- Joined
- Apr 16, 2018
- Messages
- 393
I agree with this. No amount of context that could be applied would put Klopp ahead of Pep.
Guardiola has won 27 trophies, 17 majors.
Klopp has won 6 trophies, 4 majors.
Simeone on another hand has won 9 trophies, 6 majors. Would you put him ahead of Mourinho who has 25 trophies, 20 majors? Afterall, both are not exactly known for their swashbuckling footballing, but Mourinho outspent everyone at Chelsea, and walked into Real Madrid and Manchester United jobs? That is not how it works. Mourinho and Guardiola are far more successful managers, so they are easily above the other two.
Dude you have to understand that Klopp doesn't choose ready made clubs. He literally said he prefers clubs that are like sleeping giants where he has the time to build them up. If you want to judge him based on trophies then he needs to go to a team with players near the quality of City or Bayern when Pep went. He went to Liverpool with shit like Mignolet, Sakho, Allen, Ibe etc and had to replace them year by year.
He literally used up several years to build up a team by gradually replacing shit with a quality player or two each season and having to battle for a CL spot at first to get the money to do this.
They are different kind of managers so you can't use trophies to compare them. I do still think Guardiola is the best but you need to understand where Klopp is coming from.
I would put him ahead of Mourinho because I feel if given the same resources Klopp would win just as much as Mourinho. He literally gets the better of Mourinho most times (I said MOST) with much less resources when they meet. Look at the Dortmund-Madrid game where Mourinho was completely tactically owned (never saw Mourinho like that in the CL before). He has a better head to head record against Mourinho as well by far. I don't feel Mourinho would do anywhere near as well with the resources Klopp has had.