Have City fans stopped hating UEFA now?
Man City 2020/21 - General discussion
- Thread starter Suedesi
- Start date
I took it from that site, which had Mangala included in the wrong year I guess. That'd be why.
So Pep has only purchased 8 big money defenders in his time, oh and of course a few keepers. When he came in with a team that had won the league recently. That's a real testament to his ability to coach defensive structure and shape I guess.
This is kind of my entire point on Pep. Imagine he comes into a club and aquires two CBs. Then when they're not perfect, he can't go out and buy two that he likes more. You know, like every other club in the league. Instead, he is forced to deal with what he has, coach them, get the best out of them and so forth.
City's current squad - particularly in attacking midfield - is like 10 hand-selected players to do precisely what Pep wants, and an outstanding talen in Phil Foden. Very few if any managers get that. Fergie never did. Wenger always rotated in a cast of 'who's that random French kid' as backups. When David Silva left Pep bought a damn regen of the same player. Most other teams HAVE to bring in young kids due to injuries and rotation. Aside from Foden, has Pep brought through a single academy grad in his time at City? Why should he? He has two 50m world class internationals at every position.
I'd love to see what Pep could do if he didn't have that luxury.
Last edited:
6 man, not 8
I think he'd do very well actually in less than optimal circumstances. This is someone who has been utilizing midfielders at left back for 4 seasons now. If he was throwing money at the wall he'd buy another LB to stand in for the crocked Mendy. He's played all season without a traditional striker. He's deployed a mediocre defender as a hybrid fullback slash playmaker.
The defenders Guardiola had at his disposal in his first season (excluding Stones, his first defensive signing) had an average age of 31. Five of those were over the age of 30 and the other two, Otamendi and Mangala, were 29 and 26 respectively. Hardly a suitable defence to build a title-winning squad upon, regardless of how recently we had won the league.
Exactly
The point is spending 500 m can never be less than optimal circumstances, having the most expansive squad in the history of modern football is precisely optimal circumstances... Saying that you can’t dispute him being a world class coach, but I find managers who accomplish what he has with lesser resources more impressive.6 man, not 8
I think he'd do very well actually in less than optimal circumstances. This is someone who has been utilizing midfielders at left back for 4 seasons now. If he was throwing money at the wall he'd buy another LB to stand in for the crocked Mendy. He's played all season without a traditional striker. He's deployed a mediocre defender as a hybrid fullback slash playmaker.
If he is a world class coach, why are there severe doubts about his ability to excel in less than optimal circumstances? What skillset does he lack in that would increase his chance of failure if he went to West Ham?
I'm not saying it's a certainty, mind.
One of the biggest myths in English football.
Only one way to find out. Although I doubt he could have done what Moyes has with West Ham this season.
Walked into a ready made squad with Barca, they were already one of the best teams in Europe. Most of his signings there were flops.
Did the same at Bayern, walked into one of the best teams in Europe still couldn't win the Champions League without Messi and Co.
At Man City, already one of the best teams in Europe, half a billion and 400 full backs later he's finally back in the Champions League final.
Greatest coach ever...
Why?
Moyes has (unfairly) been a laughing stock on here prior to this season. All credit to him for shutting everyone (well, most people) up this season. But what magic did Moyes perform on the training ground that is beyond Guardiola's comprehension?
This is like me doubting a PhD holder in maths would struggle to take an intro calculus class, even if he never (in this weird analogy) took an intro calculus class. If Guardiola is a world class coach (as stated on here), he's good with managing egos, there have been no serious issues with huge drops in team performance, , and he's capable of being "pragmatic" (the most idiotic word in football today but allow me), and he's proven capable of implementing a system that elevates supposed above-average players (labels applied on players like Stones, Ederson, Sterling, Jesus, etc)... What about the West Ham job would have him manage them down to midtable if he followed Moyes?
Again, nothing is certain and there's only one way to find out for sure. But if you had to estimate the probability of success, I struggle to see why you wouldn't put his chances at 70-80%, minimum...
I mean, it's not like he's being forced to go to the reserves. Didn't he buy Mendy in the first place?6 man, not 8
I think he'd do very well actually in less than optimal circumstances. This is someone who has been utilizing midfielders at left back for 4 seasons now. If he was throwing money at the wall he'd buy another LB to stand in for the crocked Mendy. He's played all season without a traditional striker. He's deployed a mediocre defender as a hybrid fullback slash playmaker.
On the striker thing, I think he loves not having a centre forward. He's never worked out how best to incorporate one into his systems, which works better with 5 nippy, talented, hard-working midfielders. I maintain that his teams are built to be defensive first, and that the only weird bit is that they defend with the ball. Having a player unwilling to forego an non-optimal chance to shoot because by going backwards the team can keep it for 30 more seconds is just not what he wants.
I think the biggest threat to this City team would be signing Haaland, strangely.
Forget about a West Ham even Spurs or Liverpool he wouldn’t have the same success, because so far his career hasn’t allowed him to not spend obscene amounts of money to alleviate problems like squad injuries and rotation...
There are a select group of mangers who have operated at both sides of the spectrum per se, Guardiola isn't one of them.
Yup. We finished 4th on goal difference and 15 points off the top with ten defeats.
Is it though?
Was it not just that season was a freak and that city massively underachieved like the champions who ended 10th. The top three were Leicester Spurs and Arsenal. There’s no way in hell at the start of that season you’d argue any of those teams had a better squad than City.
Because he didn't have to.
But, and no one has answered my question, what skill is required to lead Tottenham to multiple top 4 finishes and a CL final (with no trophies) that is beyond Guardiola? Are Rose and Dier incapable of being trained by him? Would Kane suddenly lose his goal scoring ability?
Klopp bought Van Dijk and a few others and won 2 trophies with Guardiola. But what else did Klopp do that is (theoretically) beyond Guardiola's skillset?
The table doesn't lie. It, moreso than fan's assumptions, is the most accurate indicator we have about a squad's quality.
Not really the same, one follows a formula that doesn't change, the other is maths.
He wouldn't have the players to implement his style and he wouldn't have endless supplies of money to buy who he wants.
There's no way he goes to West Ham and sets up like Moyes has, it's been an effective style for him with West Ham this season. It is why they are where they are.
One of the best yet finished 3rd and ten points behind Villarreal in second, aye? 18 behind Real.
Won half the league games, finished 4 points above 5th and only 7 ahead of the mighty Racing Santander!
You left some out, all in all about 11 defenders.
Champions League semi finals and being unlucky to lose to the team that won it by one goal? You left that bit out.
Yes it’s beyond Guardiola because he hasn’t done it. Klopp bought VVD but Liverpool’s net spend over his tenure is dwarfed by more than 7 PL clubs let alone city, is he incapable of leading a Dortmund or Liverpool to a CL I would say yes because he hasn’t done so with City(until now) or Bayern let alone Liverpool.
I don’t know if it’s skillset but in the past he has not got it right in Europe over a two legged tie, I think over the course of a whole season the little mistakes you can’t afford to make in such circumstances is alleviated by the overall quality of your squad and of course the money he has spent to build such a squad.
He’s as good as of a coach as anyone but i wouldn’t lavish him with praise for something that should be relative to how much he has spent, he inherited a team after all that had already won leagues with lesser managers.
Guardiola has evolved tactically through his managerial career. Even this City side has evolved. He's shown he can adapt to circumstances at hand.
So you believe that given these constraints, he is absolutely incapable of forming some tactics that get the best out of the players he would have at West Ham? Like, he would do worse at West Ham than David Moyes?
Hypothetical situation:
Moyes leaves West Ham after this season. The board is looking for a replacement and it comes down to two managers: Guardiola and Pardew. Both managers have expressed interest in working at the club under the available financial constraints, starting with the players available to them.
Who do West Ham select? Do they go with Pardew, as Guardiola is unproven at that level?
Because I'm really trying to understand what it is about a job at West Ham that would have Guardiola incapable of making an impact.
I hate watching city play, the tiki taka keep ball stuff they play bores me to tears. It removes all competitiveness from games, no wonder they dont have many fans. Im not saying that what there doing isnt good, I just find it incredibly boring to watch them dominate games and neutralize the opposition. Once they go a goal ahead in a premire league game Ill switch over as its game over from that point.
I mean he is a better coach the Moyes, that goes without saying. But his style of play of dominating the ball tends to require the best technically skilled players, whereas west ham play well currently due to their counter-attacking style of play.
Antonio and Lingard are two players in particular that thrive on the counter-attack, Soucek scores through late runs into the box. None of the 3 would be particularly suited to Guardiola's style of play. Players like Bowen and Benrahma would fare better - but then Pep would need to compliment them by spending a considerable sum to buy technically top players to dominate the ball - which he wouldn't get the money to do so at west ham.
That's ridiculous, especially many people have argued that Big Sam or other limited managers, given the resources at City, could replicate what Guardiola has done
We know he hasn't done it. That doesn't mean he absolutely can't. If we limit people's capabilities to what they have only accomplished, then everyone would be stuck at zero. But because we can extrapolate abilities and skillsets, we can gauge the likelihood that given past experience, they would succeed in a new role. This is how promotions happen in every line of business and sport.
I'm convinced there is an element of WUM here because there are people arguing that Guardiola would be "found out" at West Ham. Unlike, David fecking Moyes.
Many managers have not got it right in Europe over a two legged tie. Including Klopp (who did not lead Dortmund to a CL trophy). Including SAF, the GOAT. By that metric Zidane was the only quality manager in history until his exit to City last year.
Yeah I'm the same. I watch a variety of matches across all leagues, but I rarely ever watch City outside the late knockout stages. They're good and win, but it doesn't even feel like a contest half the time, especially in the league.
City have shown a more pragmatic side this season. In the game against PSG they did not hold the ball for huge periods of time, and their best opportunities came on the counter.
It is not Guardiola's preferred style of play, true. But goodness, is the skill of counter-attacking beyond Guardiola? Does he not understand late runs into the box? And if he had a squad full of plodders, and he wasn't able to replace them, and the tactics that got the best out of them were kick and rush and brexit football, would he be incapable of teaching them? "Lingard, run here. Soucek, hold your run until 5 seconds after Lingard hits the box".
He's an idealist, but nothing suggests he would relegate a team at the expense of playing tiki-taka, sky football be damned.
He might be able to do it but he hasn’t, Klopp for example has. I would say it’s easier to form an argument that a managed who has won a League and CL on modest resources is much more able to win a Pl and CL being the biggest spending manager of all time than it is the reverse.That's ridiculous, especially many people have argued that Big Sam or other limited managers, given the resources at City, could replicate what Guardiola has done
We know he hasn't done it. That doesn't mean he absolutely can't. If we limit people's capabilities to what they have only accomplished, then everyone would be stuck at zero. But because we can extrapolate abilities and skillsets, we can gauge the likelihood that given past experience, they would succeed in a new role. This is how promotions happen in every line of business and sport.
I'm convinced there is an element of WUM here because there are people arguing that Guardiola would be "found out" at West Ham. Unlike, David fecking Moyes.
Many managers have not got it right in Europe over a two legged tie. Including Klopp (who did not lead Dortmund to a CL trophy). Including SAF, the GOAT. By that metric Zidane was the only quality manager in history until his exit to City last year.
And this is the point most managers have not had the luxury of spending 500m in such a short space of time, not Sir Alex not Klopp, or any other top class manager. Guardiola has been afforded that luxury and yesterday had lead a club to a CL final in a decade, I won’t give him extra credit for performing about par, he hasn’t punched above his weight or done anything of the such, he is a great manager who has outspent all of his rivals and also inherited a core side which had a better base than most in Europe.
He doesn’t need to go to a West Ham to prove himself, but also on the inverse he hasn’t shown the ability to build sides that aren’t operating already from an incredible base backed by incredible finances, Sir Alex has, Klopp has, Wenger has Mourinho has(with Porto).
So Leicester had the strongest squad in the league? Followed by Arsenal and Spurs?
Chelsea and Man City had weaker squads than all those three?
I know you love fighting the city cause on here but it’s patently obvious that season was a freak and there wasn’t much to be taken from it long term.
I love challenging assumptions that sometimes go against the grain (explains my tagline).
Of course managerial skill goes into the final position, but you can't just look at a roster on paper and say, "that's their quality".
Thank you for finally agreeing with me.
Seem to challenge a lot of things when it involves Man City. A little strange for a supposed United fan
And on this occasion you are wrong .
In the 2015/2016 season Man City and Chelsea had the best squads. Their performances on the pitch didn’t reflect that. But in the year before and after it did as Chelsea won the league twice and city finished 2nd and 3rd.
Let's do a player vs player analysis from that summer 2015...
DDG > Hart
Cabellero > Romero
1-1
Kompany > Jones
Otamendi > Rojo
Smalling > Mangala
Blind = Demichellis
Young > Kolarov
Shaw > Clichy
Valencia > Sagna
Varela > Humphreys
McNair > Tosin Adarabioyo
Zabaleta > Darmian
Cameron Borthwick-Jackson > Man Utd Garcia
Timothy Fosu-Mensah > Angelino
8-3 United
Silva > Mata
Nasri > Januzaj
Carrick > Fernandinho
Herrera > Fernando
Yaya Toure > Schneiderlin
KDB > Schweinsteiger
Delph > Pereira
Fellaini > Celina
City 5-3
Aguero > Rooney
Martial > Bony
Sterling > Depay
Rashford = Iheanacho
Navas > Lindgard
City 3-2
I have it United winning, but then again you could remove the last two at the defenders list and have it even. People totally forget just how old and poor that Man City squad really was. That defence bar Kompany was dreadful.
You conveniently ignored we drew Celtic in the last 16 and Schalke in the last 8. It was an easy route, nothing to do with being one of the best about. We wouldn't have made the SF if we drew one of the better sides.
Is it? I've just taken a look at the team he had. I'm curious as to who you think then had better strength in depth at that time? The team contains , Sagna, Kompany, Zab, Fernando, Sterling, Gundogan, Aguero, kolarov, De bryune, Sane, Silva, Clichy, Fernandinho, Otamendi, Navas, Nolito, Yaya Toure, Gabriel Jesus, iheanacho, delph etc it's quite some squad.
So? City finished last season 18 behind Liverpool and look where they are now.
You had a squad full of world class players most in or just before their prime. Messi already finished 3rd in balon d‘or. Then you had other great players like Xavi, Iniesta, Etoo, Puyol and many more. That team was being trained by a manager who had just a couple of years ago won the CL and league titles with Barca. Xavi & Co also already won the Euros 2008.
So it was a great team which was just underperforming after having won everything with the same manager and was now probably looking for some change. Pep did a great job when he came but you are acting like you had Arsenal‘s current squad in 2008.
Lyon last season made the CL semi while finishing midtable in France, We can make that argument for best team in Europe too based off that CL semi or Madrid this season
Yeah, you know what, you are right. They were a shit side, absolute crap, could barely string 2 passes together and Pep turned them from a terrible side on into a treble winning team in a year through his own absolute genius.
What is this post? Where do I even start?- When was Young ever a better full back than Kolarov? Young wasn't even a full back at the time, he played in midfield.
- Valencia had made about a two appearances as a right back. Sagna and Clichy were specialist full backs and very good ones at their best but Young and Valencia who'd barely ever played full back at the time were better? Gimme a break. Only under Mourinho did the pair of them finalise those positions as full backs. Under LVG our fb's were Darmian and Blind/Rojo for the most part or other.
- The inclusion of those youth players
really?..... CBJ, Fosu Mensah and McNair ahead of Angelino, Adarabioyo and Garcia is fecking hilarious considering where all six players are now.- Januzaj wasn't even at the club why is he even there?
- Well done on the player comparison gymnastics to make city's midfield appear only slightly better than United's, bravo, takes some serious skill.
- And can you offer an explanation as to how Nasri, Silva and Januzaj ended up in the MF but Lingard and Navas as forwards?
He could make an impact, but I don't think he could have them at the top 4 near the business end of the season.
He has a style that he needs certain players to suit, he's not going to get the money at a West Ham to go put and buy the players needed. If he could evolve so much tactically he wouldn't have needed to spend half a billion at City to get his way of playing to work the way he wants and get to the Champions League final again.
Pellegrini won the title at City and also took them to the Champions League final. How did he fair at West Ham?
Like it or not at that point in 2008 when Pep took over, Barca were already one of the best teams in Europe. It's not even in question, won it in 2006, last 16 in 2007, semi final in 2008, won it in 2009 and top 3 in Spain almost every year.