Pep Guardiola's time at Bayern Munich
- Thread starter Damien
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
To oversimplify things, the players are the ones who made them one of the best and most successful teams in Europe over the last few years, the manager is the one who couldn't take them that step further. That said I think people overstate the influence of managers. Their CL "failure" is not solely Pep's fault, but it undoubtedly was a core target he didn't meet.
Well the squads were the best squads in the history of the club and miles ahead of the others so calm down
Back to back trebles and he would have been able to hold his head high. At City, with their financial doping policy, anything less than a quadruple should be viewed as failure.
his comments the last few days tell me that he didn't and doesn't judge his success on titles alone, but on the way he developed the team. And the fact that this wasn't recognized, but instead that his work was "reduced" to # of titles publically in this manner is one of the reasons he's leaving.
No.
Last edited:
Pep is only seen as a failure because he set the bar so high at Barcelona. Winning three league titles and two cups in three seasons, and make it to the CL semifinal every season isn't failure, it simply isn't, but at the same time, it isn't great either given Bayern's position in German football.
It's the way he won those titles. The football he made Bayern play was on another level and they'll only regress from here.
Pep did very well at Bayern but couldn't solve two big problems: (1) Ribery declined and (2) Robben's injury-free period was too short.
These two players were top 5 in the world at their peak and Bayern's best and most important players. I know Bayern fans love Müller to bits but he isn't and never will be as good as these two.
At the start of this season Costa looked great but has faded a bit since then. Coman is very talented but he ain't Robben.
Even without Ribery and Robben in their prime, Bayern played at times absolutely breathtaking football, e.g. the first half vs Juve in Turin and the first half vs. Atleti in Munich. Atleti looked lke a pub team in this half. These halfs of football were as good as Messi's Barca ever played, I'm not exaggerating one bit. Pep wasn't guilty that Müller missed a peno vs Atleti and that the latter scored with their first quality attack. He was a bit unlucky there.
City will be a big test for him though. They were dog shit over the last months and most of their key players are already 30+.
These two players were top 5 in the world at their peak and Bayern's best and most important players. I know Bayern fans love Müller to bits but he isn't and never will be as good as these two.
At the start of this season Costa looked great but has faded a bit since then. Coman is very talented but he ain't Robben.
Even without Ribery and Robben in their prime, Bayern played at times absolutely breathtaking football, e.g. the first half vs Juve in Turin and the first half vs. Atleti in Munich. Atleti looked lke a pub team in this half. These halfs of football were as good as Messi's Barca ever played, I'm not exaggerating one bit. Pep wasn't guilty that Müller missed a peno vs Atleti and that the latter scored with their first quality attack. He was a bit unlucky there.
City will be a big test for him though. They were dog shit over the last months and most of their key players are already 30+.
Last edited:
Why the heck was he crying like that?? Did Bayern refuse to pay his last year salary?
Ancelloti will deliver a CL if he stays for 3 years, unlike Pep.
And if he doesn't I guess people will call him a failure.
People are free to call anything they want.
Anyways the word failure is relative. If a new manager at PSG, does not win the league, then he ll likely be called a failure. Unlike a new manager in PL.
Probably, but his league record is poor on the other hand, with just three league titles despite being in charge of Juventus (1999-2001), Milan (2001-2009), Chelsea (2009-2011), PSG (2011-2013) and Real Madrid (2013-2015). Maybe Dortmund can actually win a league title in the next three years.
Did he turn an excellent winning team into s**t in any of those stints? If not, then I dont see how he would hinder Bayern from winning the league consistently.
I think it's more a question of him being too nice and too friendly with his players to keep the necessary determination on a high enough level for a full league season than anything like 'turning a team into shit'. The intensity level will certainly drop a lot compared to the last 3 years under Pep who has crazy high demands on his players every day. I expect us to become more inconsistent in the league without actually losing quality at our peak level. We'll just show our peak form less often than we did in the past years and that'll mean other clubs can challenge again. If it'll be enough for other teams to actually win? I guess we'll have to wait and find out.
The thing is that based on this season Bayern wouldn't have to turn into shit to put the title into jeopardy.
Dortmund were 5 points behind them until the 32nd match day and iirc ahead of them in the form table since the winter break.
I think there would've been a good chance of Dortmund seriously challenging for the title next season had Hummels stayed.
With him and Gündogan both gone (Mkhitaryan will supposedly stay, even if that means leaving on a free next summer)
things seem a lot less obvious though. On one hand Dortmund will very likely have significantly better depth next season (Dembele was already signed, Sahin and Durm won't begin the season with injuries, Passlack and Pulisic are going to have one more year under their belt and there will be supposedly a couple of more changes/additions) on the other hand two key players need to be replaced and the midweek CL fixtures will demand strong teams and focus compared to this season where Tuchel could rotate a lot for the EL group stages.
It will be interesting to see how the title race develops next season, because as people here already mentioned Carlo doesn't have a great domestic track record and I wouldn't be surprised if Bayern's player's themselves are more focused on the CL after Pep's tenure.
It is not just the question if Bayern can keep so consistent - you have to ask yourself if Dortmund can do that, too - when the opponents midweek aren't Europa League teams but CL teams. Maybe next season you do not need 80 points or more to win the league.
I am not so sure if only Pep is reason for this consistency. It started in the treble year. Sammer and the player's mentality are a big reason for it, too. And the media might be a big factor, too, that goes wild in the weeks after Bayern losses. They can win 50 games in a row - the Bayern players are "total loosers" when they loose one match...
I am not so sure if only Pep is reason for this consistency. It started in the treble year. Sammer and the player's mentality are a big reason for it, too. And the media might be a big factor, too, that goes wild in the weeks after Bayern losses. They can win 50 games in a row - the Bayern players are "total loosers" when they loose one match...
That is true. Still we can´t overlook the fact, that Pep played most of the time without the key-players of the treble winning team. Ribery > Schweinsteiger > Martinez (Robben) were all fairly unimportant during the last three years (due to injuries/form/system).
I still think that one of the biggest problems was the one of managing expectations. Both our management and Pep didn´t do themselves any favours with their way to handle the situation. The management created unrealistic expectations and he always appeared to be fairly distant from the whole team/club.
I love his reaction after the cup win, because it showed how much he cared about the players (and the players about him). He must be a great manager to work with on a daily basis and that is what creates consistency.
I was fairly angry after the last semi-final and I stand by all my criticism. That said I´d still liked him to stay another year.
I still think that one of the biggest problems was the one of managing expectations. Both our management and Pep didn´t do themselves any favours with their way to handle the situation. The management created unrealistic expectations and he always appeared to be fairly distant from the whole team/club.
I love his reaction after the cup win, because it showed how much he cared about the players (and the players about him). He must be a great manager to work with on a daily basis and that is what creates consistency.
I was fairly angry after the last semi-final and I stand by all my criticism. That said I´d still liked him to stay another year.
I cannot see Bayern maintaining that level of consistency in the league.
Why not?? Apart from Dortmund.....Bayern Munich are 3-4 levels above all others clubs.
Ancelotti has gone there to get his league record straight, and he'll too.
I'm not saying they won't win the league. Bayern are favorites regardless of who the manager is. I'm talking more in the line of PPG, total number of points, GD...
According to Daily Mail: Bayern Munich will play a friendly against Manchester City on July 20th at the Allianz Arena
Just been officially confirmed.
Ancelotti should do very well at Bayern. I consider him a better manager than Pep. Hopefully they'll spank City 
Because they actually aren't.
He has been held up as a great tactician of the game, but his time at Bayern has proved this to be false. It is hard not to commend what he has done by dominating the league, but his failure to win a Champions League undermines his supposed genius. He has been found out to be very one dimensional, he has tripped up against both Madrids and his old club. The latter having added an extra foil to their game since he has left.
That's rubbish, and by those logic, Mourinho is an awful tactician.
The only game where he failed tactically in those were the 4-0 drubbing Bayern received against Madrid.
Against Barcelona he simply didn't have the pieces to execute his game. Bayern used a wing based position game to get the wingers one vs one vs the fb and they were as good as Barcelona but could beat them in one vs ones because Robben and Ribery were out. Messi then decided the game by individual action.
Against Atletico it was individual errors that cost Bayern. That first half vs Atletico is one of the bes first halves I've seen. You could say that his tactics are risky which they are, but Bayern didn't sign him to be a reactive coach.
In fact, Bayern winning it would have been against the grain because almost all the cl winners are reactive teams bar Barcelona under Cruijff, Ajax under LVG, Barcelona under Rijkaard and Barcelona under Pep and Enrique. I'm hoping you notice a pattern. You can criticise his philosophy but his tactical acumen is up there with the greatest coaches. Creating is harder than defending which is why reactive teams never become legendary bar Herreras Inter who raged infamy.
People judging hI'm on the cl shows you how ridiculous football has become. The cl is a tournament that needs massive amount of luck. Madrid won it and does anyone here think they are the best in Europe? You need luck of the draw, key players in form, ref decisions not gong against you etc. The league should always be the bread and butter of any team for me with the Cl the crowning glory.
People criticism the German league should remember that BVB would have won the league in any other season bar the 12-16 seasons. Bayern are just an exceptional team.
Last edited:
I keep hearing this argument in regards to Pep & his Bayern stint but I think it's a lazy one. The CL is a tournament in which yes, talent and skill is needed, but luck is a HUGE factor. See Chelsea's win in 2012, or even Real Madrid's win this year, where they faced Wolfsburg, Roma, and quite frankly a Man City side who are good but not top tier as of yet in the CL. Pep's Bayern absolutely demolished the league (I think they won it in like, March or April) which is absurd, even when you consider that they are heavyweights in the Bundesliga. I however do agree with you that he is one dimensional in some regard, even in Pep's time at Barca I kept stating that they had no Plan B when their possession game wasn't working (vs. Chelsea in the CL for example a few years back). I really do wonder how his time at City will go in this regard; will he be able to adapt or will he instill a possession game that is much harder to execute in the PL than in any other league.
I always get confused about this plan B statement. In that case virtually nomanager has a plan B. Mourinho and Klopp have shown they cant adjusy their tactics.
Against Chelsea, Barcelona created enough chances to win that game which is all you can ask from your team. I will say he needs specific players to execute his philosophy to its maximum which is a weakness, but you need good players to play attacking football so it's a sort of dog chasing it's tail argument for me.
Fair enough, but I think what I'm emphasizing more, and what I should have stated in my initial post, is that Pep is often over-obsessive in his desire for possession. I remember in that Barca vs. Chelsea match, when Barca needed to score a goal, they kept playing short passes in the middle of the pitch with little to no urgency or penetration. I was literally screaming at the television for them to get the ball forward, but it looks like they were lost and had no idea what to do other than to keep possession.
That's not true at all. There are plenty more European Cup / CL winning teams that weren't reactive sides. They were either simply less extreme possession based sides or more adaptable between playing proactive and reactive football depending on the circumstances. This notion that everything but the rather extreme Dutch school of possession football is reactive is really annoying.
But isn't that true for almost all teams that are chasing a goal against an elite defensive team? Fair enough, other teams will play countless longballs or crosses from non-dangerous angles instead of trying to get through with shortpassing, but in the end it's really the same thing, isn't it? Once you're up against an elite defense and you need a goal, you'll look clueless more often than not. And most of the time when it happened to Pep, his teams actually created more than enough chances to go through, just failed to be as clinical as the opponent (definitely true for Barca-Inter in 2010, Barca-Chelsea in 2012 and Bayern-Atletico in 2016). That's simply a part of football and happens from time to time. Can you really argue that for example Mourinho's teams are better at chasing a goal when they fall behind? I just don't see that.
I didn't count the European cup. I don't really use the word possession football. That means nothing to me. I prefer the term position play. No other cl winning team apart from the afformentioned played with position game.
You could even take put Rijkaards Barcelona becaue their structural build up wasn't at a very high level. The Dutch school of 'possession' just like the word 'tiki taka' are just useless words that mean nothing on the pitch.
By reactive I'm talking about sides that literally never changed their position game to restrict space. They all played high lines and obviously are more susceptible to counters. As I said that is a weakness of position game so for me it was against the grain in that respect.
I don't count Enrique Barcelona because even though they might post high posses on numbers, they have a considerable weaker position game than under Pep and even Tito but have about the same aggregate talent.
But they created enough chances to beat Chelsea. Why should they pump it forward when they have no #9 that can head the ball, and be hit on the break? It makes no sense whatsover.
You need to circulate the ball to open up passing lanes. Hoofing the ball aimlessly into the box would have been tactical suicide as Chelsea could just hit them on the break which they did from exactly that at the end irrc.
Mourinho doesn't use 'possession' and he can't break down teams that restrict space as he has shown at Madrid and at Chelsea twice. Klopp has shown he can't adjust when teams do the same thing and that is why they were getting considerably worse in the Bundesliga ever since he won the league. Beating teams that park the box or restrict space is difficult for any team so I find it strange that you criticise Pep for what other managers have been failing to do as well.
Last edited:
Well, Cruyff only won the European Cup as a manager and never the CL. And it doesn't really matter what you want to call it, it's quite clearly that you restrict non-reactive teams to a very specific type of tactics. That's just wrong.
My point was that most of the teams that have won haven't played the way Pep and LVG did because it carries quite a lot of risk with the high lines so it would have been against grain. It wasn't meant as an insult to any of the other teams. At the end of the day the most important thing is to win. I would say most teams tend to be reactive in finals simply because of the nature of the tie.