Guardiola actually doesn't really play Tiki Taka football, he says he hates that term being labelled on his teams
Nah, Milan were big in the 50's and huge in the 60's maybe you could class Madrid as the original sugar daddy club as they had the state behind them.Funny that you mention Milan, considering they literally are the massive club that they are because of Burlesconi injecting money into the club. They were the original sugar daddy team, just did it in a different era so they became a “historically great club”. Should have used a better example mate
This might explain why you are a "New Member" since 2012 then if you "honestly" think that.
True, I’ve always held this against Pep. But let’s be real for a second: his hit-to-miss ratio on transfers is incredible compared to most others. It’s not just a fluke he hits the nail on the head on his first go a lot of the times whereas other teams/managers take 2, 3, or even more tries to get it right. His efficiency for eyeing down targets, getting them, and most of all successfully integrating them into his system is special.
I will always post this amazing analysis of Pep Guardiola's philosophy and how it works. Coaches like Thomas Tuchel, Maurizio Sarri, Paco Jemez, Paulo Fonseca, Joachim Low, Julian Nagelsmann and even Antonio Conte use a lot of Guardiola's principles but there is not a single coach who uses fully his methods..Why there are not so many coaches in the wolrld able to replicate Guardiola's Juego De Posicion football? Because it is really a very sophisticated system that needs a lot of coaching and very specific type of players to perform it : https://spielverlagerung.com/2014/12/25/juego-de-posicion-under-pep-guardiola/
To be fair at Barcelona he had a few flops. He never managed to integrate Ibra or Fabregas properly(seemed thoroughly confused as to what to do with Fabregas) and there was that defender he signed that was horrible, Chyrginsky? Been pretty good with transfers since Bayern though. Probably more experienced now in terms of knowing what his teams need.
True. No doubt he is a top coach. However Nolito and Bravo spring to mind as flops he had to spend again to replace.
Not at all. I'm not naive or stupid to think football clubs just appear from no where. Not a single team in history didn't either start or continue to survive without a 'sugar daddy'. Milan weren't Man City and their history didn't start in 1983 when Burlesconi bought them. Have a look who was in their team in 1963. This team was winning league and European competitions before then. Yes things changed in the 80's but their standing in European football was long established before then and that's my point. City were never a big club and whilst they are a absolutely superb team, you can't buy history or pedigree. They are writing their own history but this is based on the ability to pay for it. Not a criticism but will always taint their achievements pretty much like their manager who only backs winning horses. People can talk about Barca but for me it was Rijkaard was the bigger influence before him....Funny that you mention Milan, considering they literally are the massive club that they are because of Burlesconi injecting money into the club. They were the original sugar daddy team, just did it in a different era so they became a “historically great club”. Should have used a better example mate
To be fair, of all of his signings those two were the cheapest, and the oldest. Definitely not in the same mould of his other signings focussing on youth into the squad; I’d say he’s spent a lot but he’s also embedded a style of play few saw possible with this side 8 months ago.
+ Danilo who's been fine for City when called upon.
They may have spent 500m since pep but we have also spent a lot on players since. Top my head, 300plus?. We have marginally improved in terms of results, performances are still dire. City have exponentially improved and are playing probably some of the best quality football and showing the most consistent form (in a single year) that the premier league has ever seen. Peps execution from his signings has been magnificent and he got rid of all the dead wood effectively. Jose has messed around.
They are a younger and faster team than barca. If Messi doesn't have a blinder, City should win that fight.
That will never change unfortunately whilst Mourinho is in charge. It doesn't matter who is playing for us we will always play with the inferiority complex against the best teams. I find it difficult to criticise Conte for the way he approached the game today when Mourinho would've done exactly the same. There isn't a fear factor anymore when teams face United and maybe after he's gone we may move towards restoring that fear factor again.
Yep, I read that a while back.
Speaking personally I don't give a rats about guards of honour or winning it on the occasion of the Derby game.
As you end up saying I think 96 is the target for Pep. They will only worry about beating the current record of 95 points.
Already explained this in this very thread, but okay. Milan were a sugar daddy club as early as the 1950s. Same as pretty much every other italian club. Some were already sugar daddy clubs in the 20s and 30s...
Yes because posting rate is a factor in football knowledge or otherwise.
Like I said, no football club exists without a benefactor. That said, a sugar daddy from the 50's is completely different to current owners in the same way as comparing a football club or players from the same era to now. What we are seeing now is unprecedented and it's only my view but it taints it. Some won't be bothered and wouldn't blame the modern fan tbh. I'm a bit old school....
How have you managed to use Chelsea's negativity to get a dig in at United
I am of the opinion that Jose is definitely negative and not getting the best out of our attacking players. However the gap between our spending and City's is nearer 200 million pounds if I am not mistaken. That's a pretty huge gap tbh. Also, when a manager can buy a player and then dump him next season without a worry in the world, letting him play as a sub all the time, then the playing field is just not the same.
How is acknowledging there's a gap between us an City a dig at us?How have you managed to use Chelsea's negativity to get a dig in at United
Why do you need to acknowledge it? The table speaks for itself. There's a gap between all the other top sides and City. Just seems like another excuse to have a dig at United in a thread that's nothing to do with them.
To be fair, you've got Alexis Sanchez in return for Mkhitaryan, so that was totally understandable.
Yeah the 200 + million difference in spend has nothing to do with it.. nothing I tell ya.
That's your own opinion. I'm not having a dig at anyone.
My own opinion is that the gap in the table doesn't lie and everyone is behind City at the moment? That's just a fact.
Personally, I don't care how far other teams are away from them, just us. And I don't understand why you'd be unsure why a United fan is worried about the gap between his team and the team above them.
Where did I say I'm unsure why a United fan would be worried about the gap? I said I'm unsure why there is a need to go about the forum "acknowledging" the gap (as you put it) by getting digs in when discussing the Chelsea approach yesterday. It's obvious there's a gap as shown in the table. The gap exists between City and everyone else. Not just United.
I can mention it cause this is a forum, that's what it's for and again it's not a dig. You're being precious by interpreting it as one.
Just don't see the point in randomly mentioning something everybody is well aware of and has been for a while.
No exactly, I don't blame City fans either. I'd probably be enjoying it as well if I'd been forced to endure the likes of Michel Vonk, Lee Badbuy and Richard Edghill for 20 years. But, from the outside, it's all very hollow isn't it.
