Isotope
Ten Years a Cafite
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2012
- Messages
- 23,641
we have Jones and Rojo? Anyway. Like others have said, not that much between us and City.They had the likes of Stones not featuring, too.
we have Jones and Rojo? Anyway. Like others have said, not that much between us and City.They had the likes of Stones not featuring, too.
Enrique actually went on to win the treble with Barca as well. Which shows that with a world class team of superstars it isn't that difficult to win the top prizes. Pep not winning the CL in over 10 years also shows that Pep isn't this untouchable manager that people think he is.We can also look at what happened after Guardiola left, which is: three out of four Barcelona managers have won the league title in their first full season (Vilanova, Luis Enrique, Valverde). The exception, Tata Martino, was one goal away from achieving the same feat. Their current manager is about to move the team to first place.
Pep outperformed all these managers, both at Barcelona and elsewhere. But looking at this, it's pretty clear that the aberration was the season in third place, not Guardiola winning a league title.
I’m not sure what your argument is here? Guardiola left the team in a much better position than when he took over. The team had declined from their 05/06 success, with many of their star players having declined or left. Guardiola reinvigorated the team and placed a greater onus on a different tactical system, and more emphasis on different players. The managers who came after benefitted from the squad that was assembled and the success they had, but I’m not sure how that retroactively changes the job Guardiola did in the 2008-2009 season when he came in and ripped up the blueprint.We can also look at what happened after Guardiola left, which is: three out of four Barcelona managers have won the league title in their first full season (Vilanova, Luis Enrique, Valverde). The exception, Tata Martino, was one goal away from achieving the same feat. Their current manager is about to move the team to first place.
Pep outperformed all these managers, both at Barcelona and elsewhere. But looking at this, it's pretty clear that the aberration was the season in third place, not Guardiola winning a league title.
Well, this is bollocks. The season before he got the job, Barca finished the league 3rd 18 points away from the top (Real Madrid). They got humiliated by Real Madrid this season as well losing 1-4.Where did he prove himself? He walked into the Barca job with the greatest accumulation of talent ever assembled in the history of the game. I literally think I could have won the league with them.
It’s incredibly difficult to win a trebleEnrique actually went on to win the treble with Barca as well. Which shows that with a world class team of superstars it isn't that difficult to win the top prizes. Pep not winning the CL in over 10 years also shows that Pep isn't this untouchable manager that people think he is.
Or maybe because Enrique is actually a very good and underrated manager.Enrique actually went on to win the treble with Barca as well. Which shows that with a world class team of superstars it isn't that difficult to win the top prizes. Pep not winning the CL in over 10 years also shows that Pep isn't this untouchable manager that people think he is.
I'd pay good money to see anyone dig up an article or post from early 2008 predicting Guardiola's success. Since in 2021 it is a foregone conclusion to some, that that team would be considered the best team in European football this decade.You’ve ignored the league standing and being 18 points off, only to then go on to win the treble within one season and turn them into arguably the best club side ever. Guardiola improved most of those players, and you’re judging him on the result of that. People talk in hindsight that it was sure fire thing and it absolutely wasn’t.
We need to keep in mind, that these people who doubt his credentials, are nowhere near positions of authority in any club in any top flight league.No he doesn't have to go and prove anything to anyone by going to a smaller club, but that also means people don't have to accept him as being as good as he is made out to be. Unless he does go to a small club there will always be question marks from football fans, but that doesn't mean he should, so people will have to accept other people questioning him.
His first season at City has a bit of evidence to show that he wouldn't be as good without unlimited funds as his team only finished 3rd. He had to spend a ton of money to make his team look this good, he still had a very good team but it shows glimpses of why he couldn't succeed with any players.
I would have to concur.Pep is a great manager. No one would argue against that who is sane.
But there is no debate between him and Ferguson.
Fergie won a European trophy with Aberdeen. He won the treble. He won titles with half his players being from the youth team. Players he produced and developed. He won titles with sides that were clearly inferior to other teams in the division. He rebuilt teams without moving the earth to do so and won titles after people had written him off.
He did things that Guardiola just can’t do. He needs the money. Nothing wrong with that, of course. It’s still impressive how he sets them up, but he is not on the same level as Ferguson, and his achievements, in their billion pound context, just don’t match up.
I think you can say this about Vilanova, who had basically the same team. It's less true for each successive manager and isn't even remotely true today. In general I'm not a fan of giving managers credit for things other managers did years later. It's almost never justifiable.I’m not sure what your argument is here? Guardiola left the team in a much better position than when he took over. The team had declined from their 05/06 success, with many of their star players having declined or left. Guardiola reinvigorated the team and placed a greater onus on a different tactical system, and more emphasis on different players. The managers who came after benefitted from the squad that was assembled and the success they had, but I’m not sure how that retroactively changes the job Guardiola did in the 2008-2009 season when he came in and ripped up the blueprint.
You're the one using Barcelona's post record as a stick to beat Guardiola with. But has his 4 years in Spain been bettered by any manager before or after at the club? Maybe Cruyff? Enrique had the treble season but what happened after?I think you can say this about Vilanova, who had basically the same team. It's less true for each successive manager and isn't even remotely true today. In general I'm not a fan of giving managers credit for things other managers did years later. It's almost never justifiable.
I also don't think it's credible to give Pep all this credit for the 08 team because "the team had declined and many star players had declined or left" but then also give him a bunch of credit for what the next managers did, because when those managers took over, the team had declined and many star players had declined or left too.
There's very little evidence that Guardiola can't do these things.Pep is a great manager. No one would argue against that who is sane.
But there is no debate between him and Ferguson.
Fergie won a European trophy with Aberdeen. He won the treble. He won titles with half his players being from the youth team. Players he produced and developed. He won titles with sides that were clearly inferior to other teams in the division. He rebuilt teams without moving the earth to do so and won titles after people had written him off.
He did things that Guardiola just can’t do.
The answer to this question is in my earlier post, which you presumably didn't read. You seem to think I am "beating Guardiola." I am not; I think he's the best manager in the world.You're the one using Barcelona's post record as a stick to beat Guardiola with. But has his 4 years in Spain been bettered by any manager before or after at the club?
That's your opinion not the "way it is". Pep will be among the all time greats but merely focusing on number of trophies isn't the best metric imo. SAF is considered the greatest of all time for a multitude of reasons - trophies, longevity, building and rebuilding successful teams, winning as an underdog and breaking dominance of other teams. You can paint it anyway you want but Pep hasn't proven a few things other managers have done. Which is fine, everybody has their strengths. But let's not pretend those things won't be held against him. His career isn't beyond reproach.I understand on this forum people aren't going to agree with Pep > SAF doctrine. But believe me, if he manages as long as SAF did (and that's doubtful), by any metric he will have surpassed Ferguson. The spending argument for me falls apart, Ferguson consistently broke British transfer records and had his pick of players from England. I enjoyed Fergie football as much as any united fan but to say Pep's never had to do it by himself is looking at things with red tinted glasses. Tiki Taka at Barca was practically his invention and he was the one who reinvented Xavi and Iniesta as mainstays of that midfield while showing Ronaldinho the door. Pep is also far more tactical and innovative than any manager including but not limited to Ferguson. Sorry, its simply the way it is.
I think fergie will always be up there and I concede in these arguments there can be recency bias. But Guardiola's place as football managerial royalty is secured.
Rojo isn't on our books anymore. £150/200m is 'not that much?' It's not just that though, the perceived value of Peps squad is considerably higher.we have Jones and Rojo? Anyway. Like others have said, not that much between us and City.
It’s not though.There's very little evidence that Guardiola can't do these things.
We know he hasn't. The main reason why he hasn't done these things is because he hasn't had the opportunity to do them, and due to his success, he'll likely never have to.
But this is a bit like saying "George can't be the best student because he was never #1 student in the third grade" and it turns out George skipped third grade and went straight to fourth.
I’m sorry but I’m still confused as to what you’re arguing. I agree that the following managers deserve credit and had their own unique challenges, but I don’t understand what Enrique winning a title in 2015 has to do with the situation of the team Guardiola took over in 2008. You said the following managers having won the league shows that Barcelona going two seasons without a trophy and 20 points off the leaders was an aberration, but that doesn’t make sense to me.I think you can say this about Vilanova, who had basically the same team. It's less true for each successive manager and isn't even remotely true today. In general I'm not a fan of giving managers credit for things other managers did years later. It's almost never justifiable.
I also don't think it's credible to give Pep all this credit for the 08 team because "the team had declined and many star players had declined or left" but then also give him a bunch of credit for what the next managers did, because when those managers took over, the team had declined and many star players had declined or left too.
No chance he'd have got the Barca job had he not led Barca B to one of their best ever seasons...Where did he prove himself?
I am sure someone said this before but the players he inherited wereNo he doesn't have to go and prove anything to anyone by going to a smaller club, but that also means people don't have to accept him as being as good as he is made out to be. Unless he does go to a small club there will always be question marks from football fans, but that doesn't mean he should, so people will have to accept other people questioning him.
His first season at City has a bit of evidence to show that he wouldn't be as good without unlimited funds as his team only finished 3rd. He had to spend a ton of money to make his team look this good, he still had a very good team but it shows glimpses of why he couldn't succeed with any players.
Highly debatable, Zidane is 3 games away from having a good claim to that title, and he's even younger than PepPep will go down as the best manager of all time if he manages into his 60s. There is no doubt about it, money spending or not. Guy is top notch and makes his teams so much better and delivers results while playing scintillating football.
Following your logicWe can also look at what happened after Guardiola left, which is: three out of four Barcelona managers have won the league title in their first full season (Vilanova, Luis Enrique, Valverde). The exception, Tata Martino, was one goal away from achieving the same feat. Their current manager is about to move the team to first place.
Pep outperformed all these managers, both at Barcelona and elsewhere. But looking at this, it's pretty clear that the aberration was the season in third place, not Guardiola winning a league title.
Not that much, when you consider the difference in trophies they've been collecting over the years. They'll secure a 3rd PL title in the last 4 years. That's not 150-200m difference. The perceived value is higher because they bought good players and improve most of them.Rojo isn't on our books anymore. £150/200m is 'not that much?' It's not just that though, the perceived value of Peps squad is considerably higher.
If we had say Haaland and Sancho lining up for us this season do you think we wouldn't be competing for the title or even Europe?Not that much, when you consider the difference in trophies they've been collecting over the years. They'll secure a 3rd PL title in the last 4 years. That's not 150-200m difference. The perceived value is higher because they bought good players and improve most of them.
Yes, if we can get Haaland and Sancho, we'd be favorite for the League. I can see your point there.If we had say Haaland and Sancho lining up for us this season do you think we wouldn't be competing for the title or even Europe?
They did. When you consider the amount both managers have spent at their respective clubs, the squads they inherited, and how many players those managers were able to buy and discard when they didn't work, it puts it all in a very different light.
He’s questioned not because he never went to a smaller club but because every manager or player, no matter how good, is questioned. Doesn’t mean that these doubts are necessarily logical or warranted.No he doesn't have to go and prove anything to anyone by going to a smaller club, but that also means people don't have to accept him as being as good as he is made out to be. Unless he does go to a small club there will always be question marks from football fans, but that doesn't mean he should, so people will have to accept other people questioning him.
His first season at City has a bit of evidence to show that he wouldn't be as good without unlimited funds as his team only finished 3rd. He had to spend a ton of money to make his team look this good, he still had a very good team but it shows glimpses of why he couldn't succeed with any players.
I don't think we're close to pretty comfortably winning a league title and being in the CL finals, being the favourites to win that tournament either.we have Jones and Rojo? Anyway. Like others have said, not that much between us and City.
Of course. We were discussing about United and City's spending.I don't think we're close to pretty comfortably winning a league title and being in the CL finals, being the favourites to win that tournament either.
Apologies. I didn't read the thread. My bad.Of course. We were discussing about United and City's spending.
no problemo, man. I think everyone agreed we're not that close to City. Although if we had Sancho and Haaland, as Ivaldo alluded, things might be different.Apologies. I didn't read the thread. My bad.
I don't think you can infer that. The reason why you can't infer it is because CL titles (and finals) are much less common, both for top clubs and top managers, than league titles are. Because of that, if you try to evaluate managers based on windows of such short length (3 years in this case), you are almost certainly going to reach erroneous conclusions.Following your logic
Mourinho could not take Chelsea to a CL final, 2 rookies Avram Grant and RdM took them. One of them didn't even have a coaching license
We can infer that Grant and RdM were better or equal to 04-07 Mourinho.. Is that right
We judge managers using a baseline. You are saying that the baseline for Pep's years in Barcelona should be "the two years at Barcelona before he became a manager." I am saying you should actually look at a longer period of time, both before and after he became manager, to understand what the real baseline of performance was.I’m sorry but I’m still confused as to what you’re arguing. I agree that the following managers deserve credit and had their own unique challenges, but I don’t understand what Enrique winning a title in 2015 has to do with the situation of the team Guardiola took over in 2008. You said the following managers having won the league shows that Barcelona going two seasons without a trophy and 20 points off the leaders was an aberration, but that doesn’t make sense to me.
Yes, if we can get Haaland and Sancho, we'd be favorite for the League. I can see your point there.
No, I don't like this analogy. I don't think if Pep took a pay cut he'd struggle to pay the mortgage to be honest. He could try his luck at Leicester without much change to his lifestyle methinks.This is such horrifically stupid logic. Obviously I don't know what your job is but I'm guessing you wouldn't take a huge paycut to go and work in worse conditions and a worse job just to "prove yourself"?
Pep already proved himself. Now he's reaping the rewards.
He could, but why would he, when, with all due respect to Leicester, there would be 5 clubs with better pedigree courting him?No, I don't like this analogy. I don't think if Pep took a pay cut he'd struggle to pay the mortgage to be honest. He could try his luck at Leicester without much change to his lifestyle methinks.
Why would he? How does that benefit him or his family in any way?No, I don't like this analogy. I don't think if Pep took a pay cut he'd struggle to pay the mortgage to be honest. He could try his luck at Leicester without much change to his lifestyle methinks.
Okay.I believe that Lionel Messi would have been as good as he was, if Paul Ince was managing him.
His first season as a manager- at Barca B. He turned them into one of the best sides in the division and earned his first team job by doing so well there. Since then he's gone from strength to strength, something Ancelotti, Mourinho etc have all failed miserably at. There's a good reason he's the only manager ever to coach three top sides in ten years without ever getting sacked- because it's incredibly difficult. People think football is FIFA where having the best squad is 90% of the struggle. You say anyone could do it... well, why haven't they? Why's he the only one?I've been told I'm very stupid for suggesting this but can anybody tell me which year Pep didn't have the best squad in his respective league?
Ferguson wins simply because of the financial constraints placed upon him Vs the highest level European competitors during his era Vs His Achievements which stand on their own merits and Ferguson's records pre-United with Aberdeen.I think Ferguson Guardiola is an interesting debate, while they have a lot of similarities they equally have very different approaches. For me I rate Ferguson as the greatest manager I have known, longevity is an important aspect when assessing a manager and his ability to have thrived in different footballing eras and being able to continuously adapt to the different environments is an incredible achievement.
I’m not sure what your argument is here? Guardiola left the team in a much better position than when he took over. The team had declined from their 05/06 success, with many of their star players having declined or left. Guardiola reinvigorated the team and placed a greater onus on a different tactical system, and more emphasis on different players. The managers who came after benefitted from the squad that was assembled and the success they had, but I’m not sure how that retroactively changes the job Guardiola did in the 2008-2009 season when he came in and ripped up the blueprint.
I'm not saying he would or he should. He can do what he likes. He'll probably stay at PetroCity spending a fortune on the best players around and winning trophies. I'm not overly impressed, unlike some. Klopp has done far more impressive things in the game in my opinion.He could, but why would he, when, with all due respect to Leicester, there would be 5 clubs with better pedigree courting him?
The reason why Jose Mourinho went to Spurs is because that was the best slot available to him. No other elite club in Europe wanted him. Now that he is sacked, he is being linked with Celtic. That hasn't happened to Pep yet. Why would he voluntarily make that step down?