I can't see those players playing that well under Mourinho.

 

[Garethw]

How is it a myth? They have the best squad for starters. The idea that he wouldn’t use players like de Bruyne and Silva is also bollocks.

This man won the league 3 years ago.

Do you agree that Mourinho is not getting the best out of the squad and that he needs to adapt his outdated tactics?

Nobody is doubting that he has been a bloody good manager in the past, probably up there with the all time greats. But every dog has their day, and maybe Mourinho’s day is long past.

 

[haram]

I haven't said he wouldn't have use for them.
I said they won't be playing this well.
Of course, I have no way to prove it, it's my opinion but I'm convinced they won't be playing as well as they are.
What I've said has nothing to do with Mourinho's past record.
We are talking about City's set of players and I am saying I can't see those players playing that well under Mourinho.

You give him the City team Pep inherits and give him 400 million to spend and he wins the league. If you want to ignore that he just won the league 3 years ago that’s up to you.

Do you agree that Mourinho is not getting the best out of the squad and that he needs to adapt his outdated tactics?

Nobody is doubting that he has been a bloody good manager in the past, probably up there with the all time greats. But every dog has their day, and maybe Mourinho’s day is long past.

Our home form is good, we need to improve the away form, our work under the press, transitions, and counters. Yes he needs to get more out of some of the players, but we have improved from last year so there is no reason why we wont improve next year.

 

[MThomas]

He's stabilized us, kudos to that.

We're pretty much void of any form of plan when we do have the ball, and our attacking football is absolute garbage. Less kudos given the fact that we have some mint players up front to choose between

 

[Adisa]

You give him the City team Pep inherits and give him 400 million to spend and he wins the league. If you want to ignore that he just won the league 3 years ago that’s up to you.

You are moving goalposts
And even then, it's not like Mourinho has been given a stick to work with.
That's beside the point.
I can't see Sane, Sterling, De Bruyne and Silva playing this well under Jose.

 

[AndyJ1985]

You give him the City team Pep inherits and give him 400 million to spend and he wins the league. If you want to ignore that he just won the league 3 years ago that’s up to you.

Maybe he would win the league, but they certainly wouldn't look as impressive as they do now.

 

[fellaini's barber]

'Jose would be winning if he was at City because they have better players' Well if Pep where here we wont be 15 points behind either. Hell, he might not even be behind us at all. I'm pretty certain he won't have Valencia as Young as fullbacks, Fellaini won't be here, Darmian, Lingard and even probably our dear Rashford won't be anywhere near his first team either. He certainly would have never bought Lukaku or played Mata as right winger most of the season. People make it sound like Pep inherited prime Barca while poor Jose was given Stoke. Its okay to defend Jose but this point is ridiculous

 

[haram]

'Jose would be winning if he was at City because they have better players' Well if Pep where here we wont be 15 points behind either. Hell, he might not even be behind us at all. I'm pretty certain he won't have Valencia as Young as fullbacks, Fellaini won't be here, Darmian, Lingard and even probably our dear Rashford won't be anywhere near his first team either. He certainly would have never bought Lukaku or played Mata as right winger most of the season. People make it sound like Pep inherited prime Barca while poor Jose was given Stoke. Its okay to defend Jose but this point is ridiculous

Would he have been able to spend £130 million on fullbacks here? No. Especially considering he would have had to buy starting midfielders and a new striker. Where has half of the spend under Mourinho gone towards? Pogba and Lukaku. Pep inherited de Bruyne and Aguero. What happened when Pep had to make use of players like Sagna and Clichy last year? Have some perspective. City had a better squad and had been ahead of us for 3 fecking years.

Yes Pep is doing a good job. Mourinho would have won the league with that City squad plus the 400 million investment. Like I said, Mourinho won the league just 3 years ago.

 

[haram]

You are moving goalposts
And even then, it's not like Mourinho has been given a stick to work with.
That's beside the point.
I can't see Sane, Sterling, De Bruyne and Silva playing this well under Jose.

Like how Mata is integral to our team at home? A player he didn’t use at Chelsea? Or how he has got Lingard to a certain level at number 10? You can argue if they would be this good or not. Yeah, he would have a different dynamic to his team and might have purchased Bailly instead of Stones, or bought Matic and used Fernandino in a different way for example. He would have won the league and that’s what really matters.

 

[MThomas]

If Pep was at United and Mourinho was at City, the distance between the teams would be much smaller imo. We're miles away from taking advantage of the talent we have up front, and our attacking football is largely based on individual performances rather than attacking as a team.

 

[haram]

If Pep was at United and Mourinho was at City, the distance between the teams would be much smaller imo. We're miles away from taking advantage of the talent we have up front, and our attacking football is largely based on individual performances rather than attacking as a team.

Our home form has improved because of coaching on attack play against deep defenses, not because of individuals. That’s why Mata is a mainstay on the right and Lingard has performed the way he has. Away from home, yes we have problems we need to fix.