Pep v. Jose

[serghei]

Guardiola has won jack shit so far in England. He got impressive wins over Tottenham, Chelsea and Scouse thus far, but in the end it could mean nothing. We‘ll get the next games right and continue sitting in second place, it‘s hilarious how people talk down Mourinho and praise Guardiola. Guardioa has everything to prove in England, let‘s see how he handles the season without a break, because his teams without Messi are known to fall off pace in the second half of the season.

You still think it's about the wins only? It's not. It's about how much respect City gets from every team they play against. Did you see Chelsea going gung-ho on United in the derby? They were afraid to do that against City because they fear them a lot more than they fear Mourinho's United.

The degree in which a team is feared across the board is the best indicator of domination. Wins and titles come as a natural consequence. Pep has won jack shit so far in England, and yet, the current champions parked the bus at home in front of their own fans. How do you explain that?

 

[Shark]

It's pretty obvious to me that Mourinho inherited a tougher job at United than Guardiola did at City. City had a nucleus of players superior to ours at the point both managers started.

So therefore don't be surprised if it takes Jose more time to get us up to speed and challenging.


If you have the luxury of a bottomless pit of cash as City have over the last few years, players can be signed and discarded relatively quickly like confetti if they don't work. And City have a fair old list of discarded players.

The only similar case we've had was Di Maria. Generally we (and most other clubs) don't discard our feck ups as quickly as City seem to do.

No, we are not skint ourselves, but City & PSG are on another level and there are some real signs now that they are about to finally supercede Barca & RM at the top table of European football.

Thus far, yes you can say Guardiola is doing "better" than Mourinho, but it's akin to him having a 100m head start in a 400m race.

I'm sorry, but the truth is that City and PSG have spent their money well, and spread their money on a number of positions that needed strengthening. Meanwhile we were busy on smashing transfer records on Pogba, Lukaku and Di Maria. One of them left the following season and out of the other two, only one might actually live up to the billing. Bailly is the only signing we've made recently that I'd say was actually shrewd business.

 

[Mourinhonista]

You still think it's about the wins only? It's not. It's about how much respect City gets from every team they play against. Did you see Chelsea going gung-ho on United in the derby? They were afraid to do that against City because they fear them a lot more than they fear Mourinho's United.

The degree in which a team is feared across the board is the best indicator of domination. Wins and titles come as a natural consequence. Pep has won jack shit so far in England, and yet, the current champions parked the bus at home in front of their own fans. How do you explain that?

Sorry, but you don‘t take all things into consideration, meaning Chelsea tried something but after their main and only world class striker went off, things fell apart. City have to consider themselves lucky, because who knows what would have happened. Furthermore Conte and Chelsea really have a dislike for Mourinho these days, they want to hurt him no matter what, couple that with United injury problems and a fully fit Chelsea team.

Against a Guardiola side it‘s not the worst idea to sit back, soak up pressure and him them on the break, against Mourinho however you press them and force them to make mistakes, happened to an unfit Fellaini couple of times.

The fear factor comes with titles, mostly after a couple of seasons, last season after a bright start everything fell apart because of Guardiola. Teams are still in striking distance, over the course of a season Chelsea, Tottenham or United can catch them easily if they drop their standards which Guardiola sides without Messi happen to do most times, last season they barely made top 4.

 

[serghei]

Sorry, but you don‘t take all things into consideration, meaning Chelsea tried something but after their main and only world class striker went off, things fell apart. City have to consider themselves lucky, because who knows what would have happened. Furthermore Conte and Chelsea really have a dislike for Mourinho these days, they want to hurt him no matter what, couple that with United injury problems and a fully fit Chelsea team.

Against a Guardiola side it‘s not the worst idea to sit back, soak up pressure and him them on the break, against Mourinho however you press them and force them to make mistakes, happened to an unfit Fellaini couple of times.

The fear factor comes with titles, mostly after a couple of seasons, last season after a bright start everything fell apart because of Guardiola. Teams are still in striking distance, over the course of a season Chelsea, Tottenham or United can catch them easily if they drop their standards which Guardiola sides without Messi happen to do most times, last season they barely made top 4.

What you should be asking, and where you should be questioning your arguments, is why is it not a very good idea to attack City? They barely made top 4 last season, right?

 

[Park Life]

let‘s see how he handles the season without a break, because his teams without Messi are known to fall off pace in the second half of the season.

Funny that, because last season, Guardioloa's first in the EPL, City after having a massive dip mid season, actually were at their strongest and played their best football in the second half of the season......and they have continued that into the new season.

 

[Peyroteo]

How is that a negative? As a manager he'll of course build a squad that is suited to his system.

But many managers don't have that sort of power to build their squad according to their ideal system. Lots of managers have to build the system according to the players available.

It's irrelevant if only players like Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Silva, Aguero et al can work in his system because they're the levels of player he's only ever going to be working with anyway. It isn't like he's going to find himself in a situation where he needs to try and get the best out of limited players.

It isn't but it might have been. He was a great footballer which led him to get a chance at a top club (after a good job with Barça B but still). If he started out at Leiria I think there's a good chance he'd have never even got a chance to coach a top club.

And I'm not underrating Guardiola, I'm a big fan. Out of the current City squad or his Barça squad I don't think there's any manager in the world that would do better. I just think he's perfect for this kind of job, but I have my doubts over how adaptable he is.

 

[Mourinhonista]

What you should be asking, and where you should be questioning your arguments, is why is it not a very good idea to attack City? They barely made top 4 last season, right?

As aformentioned, Guardioa‘s teams flourish with space, Moyes would have been stupid enough to give it to them, but why should we? It‘s a marathon, not a sprint, try to minimize risk and take points off here and there, especially against teams who are specialists in that regard.

 

[frank lee madeer..]

Peps good, but can he do it on cold rainy night at Old Trafford...

 

[serghei]

Because parking the bus was what their manager thought was the best tactic to get the best possible result out of the match after getting his striker injured and he chose to follow that thought rather than an arbitrary belief than a football tactic is a sign of cowardice and weakness based on nothing but idealisms and elitism.

It's not a sign of cowardice really. It's a sign of inferiority, pragmatism and intelligence.

 

[Peyroteo]

It's not a sign of cowardice really. It's a sign of inferiority, pragmatism and intelligence.

I deleted that anyway because I didn't want to get into it, you were too fast

@Mourinhonista just pretty much argued my point too.

 

[serghei]

And I'm not underrating Guardiola, I'm a big fan. Out of the current City squad or his Barça squad I don't think there's any manager in the world that would do better. I just think he's perfect for this kind of job, but I have my doubts over how adaptable he is.

He's not at all adaptable. In fact, he's not even a proper manager if you ask me. He's more like a famous private investigator among police detectives. You don't call him unless you really want to and unless you can't fix the issue yourself, because once you do, it's his way or no way. Like Sherlock Holmes a bit. Managing is almost like a thing he does out of hobby interwined with obssession. He takes the teams he wants and does his thing with them. Until he gets bored and he retires.

 

[goin4glory]

Not sure about that PSG bit. They are playing really aesthetic football with dynamic, expressive players being let off the leash. The owners, the fans and the players are going to get accustomed to it and when that happens, Mourinho's ideals will not be welcomed.
Is he not allowed to get the lay of the land in a country he's never managed in or sampled football from in a coaching capacity, or instill his concepts and take things on from there?

This is the team he wants, last season's was not.

Both of them spend a fortune in their pursuit of success, so it's hardly a stick you can just throw at Pep when our own manager would gladly spend to his heart's content.

I have no issue with Guardiola spending money. I have issue with people failing to recognise that not only has he spent more than Mourinho but he also inherited a far better squad. Aguero/Silva/KDB are better than anyone in our squad, then you have Sterling/Sane/Kompany etc who he also inherited that would walk into our X1.

Inter makes my argument null and void? They're one of the biggest clubs in the world... I left them out because I simply forgot he managed them. If I'd remembered I'd have included because it actually strengthens the point.

Porto I give you, but, at the same time, football was different then. The Euro finals he won were against Celtic and Monaco respectively. Money hadn't yet destroyed the game so teams like that were given the opportunities to be competitive. It could never happen today.

Inter hadn't won the champions league for over 50 years before Mourinho and rarely challenged for it, they aren't even a top 10 club in the world, let's see Guardiola at a club without unlimited funds or a top 3 squad in the world.

He beat Monaco in the final after they'd beaten both Chelsea and Real Madrid, he also beat United and a quality Lyon side to reach the final, let's not start diluting champions league wins.

Money has always had the biggest influence in football, back in the 90s when Italian teams were handing out the biggest pay cheques every foreigner used to "dream" of playing for Milan or Juve and all the trophies followed suit. Then the well dried up and these same players now "dream" of playing for Chelsea or Man City.

 

[Park Life]

He's not at all adaptable. In fact, he's not even a proper manager if you ask me. He's more like a famous private investigator among police detectives. You don't call him unless you really want to and unless you can't fix the issue yourself, because once you do, it's his way or no way. Like Sherlock Holmes a bit. Managing is almost like a thing he does out of hobby interwined with obssession. He takes the teams he wants and does his thing with them. Until he gets bored and he retires.

Guardiola's not a proper manager?.......he's not adaptable?

I think he's adapted quite well to the Premier League all things considered!

 

[Son Of Sam]

You still think it's about the wins only? It's not. It's about how much respect City gets from every team they play against. Did you see Chelsea going gung-ho on United in the derby? They were afraid to do that against City because they fear them a lot more than they fear Mourinho's United.

The degree in which a team is feared across the board is the best indicator of domination. Wins and titles come as a natural consequence. Pep has won jack shit so far in England, and yet, the current champions parked the bus at home in front of their own fans. How do you explain that?

This is bollocks.....

Winning something at the end is always the determinant. Who can argue Wenger’s teams in the 2000s weren’t the best to watch? All kinds of excuses were made for them, the whole country wanted to see them win but in the end, they became the forgotten men.

It’s all rosy now for City cos the time to start sharing the prizes isn’t here yet. When it comes and City are found wanting, be rest assured no one would remember who played the sexiest football. Leicester won the PL title ceding possession to every team they met.

That is what everyone will always remember - the end always justifies the means.

 

[serghei]

Guardiola's not a proper manager?.......he's not adaptable?

I think he's adapted quite well to the Premier League all things considered!

It's more like City adapted to him than the other way around.

 

[Varun]

He's not at all adaptable. In fact, he's not even a proper manager if you ask me. He's more like a famous private investigator among police detectives. You don't call him unless you really want to and unless you can't fix the issue yourself, because once you do, it's his way or no way. Like Sherlock Holmes a bit. Managing is almost like a thing he does out of hobby interwined with obssession. He takes the teams he wants and does his thing with them. Until he gets bored and he retires.

 

[Keeps It tidy]

Guardiola's not a proper manager?.......he's not adaptable?

I think he's adapted quite well to the Premier League all things considered!

How did you fall for it?

 

[roonster09]

It's more like City adapted to him than the other way around.

I think only Pep fan boys comes up with shit like this, some other Barca fan looked like an idiot making these kind of ridiculous statements.

 

[B20]

Peps good, but can he do it on cold rainy night at Old Trafford...

5 draws and 6 losses (draws all 0-0) at old trafford vs top 6 and no goals scored in 9 of those 11 suggests united can't do it either.

 

[roonster09]

5 draws and 6 losses (draws all 0-0) at old trafford vs top 6 and no goals scored in 9 of those 11 suggests united can't do it either.

At Old Trafford? I'm sure that stat is incorrect as ManUtd haven't lost a game at home since last September.

Also wins against Spurs, Chelsea Draws against Liverpool and Arsenal. Not sure where you got yours tats from.

 

[Varun]

5 draws and 6 losses (draws all 0-0) at old trafford vs top 6 and no goals scored in 9 of those 11 suggests united can't do it either.

You're quoting our away stats I believe.

 

[LoneStar]

The worst part about Pep are his fans. They are unbearable and have this holier than thou attitude. Pretty sure a couple of Barca fans switched allegiance to City once he came here.

Seriously though, this City team is playing some amazing football. What is baffling to me is they even counter attack better than very team in the league. Jose has made us defensively well organised, however the lack of cohesion between our attacking players at this point in the season is quite concerning.

People saying we spent loads of money post Fergie are forgetting that Moyes and LVG bought absolute dross during their time. This coupled with the years of underinvestment during the last decade, has set us back a couple of years.

 

[GhastlyHun]

5 draws and 6 losses (draws all 0-0) at old trafford vs top 6 and no goals scored in 9 of those 11 suggests united can't do it either.

Sack Old Trafford, build a new Mourinho!

 

[Treble]

Both Jose and Pep are great managers. And it's great for football that they promote very different ways of winning titles.

I've always thought that Guardiola's approach is superior because it's bold, imaginative, spectacular and requires a lot of subtle coaching. Jose's approach is better for underdogs though. He's a very clever manager who knows how to exploit the weaknesses of the opposition. I don't like it very much because it's parasitic: you leave the opposition to try to create something and open spaces and then you try to capitalise on the risks it takes in the process. It's clever and it has often worked. Football has moved in the last years though and it is an open question whether Jose's approach can still win big things. The trophies from last season weren't exactly big and the competition for them was average: the likes of Soton, Celta, Ajax...

It's also an open question whether Pep's philosohy can win the CL with an English team or even the EPL.

 

[FCBarca]

The worst part about Pep are his fans. They are unbearable and have this holier than thou attitude. Pretty sure a couple of Barca fans switched allegiance to City once he came here.

The best part are the haters & bitter bunch who keep trying to reframe the criticism because they can't stomach how well his teams play despite praying for failure but sure Barcelona fans are switching allegiances. Whatever helps you sleep at night

 

[LoneStar]

The best part are the haters & bitter bunch who keep trying to reframe the criticism because they can't stomach how well his teams play despite praying for failure but sure Barcelona fans are switching allegiances. Whatever helps you sleep at night

Do you just selectively read posts critizing Pep daily? Read the rest of my post. Pretty much highlights what I said about Pep fans.

 

[B20]

You're quoting our away stats I believe.

I am. Got them mixed up in my head. Sorry.

 

[BlueSingh]

How did Jose had a tougher job, I can't understand this logic in all honesty. Pep faced similar issues that Jose had with his squad if not worse considering the type of football he wanted to implement has never been practiced before in this league.

The only difference is, Pep tackled the problems in a much better way than Jose.

Just like Jose, Pep got a squad that was no way near what was required, specially to play the high intensity attacking football which is much more difficult to implement.

Zabaleta, Sagna, Yaya, Clichy, Kolarov, Caballero, Hart, Fernando, Delph (at the time), Navas, Bony, Mangala were all either really old, or straight up trash and needed to get rid.

Aguero, Silva, and Kevin were all there but Pep changed their game with all of them having to up their defensive contributions, especially the latter two who saw their roles completely change from AM or wide midfielders to CM/no. 8s

 

[FCBarca]

Do you just selectively read posts critizing Pep daily? Read the rest of my post. Pretty much highlights what I said about Pep fans.

I comment on the petty things from time to time, can’t do it for all of them

 

[Theonas]

Both Jose and Pep are great managers. And it's great for football that they promote very different ways of winning titles.

I've always thought that Guardiola's approach is superior because it's bold, imaginative, spectacular and requires a lot of subtle coaching. Jose's approach is better for underdogs though. He's a very clever manager who knows how to exploit the weaknesses of the opposition. I don't like it very much because it's parasitic: you leave the opposition to try to create something and open spaces and then you try to capitalise on the risks it takes in the process. It's clever and it has often worked. Football has moved in the last years though and it is an open question whether Jose's approach can still win big things. The trophies from last season weren't exactly big and the competition for them was average: the likes of Soton, Celta, Ajax...

It's also an open question whether Pep's philosohy can win the CL with an English team or even the EPL.

Of course it is superior. This view that all styles or approaches are equal is something only underdogs technically limited players and or teams try to argue. There is a reason you will never find a team that has superior individual quality opt for a reactive approach and that reason is that it is something you only do when you are inferior. In any field really, creating and taking risks is more valuable, respected more and is the hardest thing to achieve. Having said that, getting a team of underdogs to punch above their weight the way Mourinho or Simeone could is also impressive in its own right. Team management wise, it is as impressive as any feat really. There is a difference however between how good of a job the manager does and how good the overall product is. Mourinho and Pep can both do great jobs in different ways, the final product of Pep's work however, even if he demands a lot to be able to produce it, is just incomparable to anyone in modern football.

 

[Chuckazulu]

Both Jose and Pep are great managers. And it's great for football that they promote very different ways of winning titles.

I've always thought that Guardiola's approach is superior because it's bold, imaginative, spectacular and requires a lot of subtle coaching. Jose's approach is better for underdogs though. He's a very clever manager who knows how to exploit the weaknesses of the opposition. I don't like it very much because it's parasitic: you leave the opposition to try to create something and open spaces and then you try to capitalise on the risks it takes in the process. It's clever and it has often worked. Football has moved in the last years though and it is an open question whether Jose's approach can still win big things. The trophies from last season weren't exactly big and the competition for them was average: the likes of Soton, Celta, Ajax...

It's also an open question whether Pep's philosohy can win the CL with an English team or even the EPL.

Of course it is superior. This view that all styles or approaches are equal is something only underdogs technically limited players and or teams try to argue. There is a reason you will never find a team that has superior individual quality opt for a reactive approach and that reason is that it is something you only do when you are inferior. In any field really, creating and taking risks is more valuable, respected more and is the hardest thing to achieve. Having said that, getting a team of underdogs to punch above their weight the way Mourinho or Simeone could is also impressive in its own right. Team management wise, it is as impressive as any feat really. There is a difference however between how good of a job the manager does and how good the overall product is. Mourinho and Pep can both do great jobs in different ways, the final product of Pep's work however, even if he demands a lot to be able to produce it, is just incomparable to anyone in modern football.

Great point by @Treble and a fantastic expansion by @Theonas

 

[dichinero]

Pep just came in more prepared for the task at hand

 

[11101]

It's simple for me

Both can win when they get the right players together
Both can go out and spend a fortune on getting the right players
Both can go and waste a fortune on players too
Only Jose can still win when the team isn't to his liking

 

[KirkDuyt]

I like the way Pep makes his teams play infinitely more than the way Mou makes his teams play.

Wages, salary, net spend, whatever. Mou would not make City play the way Pep makes them play. Results wise Mou is more pragmatic and better able to get results with teams that are not absolutely world class, but Pep is responsible for a type of football that I could for all intends and purposes describe as porn.

 

[Theonas]

It's simple for me

Both can win when they get the right players together
Both can go out and spend a fortune on getting the right players
Both can go and waste a fortune on players too
Only Jose can still win when the team isn't to his liking

Yea, the reason Pep had every big club in the club offering him the moon to come and join them is only because he can win. Bayern did not fire him, Barcelona wanted him back, we and City wanted him, Abramovic might as well begged him and there were reports that even Real were interested. Now contrast that with Mourinho? When we consider that on pure numbers, both are similar, Mourinho is actually better if anything. Why do you think there was and is such a difference in the pursuit and offers? Could it be maybe that because Pep brings with him much more than winning which is something big clubs are increasingly looking at? This also goes against him though because he is the only manager for whom it is not enough to simply win the league. Let's put it this way, if Man City win the league this year the same way Conte or Mourinho's Chelsea did, they will be applauded but there will be a sense of underachievement if the style does not match.

 

[melatonin]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[giorno]

Inter hadn't won the champions league for over 50 years before Mourinho and rarely challenged for it, they aren't even a top 10 club in the world, let's see Guardiola at a club without unlimited funds or a top 3 squad in the world.

Inter were a top 5 club in terms of money and top 5 team that season. They'd been one of the 5 biggest spenders in the world between 1996 and 2010. Just because they often spent badly and were run by incompetent men doesn't make Massimo Moratti-era Inter anything less than a super-club

How did Jose had a tougher job, I can't understand this logic in all honesty.

Guardiola took over the most talented team in the league, Mourinho the fifth

 

[BlueSingh]

Guardiola took over the most talented team in the league, Mourinho the fifth

City came 4th that season, a point or two above United.

 

[Womp]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I don't think either parties really consider it a rivalry tbh. They're both very good managers who just always seem to be in the spotlight as they seem to be the only managers capable of getting the better of the other.

 

[AXVnee7]

City came 4th that season, a point or two above United.

Not even points. City finished 4th ahead of United on goal difference.