Who you rate the highest Pep, Klopp or Tuchel?

[footballistic orgasm]

Saying Pep needs best squad to win is bs but Klopp only wants team that will give him time and doesn't have pressure to win

Either both are true or both are bs.

How so? They're not mutually exclusive things. Barca when Pep arrived was not the best team in Spain (hadn't won anything in 2 years and finished 19points behind Madrid) and Pep went to Dortmund where there was no pressure to win immediately, and after that went to Liverpool where he had time to build.
You can clearly see that both aren't the same thing.

Xavi and Iniesta won a lot for Spain. They did not just perform under Pep and they won even before Pep Euro 2008.

Messi is a special talent and it is not just Pep making him good.

What does the fact that they won the Euros before Pep arrived have to do with anything? Italy just won the Euros, so are you suggesting that Chiesa or Jorginho amongst others are world-class players?
Talking about Spain, you can't deny the fact that they imitated Barca's style of play a lot more from 2009 with more Barca players in the team (there were only 3 in 2008), they played differently during the Euros in 2008.

Good thing I never said it was just Pep that made Messi good right?

Nothing to do with Iniesta, Xavi, Messi being on Peps team

Klopp is the best.

The same team lost to United the year before. The same team also lost some other important games, so how does it work? When they win, it was thanks to the players and when they lose it was Pep's fault?

The idea to play Xavi and Iniesta (just like Silva and KDB) together through the middle had to come from somewhere right? I'm sure you believe just anyone could have come up with those ideas.

Funny how some of you are trying so hard to argue against the opinions of these great players about Pep being a great coach when they actually know better.

 

[SCP]

Klopp.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Pep. Stamped his style i both Germany and England post Barca and still won. Its harder than Klopp's style to play

 

[roonster09]

How so? They're not mutually exclusive things. Barca when Pep arrived was not the best team in Spain (hadn't won anything in 2 years and finished 19points behind Madrid) and Pep went to Dortmund where there was no pressure to win immediately, and after that went to Liverpool where he had time to build.
You can clearly see that both aren't the same thing.

And 2 year + 2 months, they were double winners. Ofcourse he did well and undeniably they had superb team too just like he had superb squad at Bayern and City.

Pep didn't go to Dortmund, Klopp signed for Dortmund and it's not because there was less pressure. It's because Klopp was upcoming manager who managed small club. Dortmund took chance on him.

So Pep choosing best squads is as true as Klopp choosing clubs without pressure. Or maybe both are bs statements and circumstances played big role, where big clubs wanted Pep who obviously will have best squads and Liverpool were lucky to land Klopp as the timing was right with Rodgers sacking.

 

[DoneDaDa]

I’d love to see what klopp would be capable of given the mind boggling resources and players Pep’s been gifted at Barca, Bayern, city.

At Barca he inherited all time greats like messi, xavi, iniesta, busquets and then threw money at zlatan, David silva, fabregas, dani alves, mascherano, pique, alexis Sanchez.

At Bayern he inherited heynckes’s unstoppable squad and was given the resources to add the likes of Vidal, lewandowski, Kimmich, Thiago, coman, a peak gotze.

At city, he’s been allowed to spend several hundred million to add to what was already the most expensively assembled squad in the history of the EPL.

He‘s the most financially backed manager in the history of the game (bar perhaps mourinho), and that leaves an asterisk beside all his achievements for me.

True, the counter argument goes that not everyone could achieve what he did with that Barca side even with those players at their disposal, but that’s a false argument. The comparison being made here isn’t between pep and mediocrity like tata martino, but between pep and his competitive peers like klopp.

That's because no one is able to deliver with the result, style and consistency he has.

There are 2 other manager who have probably been at the top clubs for as long as he has:

Carlo Ancelotti - Juve, AC Milan, Chelsea, PSG, Real Madrid and Bayern Munich - 17 years = 20 titles - 4 leagues + 3 CL = 7 Major honors - just a little over 1 title per season

Jose Mourinho - Chelsea x2, Real Madrid, Manchester United - 12 years = 14 titles - 4 leagues titles + 0 CL = 4 Major honors - just a little over 1 title per season

Pep Guardiola - Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Manchester City - 12 years = 31 titles - 9 league + 2 CL = 11 Major honors - Close to averaging 3 titles per season

Ancelotti + Mou combined have 34 titles compared to Pep alone who has 31, while they combine have 11 major honors equal to Pep major honors.

As I said nobody deliver quite like Pep, its a fact at the end. One can criticize and question his CL record, but overall he's been a monster of a manager delivering at and exceptionally high level.

Coaching at the top is not easy, Pep knows how to deal with pressure, how to handle squad full of egos, while managing expectation. Bayern Munich is one of the most ruthless run clubs despite that Pep was there longest serving managers in over 2 decades (last one was Hitzfled I believe) despite his CL exits and they even wanted to extend him there, clearly the higher ups are most always happy with his work, like wise at City think most managers would've been sacked losing to Monaco, Lyon and Spurs in the CL, despite the club maintains its trust. Pep players are always warriors and literally run through walls for him, not everybody can do this and it isn't as common as most want people to believe it is.

 

[adexkola]

1. If winning as an underdog or with a cheap squad was the only thing that mattered in terms of managerial quality, then Claudio Ranieri would be the greatest manager in history. It's not, so he's not. And all rating systems that use this metric alone are similarly invalid.

2. There is no point in recapping the sorry state Barcelona were in pre-Pep (I've been in too many of these discussions to even bother clipping in articles at the time which demonstrated the magnitude of what Pep accomplished there) because people will believe what they want to believe regarding this topic (Big Sam could have won 3 CL trophies in a row with that Barcelona, etc).

3. Tuchel doesn't belong in this conversation honestly. Not in the same tier as the first two. That's that on that.

4. Klopp is an amazing coach and tactician. However the two trophies he's won with Liverpool along with the narrative of reawakening a sleeping giant, has allowed for people to skate over the issue of whether he can rebuild a new team** (now that Mane and Firmino look past their best). His efforts to inject more creativity/depth into the midfield have been mid at best (Ox, Thiago, Keita). Can he evolve his tactics in order to stay on top? That's the biggest question I have with him.

5. Gengenpressing (sp) became a meme a year into Klopp's tenure at Liverpool, but it's really fascinating in retrospect to see how Klopp reined in the most explosive parts of his early tenure at Liverpool, while drilling his team to ruthlessly exploit any mistakes made in transition play by the opposition. We give credit to Pep (rightly so) for his innovation regarding possession play, well Klopp deserves credit for his innovation regarding transition play. It's simply fascinating how City play Liverpool now, compared to 4/5 years ago.

6. This is a thought experiment I like to play. Throw Pep into a time machine going back 5 or so years. Install him as manager of Liverpool, with the same squad and resources available to Klopp. Fast forward to today. Does he end up trophyless? I don't think so. He's proven himself as an excellent tactician, man manager, and ability to get the best out of "limited" players, and use talented players in roles that minimize their weaknesses and amplify their strengths. There is no reason why his skillset isn't transferable down the table. Barring Burnley of course.

7. With that all being said, if you take only difficulty of resources into consideration, Raineri >>> Benitez >> Klopp >>> Pep. If you take a holistic approach considering depth of tactical knowledge, man management, ability to squeeze every drop out of the lemon, trophies won, peer acknowledgements, dominance of play (to clarify here, Mourinho's first Chelsea team was nearly as dominant in imposing their will on the opposition as Pep's Barcelona was)... Then Pep and Klopp are nearly inseparable for me. I'd give the nod to Pep because of the sheer disparity in trophies won, but there's no reason Klopp can't cover that ground by the end of both their careers.

8. Tuchel doesn't belong in the conversation. Simeone I'd place above him. And Allegri. Very good manager though.

*In these kind of conversations it's important to remember that these people of whom we speak have forgotten more football than all of us combined know, and I rate the assessments by their peers as Grade A evidence of their quality. The Caf? Doesn't even register in comparison.

**Given that this is a United forum, this quality is deemed most important as it validates SAF's position as the GOAT, seeing this was probably his strongest quality. Strangely, it's not been used as a stick to beat Klopp with

 

[Ixion]

I don't rate Pep at all. Taking the Bayern and City jobs are the easiest challenges possible.

 

[Dancfc]

All of them worse managers than prime Wegner, SAF and Mourinho.

Fergie yes, Mourinho maybe (in regards to Pep) but not having Wenger.

He had a team that should have dominated Europe but never even achieved back to back titles.

 

[Dancfc]

I don't rate Pep at all. Taking the Bayern and City jobs are the easiest challenges possible.

His job at Barca gives him the right to take whatever job he wants until he shows evident signs of decline. Would you take even if shifts on A and E reception if you were a qualified surgeon?

Also if winning at Bayern was so easy, why was only three titles in a row done for them only once before? And four never?

 

[432JuanMata]

I don't rate Pep at all. Taking the Bayern and City jobs are the easiest challenges possible.

But that shows how well he would do here. He might of spent 1 billion at City but since then we nearly spend the same so if he came here instead we be winning titles

 

[Tonicruise]

Klopp in my opinon. Took over a bankcrupt Dortmund without any financial capabilties and lead them to 2 straight league titles aswell as a CL final and basically single handled solidified them as a top 10 european club, from where they were before to where they are now it's just remarkable.

What he did at Liverpool is equally impressive he had more financial flexibility (nothing like Pep) sure, but still how he managed to make change Liverpool from being a team who barely got top 4 and was more or less having a seasonal ticket in the EL to where they are today, surely amazing. With all respect to the likes of Henderson and Milner, to win the PL and CL with those kind of players that's just hats off to Klopp

His football is just (subjectivly ofc) a lot more entertaining to watch.


Pep screwed up to many SF for us for me to put him on even close to the same level, that he failed to win the CL with Bayern with the team we had it just should not (ever) have happend.

 

[432JuanMata]

While rating Klopp even top for what he has done at pool it’s a no brainer to take Pep here as now we spend and he would be the best option with the resources we have

 

[Daysleeper]

Nothing to do with Iniesta, Xavi, Messi being on Peps team

Klopp is the best.

2009 united were favoured and saf fell apart

 

[Giggsy13]

1. OLE
















2. THE REST.

 

[432JuanMata]

2009 united were favoured and saf fell apart

Bookies wise they weren’t but it was close. It was due too us being defending champions but anyone with eyes knew it was going to be insanely hard

 

[Daysleeper]

Bookies wise they weren’t but it was close. It was due too us being defending champions but anyone with eyes knew it was going to be insanely hard

fair enough

 

[telstar96]

1. If winning as an underdog or with a cheap squad was the only thing that mattered in terms of managerial quality, then Claudio Ranieri would be the greatest manager in history. It's not, so he's not. And all rating systems that use this metric alone are similarly invalid.

2. There is no point in recapping the sorry state Barcelona were in pre-Pep (I've been in too many of these discussions to even bother clipping in articles at the time which demonstrated the magnitude of what Pep accomplished there) because people will believe what they want to believe regarding this topic (Big Sam could have won 3 CL trophies in a row with that Barcelona, etc).

3. Tuchel doesn't belong in this conversation honestly. Not in the same tier as the first two. That's that on that.

4. Klopp is an amazing coach and tactician. However the two trophies he's won with Liverpool along with the narrative of reawakening a sleeping giant, has allowed for people to skate over the issue of whether he can rebuild a new team** (now that Mane and Firmino look past their best). His efforts to inject more creativity/depth into the midfield have been mid at best (Ox, Thiago, Keita). Can he evolve his tactics in order to stay on top? That's the biggest question I have with him.

5. Gengenpressing (sp) became a meme a year into Klopp's tenure at Liverpool, but it's really fascinating in retrospect to see how Klopp reined in the most explosive parts of his early tenure at Liverpool, while drilling his team to ruthlessly exploit any mistakes made in transition play by the opposition. We give credit to Pep (rightly so) for his innovation regarding possession play, well Klopp deserves credit for his innovation regarding transition play. It's simply fascinating how City play Liverpool now, compared to 4/5 years ago.

6. This is a thought experiment I like to play. Throw Pep into a time machine going back 5 or so years. Install him as manager of Liverpool, with the same squad and resources available to Klopp. Fast forward to today. Does he end up trophyless? I don't think so. He's proven himself as an excellent tactician, man manager, and ability to get the best out of "limited" players, and use talented players in roles that minimize their weaknesses and amplify their strengths. There is no reason why his skillset isn't transferable down the table. Barring Burnley of course.

7. With that all being said, if you take only difficulty of resources into consideration, Raineri >>> Benitez >> Klopp >>> Pep. If you take a holistic approach considering depth of tactical knowledge, man management, ability to squeeze every drop out of the lemon, trophies won, peer acknowledgements, dominance of play (to clarify here, Mourinho's first Chelsea team was nearly as dominant in imposing their will on the opposition as Pep's Barcelona was)... Then Pep and Klopp are nearly inseparable for me. I'd give the nod to Pep because of the sheer disparity in trophies won, but there's no reason Klopp can't cover that ground by the end of both their careers.

8. Tuchel doesn't belong in the conversation. Simeone I'd place above him. And Allegri. Very good manager though.

*In these kind of conversations it's important to remember that these people of whom we speak have forgotten more football than all of us combined know, and I rate the assessments by their peers as Grade A evidence of their quality. The Caf? Doesn't even register in comparison.

**Given that this is a United forum, this quality is deemed most important as it validates SAF's position as the GOAT, seeing this was probably his strongest quality. Strangely, it's not been used as a stick to beat Klopp with

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Pep and Klopp are both legends of the game, at least for this current era and are pretty much impossible to separate.

The disrespect Pep gets is incredible. People use a lot of hindsight in their assessment of his Barca team and forget what he did to transform that team. I think a great example is the Champions League Semi Final in 2008. Tough game against a good Barcelona side but overall United got the better of them. Fast forward 1 year and we got spanked by virtually the same side minus Ronaldinho and Deco as they secured the treble. That's managerial brilliance in my opinion.

With Klopp, he's criminally underrated as a tactician. I'm not being funny, but to be able to find a role in your team for Jordan Henderson and turn him into one of the best midfielders in Europe is unbelievable. Only a great tactician is able to do that. Pep is similar with this ability. He turned Pedro into an absolute killer of a forward.

I like Tuchel. Definitely not on the same level of Pep and Klopp, but I reckon he has the talent to get to their level in the future. Only time will tell.

 

[432JuanMata]

fair enough

Also I don’t think 09 SAF got much wrong at all. I feel 2011 he did though. We were a shadow of a side in 2011 and he went out with the attitude that we are Man Utd so we were open when we should of sat deep.

 

[Cnaiür urs Skiötha]

I always wanted Klopp to succeed SAF, for me his energetic approach is in a way the evolution of Fergie‘s style.
Guardiola is probably „the best“ from a neutral point of view when it comes to analytics and tactics.
For us Tuchel would have been perfect as he did quite a good job of handling the individual stars at PSG and get the best out of them as a team.

 

[JJ12]

2009 united were favoured and saf fell apart

Xavi, Iniesta, Messi. Keep crying.

 

[Daysleeper]

Xavi, Iniesta, Messi. Keep crying.

Looks like you’re the one crying mate, twice during those finals.

United were favoured in 2009 heading into that final:

https://www.oddsportal.com/soccer/europe/champions-league-2008-2009/results/

 

[matt10000]

Pep. Stamped his style i both Germany and England post Barca and still won. Its harder than Klopp's style to play

Yes, in order to play this way you have to buy better players than the opposition has

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Yes, in order to play this way you have to buy better players than the opposition has

The players matter way less than coaching them to play that way consistently and win consistenly that way too. It's not like he has the best XI in his league let alone in Europe.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

That's right I was referring to what I'm seeing at Chelsea and not the other clubs. He's good but he's no Pep or Klopp. Pep especially has revolutionized the game at Barca. Not so much at City but he's a brilliant tactician overall.

Did Pep really revolutionize a thing? He simply brought back Rinus Michels and Johan Cruyffs' football to the modern era. I'd credit him rather for showing it can still be consistently used to win.


I'd say Klopp is the one who revolutionized the game with his particular brand of geggen pressing that he calls "heavy metal football". I don't believe any coach does it better than him though he is being copied up and down europe

 

[adexkola]

Did Pep really revolutionize a thing? He simply brought back Rinus Michels and Johan Cruyffs' football to the modern era. I'd credit him rather for showing it can still be consistently used to win.


I'd say Klopp is the one who revolutionized the game with his particular brand of geggen pressing that he calls "heavy metal football". I don't believe any coach does it better than him though he is being copied up and down europe

Definition of revolutionize: to change fundamentally or completely

Unless you're thinking it means invention, then yes, he did revolutionize football from 2008 onwards.

 

[Von Mistelroum]

Pep is good as long as he has ridiculous levels of resources but without seeing how he would do at a club where everything isn’t in his favour I couldn’t rank him up with the top managers of our time.

 

[adexkola]

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Pep and Klopp are both legends of the game, at least for this current era and are pretty much impossible to separate.

The disrespect Pep gets is incredible. People use a lot of hindsight in their assessment of his Barca team and forget what he did to transform that team. I think a great example is the Champions League Semi Final in 2008. Tough game against a good Barcelona side but overall United got the better of them. Fast forward 1 year and we got spanked by virtually the same side minus Ronaldinho and Deco as they secured the treble. That's managerial brilliance in my opinion.

With Klopp, he's criminally underrated as a tactician. I'm not being funny, but to be able to find a role in your team for Jordan Henderson and turn him into one of the best midfielders in Europe is unbelievable. Only a great tactician is able to do that. Pep is similar with this ability. He turned Pedro into an absolute killer of a forward.

I like Tuchel. Definitely not on the same level of Pep and Klopp, but I reckon he has the talent to get to their level in the future. Only time will tell.

Yep, and like I said, there is no point wasting energy in trying to convince someone of a manager's merits, when said manager has been provided with the highest accolades by players and other managers alike.

It's telling that the Liverpool City matchups in recent times, in terms of quality, match/nearly match the quality of El Classico from a few years ago.

 

[Tincanalley]

Let's compare their current power. It doesn't make sense to compare their whole careers. If careers, then 1) Pep 2) Klopp 3) Tuchel. But I mean nowadays it is obvious that Pep is struggling, isn't it? So TODAY I rate them:
1) Tuchel. Two CL finals in a row and 1 win. Classy football, beat Pep 3 times in a row. Impressive draw at Anfield with 10 players against Klopp. Total control of the team and tactical flexibility. Incredible match changing skill. Confident PL run.
2) Klopp. Also confident PL run. But too dependent on his players and tactically limited. He has his ideal 4-3-3, but not more.
3) Pep. He is like a mad genius. He doesn't know how to beat Chelsea. He doesn't know how to win the CL after Barca with Ovrebe and Messi/Xavi/Iniesta/Puyol/Alves. Very good PL coach, who won it 3 of 4 times. But this season his team played some weird matches, and it looks like Pep's tired.

Fun post - I am entertained

 

[Dancfc]

Pep is good as long as he has ridiculous levels of resources but without seeing how he would do at a club where everything isn’t in his favour I couldn’t rank him up with the top managers of our time.

Why should he? He created arguably the best team of all time which gives him the pick of top jobs until he shows clear signs of decline.

If you were a great surgeon wanted by every top hospital in the world would you take shift work at reception in a small hospital in Cornwall?

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Definition of revolutionize: to change fundamentally or completely

Unless you're thinking it means invention, then yes, he did revolutionize football from 2008 onwards.

My point is he changed nothing fundamentally. He simply recycled Cruyff's and Michel's principles. I honestly do not see anything he changed radically. He also doesn't play a brand of football almost any side can use nor did he spark a trend of possession football that spawned many copy cats.

Klopp on the other fundamentally changed the principles of pressing football (which was possession and position based) and made its focus totally transition based whilst also eliminating reliance on creative play makers which are the hardest players to find next to consistent goal scorers. Sparking many copy cats. Up and down the football pyramid, world wide

 

[adexkola]

Why should he? He created arguably the best team of all time which gives him the pick of top jobs until he shows clear signs of decline.

If you were a great surgeon wanted by every top hospital in the world would you take shift work at reception in a small hospital in Cornwall?

Yes. Because he would be horrified at the notion that someone on the Caf thought he couldn't hack it in Cromwell A&E on a cold, wet windy Tuesday night

My point is he changed nothing fundamentally. He simply recycled Cruyff's and Michel's principles. I honestly do not see anything he changed radically. He also doesn't play a brand of football almost any side can use nor did he spark a trend of possession football that spawned many copy cats.

Gegenpressing was invented by Ralf Rangnick so by your silly interpretion of "revolutionary", both managers (who are also disciples of Sacchi) are mere copycats. Plus, Guardiola has evolved his tactics since coming into the scene in 2008, so unless you're saying that everything he has done in 13 years is a direct copy of Cruyff and Michels, then there's a contradiction somewhere. Not to mention some of the best coaches in the world (Lippi for one) have used that exact term when describing him...

Not to continue this conversation, if you don't see it that's fine

 

[mu4c_20le]

Why should he? He created arguably the best team of all time which gives him the pick of top jobs until he shows clear signs of decline.

If you were a great surgeon wanted by every top hospital in the world would you take shift work at reception in a small hospital in Cornwall?

He didn't say that he should, he said he didn't. Which is why many still rate Klopp ahead of him.

 

[Swedish_Plumber]

What pep and his Barca side achieved was outstanding. However Klopp has turned two average teams into league winners on relatively low budgets compared to direct competitors. Klopp would suit United more too. Pep has gone to two already established teams since Barca and made them into juggernauts. It’s just Klopp for me.
But this thread just serves as more depressing reminders that we failed to bring either in. What the feck were we playing at?

 

[stefan92]

What pep and his Barca side achieved was outstanding. However Klopp has turned two average teams into league winners on relatively low budgets compared to direct competitors. Klopp would suit United more too. Pep has gone to two already established teams since Barca and made them into juggernauts. It’s just Klopp for me.
But this thread just serves as more depressing reminders that we failed to bring either in. What the feck were we playing at?

Pep at Bayern would not have been possible in the same way without van Gaal creating the foundation for that team.

It was an understandable decision to go for van Gaal to implement a style, but while Bayern signed Heynckes and then Pep who both refined that style. United tried to completely get rid of that style, that was the mistake.

 

[Dancfc]

He didn't say that he should, he said he didn't. Which is why many still rate Klopp ahead of him.

If Pep's going to have an asterisk due to not "taking a challenge" then surely likewise has to be stuck on Klopp until he takes a job where there's genuine expectation to win all the time? Would he have been so easily able to convince the Real Madrid board to buy into a medium term process or convince the Bernabeu crowd to see the bright side of a 2-2 home draw to whoever Spain's version of West Brom is? For all we know he could actually be aware of all of this hence why he's stayed away from win at all costs jobs (compare that to Tuchel after leaving BVB who's relished the challenge of such).

What's to say Klopp wouldn't get "found out" having to win most weeks while also having to try and convince huge egos to buy into his gegenpressing?

 

[mu4c_20le]

If Pep's going to have an asterisk due to not "taking a challenge" then surely likewise has to be stuck on Klopp until he takes a job where there's genuine expectation to win all the time? Would he have been so easily able to convince the Real Madrid board to buy into a medium term process or convince the Bernabeu crowd to see the bright side of a 2-2 home draw to whoever Spain's version of West Brom is? For all we know he could actually be aware of all of this hence why he's stayed away from win at all costs jobs (compare that to Tuchel after leaving BVB who's relished the challenge of such).

What's to say Klopp wouldn't get "found out" having to win most weeks while also having to try and convince huge egos to buy into his gegenpressing?

Well, you're using Madrid as an example, a notoriously impatient club. Pep didn't go to Madrid, he went to Bayern, where he achieved the minimum expectations of picking up the league every year. IMO despite building an attractive side, he failed in Europe where it counts. Klopp edges him by building projects and bringing greatness to clubs that weren't at the top. At Liverpool he definitely had expectations, since the guy he was replacing had actually brought them to within a few inches of the title. I mean, its not all Pep's fault, but using your surgeon analogy, he's like the yuppie born and grew up in a top hospital, with a silver spoon in his mouth, so I think it's normal when people wonder how he would fare in a lesser environment.

 

[adexkola]

Well, you're using Madrid as an example, a notoriously impatient club. Pep didn't go to Madrid, he went to Bayern, where he achieved the minimum expectations of picking up the league every year. IMO despite building an attractive side, he failed in Europe where it counts. Klopp edges him by building projects and bringing greatness to clubs that weren't at the top. At Liverpool he definitely had expectations, since the guy he was replacing had actually brought them to within a few inches of the title. I mean, its not all Pep's fault, but using your surgeon analogy, he's like the yuppie born and grew up in a top hospital, with a silver spoon in his mouth, so I think it's normal when people wonder how he would fare in a lesser environment.

We need to specify that the people who are in this genuine haze as to how Pep would fare in a lesser environment are not involved in making managerial hiring decisions at any top flight club across Europe.

But otherwise, carry on

 

[Dancfc]

Well, you're using Madrid as an example, a notoriously impatient club. Pep didn't go to Madrid, he went to Bayern, where he achieved the minimum expectations of picking up the league every year. IMO despite building an attractive side, he failed in Europe where it counts. Klopp edges him by building projects and bringing greatness to clubs that weren't at the top. At Liverpool he definitely had expectations, since the guy he was replacing had actually brought them to within a few inches of the title. I mean, its not all Pep's fault, but using your surgeon analogy, he's like the yuppie born and grew up in a top hospital, with a silver spoon in his mouth, so I think it's normal when people wonder how he would fare in a lesser environment.

I can replace Madrid with Bayern, Barca, us or even City, none would have waited for 4 years and if he even dared try to glorify a home draw to fodder he'd have been chased out of the city.

I'm not saying Liverpool is a free hit but there certainly isn't the sheer expectation to constantly win there is at other big teams/clubs. Case in point, Tuchel will likely (touch wood) have 3/4 of Klopp's trophy haul in less than a year in the job yet if we were told one of those two will be sacked at the end of this season who will almost everyone be putting their money on?

And regarding my analogy, being brought up in favourable environments certainly helps get you up the ladder quicker and sometimes even gets you positions before you've 'earned' them but that can only take you so far, you will have to show your ability in the field you're in to maintain your role in the medium to long term (Brooklyn Beckham in football and Paul Ince in management two examples of people who couldn't take advantage of their leg up by association).

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Gegenpressing was invented by Ralf Rangnick so by your silly interpretion of "revolutionary", both managers (who are also disciples of Sacchi) are mere copycats. Plus, Guardiola has evolved his tactics since coming into the scene in 2008, so unless you're saying that everything he has done in 13 years is a direct copy of Cruyff and Michels, then there's a contradiction somewhere.

1. You are the one conflating invention and revolutionizing. I never did.
2. I seriously doubt you know ANY of the playing principles Rinus Michel's created and Cruyff taught Pep as a player. Because the game he plays didn't change a thing to use it in the modern game. Its like you are under the illusion the exact tactical template of possession, positioning and pressing, with emphasis on making the pitch wide, pressing like rats, technical skill and intelligence on the ball over size, keeper as the first attacker and striker as the first defender, 2 diamonds in team shape for best passing angles, resting in possession et all can't be used in the modern game. Yet Pep at club level and Spain in their dominant period at international football used the exact same template to outstanding success. It hasn't failed Pep yet

3. Ralf Ragnick invented a particular brand of counter pressing: With emphasis on positional fluidity. Much harder to coach and repeat than the spin Klopp put on it. You would know this if you actually knew the fundamental difference between Klopp's use of it and the inventor's use of it. That is why I listed Klopp as revolutionary because of that difference that many coaches have taken up as a trend.

Not to mention some of the best coaches in the world (Lippi for one) have used that exact term when describing him...

So what? I don't in form my opinions based on theirs.

Not to continue this conversation.....

Great to the bolded bit. I'm not in the mood of re explaining a previous because someone completely missed the point the first time

 

[adexkola]

So what? I don't in form my opinions based on theirs.

That's obvious