Pep was at the start of his reign.
Trying to pull apart a similar situation of trusting youth players that have come through at the same time is asinine
Pep Guardiola Threatens to quit Man City
- Thread starter UnitedSofa
- Start date
-
In the latest edition of the United Hour Podcast, we interview Duncan Drasdo of MUST - covering ticket prices, new stadium, INEOS and what fans should be demanding from our club.
Also, due to technical issues we couldn't put a notice up for the previous episode which was about the game against Bournemouth and other stuff. If you'd like to listen to it, click here.
Trying to pull apart a similar situation of trusting youth players that have come through at the same time is asinine
Your point is correct but Eric Harrison deserves a mention.
Pep would fail to achieve what Tony Pulls did at Palace. Pulis>Pep
Pep is hands down the greatest of all time along with Sir Alex.
The wheels came off for Klopp from about age 55, with him stating he was "running out of energy" and that he "cannot do the job again and again and again and again".
Pep is also now 55 and seems to be struggling more now as well.
I've pointed out numerous times in threads about who should be the next United manager, that managers tend to have peak years, same as players, and for managers this tends to be early 50s, with a decline from mid 50s. Yet many seem to assume that managers such as Luis Enrique (55) and Conte (56) will be able to defy what has happened to Pep and Klopp and continue at the same level and intensity indefinitely - and would therefore be dead-certs to succeed at United in future as well. Turns out they're also this season seemingly not quite at their peak either.
Bringing in a 55/56 year-old manager could be like bringing in the 32 year-old Salah, on the assumption that because he was great before the wheels will never come off for him either. As the phrase goes in finance: "past performance is not indicative of future results".
I think, like for players, this should be refined with how long they've been in the spotlight (in the same way that for players, it's more about at what age they started at the top level). It's more about mileage than a specific age, imo.
The difference between players and managers is that it's normally a physical decline.
Guardiola took a year off after Barcelona, but has worked every season from 2013 onwards, so he could well be mentally burnt out.
Conte, and Luis Enrique will have benefitted from being International managers as it's not as time consuming as top level club management.
I doubt Pep would've done very much with the squad Klopp inherited
Last edited:
Yeah they bought VVD and Alison for peanuts... After he had meltownd because we bought Pogba for big money.
We will never know.
Would Klopp did achieved what Pep did at Barca?
Just going by PL, Pep's City never had "meltdown" after good season like Klop's Pool.
And Klopp fecked off after one big presure job.
So you take out the top-class recruitment team of Edwards and others as well? Liverpool were at the same level as Spurs and Pochettino got nothing, Klopp got one of the best CBs of his generation for a world-record fee for a defender, and one of the most talented goalkeepers in the world and the rest is history.
Pretty sure Ferguson did not peak in 1996
This is a well thought out post!
You make good points but I think it depends on other circumstances. I think a big factor is how long they've been at the top for (not so much the age). Obviously being at the top it requires a relentless work ethic and much more pressure. Some can handle that long term and others can't.
Carlo has been a top manager at big teams for pretty much over 30 years. Sir Alex - well he's a different kettle of fish and one of few exceptions across not just Football, but sports managers in general!
I really think Pep wouldn't have sustained as much success if only for City's owners, whom spent and spent and yes in a dodgy way, but they spent right. If Pep wasn't at City or PSG, I think he wouldn't have had HALF the success he's had. It's not me having a go at him, just my opinion.
We had Ruben who is very young, and the politics of the club (which every club has) clearly got the better of him because he didn't know how to get his own way and/or wasn't willing to show much compromise.
Another factor is burn out. That's what happened to Klopp and I think it's evident it's happening to Pep.
As fans, we were truly BLESSED with Sir Alex - the guy is just made of different stuff and what's happening to Pep - is just the norm. Sir Alex is the exception. I think it's unfair to even compare a manager to Sir Alex and it's clear as day he's in a class of his own.
Get out!
Its highly likely he would, there is a reason Sir Alex wanted Klopp as his replacement
A fairer comparison would be at Munich. I reckon Klopp would have been more successful at Munich than Pep. At Barca, it is Pep's DNA. Klopp still likely would have been super successful with that team.
I'm not sure Beckham or his dad took much persuading given both were die-hard United fans!
Fergie talked with Pep, and Pep took his year off. It is know fact.
No-one has.
But Salah, Firmy, Mane were considerable fees at the time and Allison and Van D were world records for their positions at the time.
So any narrative that he somehow did it on a budget needs to be absolutely aggressively shut down.
He didn’t do it on a budget. Every team spends to improve. But not every team can buy a first 11 in like a year which is pretty much what city can do and get away with it.
seriously we are going round and round to this Pep debate?
Usually best in the field attract the other best, nothing surprising.
Pep might be good/better than the rest, you cant put him in the bracket of SAF, ever.
There's 0 evidence of Pep proving himself before getting "best in the world team aka Messi etc". At best he got into that position because he was a barca boy.
That's it.
SAF wasn't a United boy.
What it means is that likes of SAF, Klopp etc had to face harder challenges.
You can climb a hill in a park near your house, does not mean you can climb Mt Everest
Before anointing someone like Pep (with 115 odd charges pending to say the least) with a great manager title, atleast compare apples to apples.
say the same in a different way (my friends on this forum will/may disagree), if we had a chance to select between Pep or Klopp starting next season, who would you select?
My answer would be Klopp and I hate him.
Usually best in the field attract the other best, nothing surprising.
Pep might be good/better than the rest, you cant put him in the bracket of SAF, ever.
There's 0 evidence of Pep proving himself before getting "best in the world team aka Messi etc". At best he got into that position because he was a barca boy.
That's it.
SAF wasn't a United boy.
What it means is that likes of SAF, Klopp etc had to face harder challenges.
You can climb a hill in a park near your house, does not mean you can climb Mt Everest
Before anointing someone like Pep (with 115 odd charges pending to say the least) with a great manager title, atleast compare apples to apples.
say the same in a different way (my friends on this forum will/may disagree), if we had a chance to select between Pep or Klopp starting next season, who would you select?
My answer would be Klopp and I hate him.
I'd say the same. I can't stand Klopp but at the same time I do have a lot of respect for what he has achieved with the resources he's had available.
Pep has to have the best of everything stacked in his favor in order to be able to succeed. And even now with his club still able to absurdly back him in the transfer market like no one else, his philosophy appears to be failing.
Ahh come on, let's not ignore that for a club of Liverpools size, they didn't really spend that much of their own balance at one point, until they saw the success on the pitch.
Countinhos money alone covered Salah, Mane and Firminhio. Then the other 2 accumulated transfer fees of around £140 million total.
That team needed a massive rebuild because let's face it, players like Jonjo Shelvey and Jay Spearing had no business getting game time in a club like Liverpool over the years before he came in.
Yep, Klopp got what he needed when he needed it, it was quite similar to United in the 1990s that way. Other teams spent more than United overall, but United would get the top players for record fees to add to what they already had (Keane, Cole etc). City it was more Pep got what he needed and what he didn't need and what he didn't know he needed.
As has been covered in some of the other replies, of course there can be freakish exceptions.
Klopp never bought an entire back 4 for 50m each, then replaced them all with another back 4 costing 50m. Klopp then never had 50m players bought for every position and every player on the bench.
Klopp never inherited KDB, David Silva, Yaya Toure, Aguero, Kompany and Sterling, then spent obscene amounts on top.
Yeah Klopp always deserves more respect than him
More like the 12 months 1
Salah, firminho and mane cost Liverpool like just under 100m for all 3. That’s great business and Klopp also improved them. Guardiola buys expensive players who are already quality. Mane, firminho and Salah wasn’t world class when Klopp bought them.
They've already spent over 2 billion on players for him since he's been there, 500m in the last 12 months.
Fergie is the greatest of all time. Pep is not along with him at all.
Pep requires perfect conditions to excell. Many great managers could achieve similar to him with the squads and finances he's had at his disposal.
Not many in history could do what Fergie did at Aberdeen and then keep one club at the pinnacle of the sport for 20 years.
As much as I don't care for Pep, it's not unreasonable to say he's an outstanding coach of elite players. Man City had the same resources for years before he came along and didn't come close to the level he took them too.
The greatest of all time? I'm not so sure but these things are subjective.
The greatest of all time? I'm not so sure but these things are subjective.
Can't believe people are putting Pep anywhere near Fergie, let alone on the same level. Those saying he's above Fergie have lost the plot completely. I suppose recency bias makes people forget the greatness of his achievements. Pep is a brilliant coach, there's no doubt about that, but Fergie transcended coaching unlike any before or since, he created a dynasty that will be remembered forever. And he did it without disgusting amounts of state wealth behind him. Better yet he did it under the leash of the Glazer parasites. He was unbelievable.
Yup it’s recency biased. Also pep is comfortably number 2. Jose and Wenger the next two in any order.
Fergie had Utds golden generation and before 2005, Utd were the undisputed financial kings in the premier League. Could buy anyone pretty much.
Pep has state money since he managed City but he's done it in two other countries as well.
They're both great managers of their generation. Different eras, can't say one is better than the other.
United under Fergie pre Glazer were outspent many many times. We spent big sometimes yes, such was our right having won many trophies and being the biggest club in the land.
Pep did a great job at all the clubs he was at but it pales in comparison to what Ferguson achieved at the clubs he was at.
Sure we’ve had the “Fergie outspent everyone and bought teams” loads of times and loads of times, same reply?
Putting aside Aberdeen (third team (at best!) in a two team league) and class of 92…
Top Net Spenders by Season (sure Everton were very high mid 90s too?)
- 1993/94 – 1994/95: Blackburn Rovers
- 1995/96 – 1997/98: Newcastle United
- 1998/99: Manchester United
- 1999/00: Liverpool
- 2000/01: Leeds United
- 2001/02 – 2002/03: Manchester United
- 2003/04 – 2006/07: Chelsea (start of Abramovich era)
- 2007/08: Liverpool
- 2008/09 – 2010/11: Manchester City
- 2011/12 – 2012/13: Chelsea
Exactly. Moneybags United is a poor argument.
This is incorrect, we were never financial kings or in a position where we could sign any player we wanted and missed out on a few over the years while being outspent by other Premier League teams in most seasons.
I think we were top spenders in only 3 of our 13 Premier League title winning season
Yes, pretty much what I see. Both had cheat codes for spending. I don't think there is much in that. Fergie shades it maybe, I believe he was more versatile but Pep will probably draw even on trophies if he stays.
I have more respect for United's achievement under Fergie but that's another issue.