Bob Paisley vs Sir Alex Ferguson

Lawman said:
Imo the Champs league is now a second rate comp compared to the old knock out format. Yes i'd love to win it another 100 times to have bragging rights but, imo its been lessened by letting teams that don't win their own leagues into the competition and also by having a league format inside the comp where imo in leagues the cream always come to the top, this is proven by the teams in the champs league format.
Click to expand...

Agree to a certain extent...the group stages are on par with the Carling cup with many kids getting a start or their first cap. If there wasn't a huge prize money involved, the top teams will field second string sides regularly in the group state of the competition and still expect to qualify.

The knockout stages are highly competitive. I doubt anyone can predict who will win the CL this year.
 
St Red said:
Using your logic for the league, is it far easier to win the Premier League than the old First Division.
Given that since the inception of the sky league, only 4 teams can realistically win it.
In fact, with the exception of Blackburns win, only you and Arsenal really challenged for it until 2005 when Chelsea won the lottery.
The Premier League has become similar to the SPL in that 80% of the teams in the league have no chance of winning it.

By contrast in the old Division One prior to our dominance, you had teams like Derby,Arsenal, Leeds, Man City. FFS, even Spurs and Ipswich won it in the 60's.
Even once our dominant period had started Forrest, Villa and Everton won the league.

So before demeaning the old European Cup, and our wins in it, look at the 2 horse race the premier League has become.
Click to expand...

I had never mentioned anywhere winning the premier league was much easier in the 80's infact the competition was more balanced, with the FA Cup throwing shit load of surprises and Liverpool were the most consistent one then. Even if any team went in an hibernation mode for an year or two, it wasn't tough to make a comeback.

Starting from the mid 90's the gulf in class between the top dogs and the rest steadily increased and these days it has only widened, and not winning the league is regarded as a disastrous season for atleast three out of the top four teams. With the obscene sum of money laundered in the transfer windows, teams cannot affort to relax for a season or two, rebuild again as the pressure to win has gone over the roof these days which makes Fergie's run more outstanding than Paisleys.

Nevertheless winning the old European cup was more easier, predominantly a cakewalk in many seasons if they manage to win their domestic leagues. Its for the reason highly succesful Brit managers of 70's and 80's barring Clough werent rated really high in the continent compared to Bayern or Ajax of the 70's. Ferguson got recognized as one amongst the elite in 99 when we knocked out all top continetal giants, enroute to the title run as the both the competition and competitiors were stiff.
 
vijay said:
I had never mentioned anywhere winning the premier league was much easier in the 80's.
Click to expand...

I know you didn't, I did.

I pointed out that the argument you put across that it was easier to win the European Cup in its old format can also be used to say that its easier to win the league now than it used to be.

So for those that try to demean our European Cup wins of the 70's and 80's, the same logic must apply to your league wins of the 90's and 00's.

Cant have it both ways in this comparison.
 
Funny how mancs say the old Euro Cup was easier to Win than the CL because LFC won 4. Yet,when we won the CL,that competition was "devalued".
What SAF has done in the last 16 years will never be repeated. What Paisley did in his 7 years will never be repeated.
The only thing you can compare is longevity. Saf should have gotten ouyt years ago,but the guy just won't leave.
 
njred said:
Funny how mancs say the old Euro Cup was easier to Win than the CL because LFC won 4. Yet,when we won the CL,that competition was "devalued".
What SAF has done in the last 16 years will never be repeated. What Paisley did in his 7 years will never be repeated.
The only thing you can compare is longevity. Saf should have gotten ouyt years ago,but the guy just won't leave.
Click to expand...

9 years.
Dont give them an excuse :lol:
 
St Red said:
9 years.
Dont give them an excuse :lol:
Click to expand...
You get the point. It's all about longevity. Nothing else. Except the Euro Cups. Paisley will never be touched on that one....never.
 
njred said:
Funny how mancs say the old Euro Cup was easier to Win than the CL because LFC won 4. Yet,when we won the CL,that competition was "devalued".
What SAF has done in the last 16 years will never be repeated. What Paisley did in his 7 years will never be repeated.
The only thing you can compare is longevity. Saf should have gotten ouyt years ago,but the guy just won't leave.
Click to expand...

do i dare mention the back pass rule?
 
Paisley was a great manager but Fergie is the most successful manage of all time and therfor has to be seen as the Greatest.

As regards the Champions League being harder to win that the old European Cup it certainly is. The old comp was a knocout competition and as we saw with last season FA CUP they are easier to win that a league format competition.

Saying that the current competition is devalued is illogical. I dont know how anyone can argue that the competiotion would be more difficult to win with the Champions of the likes of Irelands Eircom league in in place of teams like Chelsee Arsenal a Liverpool or the Spanish and Italian teams that get in despite not winning their league.
 
I think when you consider what they were given as a starting point, Fergie has done better overall. That said, I'd hold Shankly about Paisley in terms of management genius. Shankly took Liverpool from an average division two side and built something for Paisley to finish off - the best analogy I can think of is that Paisley was a great chef given a fantastic recipe that had little chance of turning out badly if followed even closely; the continuation by Fagan showed that.
 
don't know what any of the Liverpool lads think, but I remember Shankly's teams being very workmanlike and real grafters. Not a particularly good side to watch though. Paisley brought in a far more silky approach and they were much better to watch. Of course it pains to say it, but Ray Kennedy and McDermott in mf were absolutely masterful - and Ian Rush one of the greatest strikers I've ever seen. The basic "pass to the nearest red shirt and move" philosophy probably didn't change but the style sure did.

Four truly great managers.
 
Denis' cuff said:
don't know what any of the Liverpool lads think, but I remember Shankly's teams being very workmanlike and real grafters. Not a particularly good side to watch though. Paisley brought in a far more silky approach and they were much better to watch. Of course it pains to say it, but Ray Kennedy and McDermott in mf were absolutely masterful - and Ian Rush one of the greatest strikers I've ever seen. The basic "pass to the nearest red shirt and move" philosophy probably didn't change but the style sure did.

Four truly great managers.
Click to expand...

Good post, and agree with the four great managers comment.
It is not up for debate that Ferguson has won more honours than any British manager.

What will never be agreed on is who is actually the "greatest" manager.

On a side note, just interested to know how many people on here think Ryan Giggs is the greatest ever Man Utd player.
 
Denis' cuff said:
don't know what any of the Liverpool lads think, but I remember Shankly's teams being very workmanlike and real grafters. Not a particularly good side to watch though. Paisley brought in a far more silky approach and they were much better to watch. Of course it pains to say it, but Ray Kennedy and McDermott in mf were absolutely masterful - and Ian Rush one of the greatest strikers I've ever seen. The basic "pass to the nearest red shirt and move" philosophy probably didn't change but the style sure did.

Four truly great managers.
Click to expand...

When Liverpool, under Shanks, won their 2 league titles in the 60's (64 & 66). They scored 92 goals in 1964, & 79 goals in 1966. Compared to United's 2 successes during that same period (65 & 67). When they hit 89 goals in 1965, & 84 in 1967. So I can't quite see how we were, 'not a particularly good side to watch'.

I think you might be thinking of his later title winning side (1973). But you need to remember that from the late 60's, football in general adopted a more defensive style of play. When Leeds won the league in 1969, they scored a total of 66 goals. & for the next few years, very few title winning side, if any, scored more than 70 goals over the season.
 
redman5 said:
When Liverpool, under Shanks, won their 2 league titles in the 60's (64 & 66). They scored 92 goals in 1964, & 79 goals in 1966. Compared to United's 2 successes during that same period (65 & 67). When they hit 89 goals in 1965, & 84 in 1967. So I can't quite see how we were, 'not a particularly good side to watch'.

I think you might be thinking of his later title winning side (1973). But you need to remember that from the late 60's, football in general adopted a more defensive style of play. When Leeds won the league in 1969, they scored a total of 66 goals. & for the next few years, very few title winning side, if any, scored more than 70 goals over the season.
Click to expand...

I hate to have to do this, but in this post I totally agree with you. :)

I suppose even Scousers are like stopped clocks once in a while.
 
redman5 said:
When Liverpool, under Shanks, won their 2 league titles in the 60's (64 & 66). They scored 92 goals in 1964, & 79 goals in 1966. Compared to United's 2 successes during that same period (65 & 67). When they hit 89 goals in 1965, & 84 in 1967. So I can't quite see how we were, 'not a particularly good side to watch'.

I think you might be thinking of his later title winning side (1973). But you need to remember that from the late 60's, football in general adopted a more defensive style of play. When Leeds won the league in 1969, they scored a total of 66 goals. & for the next few years, very few title winning side, if any, scored more than 70 goals over the season.
Click to expand...

point taken - but it still doesn't make them an attractive side to watch. Not saying they were negative. In fact they were widely admired for their graft.

One thing I do remember around the early/mid 70s was Keegan complaining about Jack Charlton's Boro going to Anfield, shutting up shop and getting a 0-0 draw. It was in all the papers him saying "I'd rather go shopping with the Mrs than play in a game like that". Shortly after, (possibly even the next week) , Liverpool did the same thing at Old Trafford in a midweek game. Had every man behind the ball for most of the game. Bored us all silly and went home with a 0-0 draw. Steve Heighway had a blinder (Jeez, he could shift) and if he'd had a bit more support/outlet might've done better.
 
St Red said:
This is a comparison that could be and probably will be discussed for a long time.
There are very valid arguments for both being the greatest, but there is no dispute who has amassed the most honours.

Stats however can and will be used to suit each argument, for example, the fact that you ommitted to mention that Ferguson has taken 34 years of football management to win his honours, whereas Paisley won all his honours in only 9 years.
Click to expand...

In 9 of 10 discussions, I would agree with you, but not in this one, and I don't think many neutrals would either to be honest.

If you look at what Ferguson achieved - not just in his 9 best years - but in all the years when Shankly was merely a physio, when Paisley was just an assistant manager, when Stein was only, well what was he, before 67?

Actually, a fair comparison would be

Jock Stein + Bill Shankley + Bob Paisley = Alex Ferguson.
 
Grande said:
In 9 of 10 discussions, I would agree with you, but not in this one, and I don't think many neutrals would either to be honest.

If you look at what Ferguson achieved - not just in his 9 best years - but in all the years when Shankly was merely a physio, when Paisley was just an assistant manager, when Stein was only, well what was he, before 67?

Actually, a fair comparison would be

Jock Stein + Bill Shankley + Bob Paisley = Alex Ferguson.
Click to expand...

What an extremely disrespectful post.

Using your Stein logic, what was Ferguson before 1980?

Ferguson was Steins assistant for the Scottish national side, and took over after Stein tragically died, yet you dismiss Stein so readily because he didn't win bags of silverware prior to 1967.

Shankly was never a physio either, Paisley was.

And as for your fair comparison.............:wenger:
 
You can't really compare the two directly in terms of timeframes because of where they were at the time.

Paisley had inherited a side that was already top of the pile in terms of being best in the league and had a set up second to none at the time.
Ferguson inherited a group of players at Aberdeen who had the potential thanks to the preparation of McNeill and Macleod but still needed to become a team to take on the Old Firm. At United, Fergie inherited a side that was finished consistently 3rd or 4th under Atkinson but more importantly inherited a club that needed shaking up from the roots, a process that took a while to win any trophy and even though we pushed for 2nd in Choccy's first season, we were still a few players off the pace. Mourinho arguably inherited at Chelsea what Paisley inherited at Liverpool - a club capable of challenging immediately.
 
Grande said:
In 9 of 10 discussions, I would agree with you, but not in this one, and I don't think many neutrals would either to be honest.

If you look at what Ferguson achieved - not just in his 9 best years - but in all the years when Shankly was merely a physio, when Paisley was just an assistant manager, when Stein was only, well what was he, before 67?

Actually, a fair comparison would be

Jock Stein + Bill Shankley + Bob Paisley = Alex Ferguson.
Click to expand...

You could make a case for SAF being the best of the lot without disrespecting other legends' achievements.
 
Denis' cuff said:
point taken - but it still doesn't make them an attractive side to watch. Not saying they were negative.
Click to expand...
They weren't particularly attractive compared to the teams like Spurs and Everton who won it before them and Man Utd and City who won it after.
 
St Red said:
What an extremely disrespectful post.

Using your Stein logic, what was Ferguson before 1980?

Ferguson was Steins assistant for the Scottish national side, and took over after Stein tragically died, yet you dismiss Stein so readily because he didn't win bags of silverware prior to 1967.

Shankly was never a physio either, Paisley was.

And as for your fair comparison.............:wenger:
Click to expand...

Sorry for appearing to be disrespectful to these giants. They were of course true greats. I just sat reading biographies some years back and mused:

Stein with Dunfermline, Hibs and Celtic vs
Fergie with East Stirlingshire, St Mirren and Aberdeen.

I'd say Stein notches it, but not by much. Winning nine times with Celtic vs breaking the Firm Dominance with Aberdeen. It's close. Winning the E-cup with Celtic when Scottish football was comparatively better, vs beating Bayern, Hamburg and Real Madrid to take the CWC and Super Cup at a time when Scottish teams were cannon fodder in Europe. Possibly leans to Fergies side for me. Stein perhaps did more for Dunfermline than Fergie did by taking St Mirren from bottom of 1st up to the Premier Division.

All in all, I'd say Stein has an edge, but not a clear one. As for the rest of the comparison. Well, I don't think it's disrespectful, really.
 
peterstorey said:
They weren't particularly attractive compared to the teams like Spurs and Everton who won it before them and Man Utd and City who won it after.
Click to expand...

What I can't quite get my head around, is how people can pass opinions on other teams from 40 odd years ago, when there was very little, if any, football tv coverage - My opinions, for what they are worth, are based from standing in the boy's pen & watching the likes of Callaghan, Thompson, Hunt & St John regularly rip teams apart. In the 63/64 season, 4 teams suffered 6 goal thrashings at Anfield in the league. As strange as it may seem. I actually found that quite 'attractive'.
 
It's an opinion formed from seeing some live games over a few seasons, from TV (MOTD kicked in in '64 - first game Liverpool v Arsenal) and from the consensus in the media. FA Cup final of '65 was a typical performance - workmanlike and professional - not exactly thrilling.
 
green demon said:
I stand by the fact that Liverpool were dominating in England at the time of Paisley's appointment and had won the European Cup. If they weren't the best in Europe, and that's subjective, they were damned close. I've not denied that Paisley was a very good manager, even great - he was! But I do believe that Shankly was greater as he laid the foundations of what you went on to achieve under Paisley. I'm still not saying that things didn't get even better under Paisley because they did.

Jones, Case and Fairclough are not necessarily names that I would use as examples of Paisley's greatness - Case and Fairclough were two good workmanlike players and I don't even remember Joey Jones except for his name. Dalglish, Hansen, Souness I'll grant were very decent players but Shankly had very decent players before Paisley took over. Ferguson had to clear out a lot of dead wood when he went to United as well.

Someone used the examples of how having big squads today makes Fergie a lesser manager. I remember that Liverpool were always feted as having a bigger squad than their rivals, with more strength in depth, so that cancels that accusation out. (However I also remember Liverpool winning the league one year with only using 15 or 17 players - I can't remember who was the manager then).

Fergie's record speaks for itself - and the only ones that come close are Busby and Shankly. Paisley, Stein, Clough, Chapman and Wenger are the ones I'd put in the second tier.
Click to expand...

Paisley took over after Shankly quit after the 1974 FA Cup final. Liverpool won their first European Cup in 1977. Leeds were considered the best side in England in 1974. They won the league easily after opening with an unbeaten run of 29(?) games. Bayern Munich won the European Cup in 1974, 75 and 76. They should be considered Europe's top side at the time.

In about 1981, I remember a bloke arguing with me that Paisley was successful purely because he inherited Shankly's players. This is not true. Liverpool beat Newcastle in the 1974 Cup final with Clemence, Smith, Lindsay, Thompson, Cormack, Hughes, Keegan, Hall, Heighway, Toshack, Callaghan.

By the 1978 European Cup Final this was Clemence, Neal, Thompson, Hansen, Hughes, McDermott, Kennedy, Souness, Case (Callaghan), Fairclough, Dalglish.

On the subject of Joey Jones, he was popular among Liverpool fans but not rated as a great player. One of their songs (after he put another 20 yard screamer into the back of the terraces was "He shot, he missed, he must be fecking pissed, Joey Jones, Joey Jones".
 
green demon said:
Someone used the examples of how having big squads today makes Fergie a lesser manager. I remember that Liverpool were always feted as having a bigger squad than their rivals, with more strength in depth, so that cancels that accusation out. (However I also remember Liverpool winning the league one year with only using 15 or 17 players - I can't remember who was the manager then).
Click to expand...

That was under Shankly in the 1960s. Villa set the record in 1980/81 by using 14 players.

Jimmy Rimmer, Ken Swain, Ken McNaught, Dennis Mortimer, Des Bremner, Gordon Cowans and Tony Morley played all 42 matches. Gary Shaw (40), Allan Evans (39), Peter Withe (36), Gary Williams (21), Colin Gibson (19), David Geddis (8), Eamonn Deacy (5) were the other players. Villa also used a total of 8 substitutes - Deacy (4), Gibson (2), Williams and Geddis.

It was impossible to cater for quality players outside the first eleven in those days. As you can imagine bad luck with injuries could have a big impact on a club's title hopes.
 
St Red said:
On a side note, just interested to know how many people on here think Ryan Giggs is the greatest ever Man Utd player.
Click to expand...

No takers so far then, despite him winning the most silverware in Man Utd history?

Kind of rules out the popular theory that Ferguson is the greatest manager purely by virtue of having won the most trophies then ;)
 
St Red said:
No takers so far then, despite him winning the most silverware in Man Utd history?

Kind of rules out the popular theory that Ferguson is the greatest manager purely by virtue of having won the most trophies then ;)
Click to expand...
Shit comparison.

You've nothing but your results to be measured by as a manager. Not so as a player.
 
St Red said:
No takers so far then, despite him winning the most silverware in Man Utd history?

Kind of rules out the popular theory that Ferguson is the greatest manager purely by virtue of having won the most trophies then ;)
Click to expand...

By the same logic would you say Gerard Houllier was in the top 3 Liverpool managers of all time, having won 6 trophies within a period of 3 years?

Regarding Giggs, I dont think you can measure a player by the same standards as you measure a manager - without Giggs we would have still dominated the 90's & 00's - without Fergie who knows what would've happened.
 
St Red said:
No takers so far then, despite him winning the most silverware in Man Utd history?

Kind of rules out the popular theory that Ferguson is the greatest manager purely by virtue of having won the most trophies then ;)
Click to expand...

Which also excludes Paisley for the reason of winning his bag in nine years. I think you scored an o.g. there. ;)

So this brings us back to the start: who is the greater manager, Paisley or Ferguson, if pure stats are ignored?

Paisley took the best team in England and made them the best team in Europe.

Ferguson took a mid-table side in Scotland and made them the best in their own patch and won the ECWC with them. He also took a slumbering giant, and far from the best team in England (bottom half of the table when he took over), and made them the best team in Europe. Q.E.D.
 
032Devil said:
I'm often confused by Liverpool fans insistence that Paisley is both a better manager and won more trophies than SAF - in fact, I was just reading another comment on The Sun website where a Dipper commented: "fergie is a legend, up there with the very best sir bob still got 2 be no1 saf 2nd"

Looking at the Wiki pages on both men, here are the stats on them:


MANAGERIAL HONOURS

PAISLEY:

- League Championship: 1975/76, 1976/77, 1978/79, 1979/80, 1981/82, 1982/83
- League Cup: 1980/81, 1981/82, 1982/83
- European Cup: 1976/77, 1977/78, 1980/81
- UEFA Cup: 1975/76
- European Super Cup: 1977/78

That's a total of 14 competitions won

FERGUSON:

IN SCOTLAND
- Scottish First Division: 1976-77 (St Mirren)
- Aberdeen (1978–1986)
- Scottish Premier Division: 1979-80, 1983-84, 1984-85
- SFA Cup: 1981–82, 1982–83, 1983–84, 1985–86
- Scottish League Cup: 1985-86
- UEFA Cup Winners' Cup: 1982–83
- UEFA Super Cup: 1983-84

That's a total of 12 in Scotland

IN ENGLAND (MANCHESTER UNITED)
- Premier League: 1992–93, 1993–94, 1995–96, 1996–97, 1998–99, 1999–2000, 2000–01, 2002–03, 2006–07, 2007–08
- FA Cup: 1989–90, 1993–94, 1995–96, 1998–99, 2003–04
- League Cup: 1991–92, 2005–06
- UEFA Champions League: 1998–99, 2007–08
- UEFA Cup Winners' Cup: 1990–91
- UEFA Super Cup: 1991-92
- Intercontinental Cup: 1999

That's a total of 22* in England

As a career total Paisley has won 14 competition and Ferguson 34.



No competition or comparison really.

Exactly on what basis could Liverpool fans think that Paisley is superior to SAF?



*I have not included Charity Shields.
Click to expand...

3 European Cups? that's their only remaining leg to stand on.
 
dicko said:
Paisley took over after Shankly quit after the 1974 FA Cup final. Liverpool won their first European Cup in 1977. Leeds were considered the best side in England in 1974. They won the league easily after opening with an unbeaten run of 29(?) games. Bayern Munich won the European Cup in 1974, 75 and 76. They should be considered Europe's top side at the time.

In about 1981, I remember a bloke arguing with me that Paisley was successful purely because he inherited Shankly's players. This is not true. Liverpool beat Newcastle in the 1974 Cup final with Clemence, Smith, Lindsay, Thompson, Cormack, Hughes, Keegan, Hall, Heighway, Toshack, Callaghan.

By the 1978 European Cup Final this was Clemence, Neal, Thompson, Hansen, Hughes, McDermott, Kennedy, Souness, Case (Callaghan), Fairclough, Dalglish.

On the subject of Joey Jones, he was popular among Liverpool fans but not rated as a great player. One of their songs (after he put another 20 yard screamer into the back of the terraces was "He shot, he missed, he must be fecking pissed, Joey Jones, Joey Jones".
Click to expand...

Seven of the same players in 1977!

I'd say that is inheriting a side!
 
green demon said:
Which also excludes Paisley for the reason of winning his bag in nine years. I think you scored an o.g. there. ;)

So this brings us back to the start: who is the greater manager, Paisley or Ferguson, if pure stats are ignored?

Paisley took the best team in England and made them the best team in Europe.

Ferguson took a mid-table side in Scotland and made them the best in their own patch and won the ECWC with them. He also took a slumbering giant, and far from the best team in England (bottom half of the table when he took over), and made them the best team in Europe. Q.E.D.
Click to expand...


Liverpool were not the best team in England when Paisley took over, Leeds were, by far.
Look at their achievments in the 6 years prior to Paisley taking over at Anfield.
2 Uefa Cups
1 European cup Winners Cup
1 League Cup
1 FA Cup
2 League titles.

They also reached the European Cup semi final during that period, and European finals either side of that 6 year period.

Paisley turned a team that were challenging to be the best in England, into a team that were by far the best in England and Europe.
 
St Red said:
Oh dear :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Great success with two different clubs in two different countries.

Won every single trophy there is to win, a number of times.

Managed to break up a duopoly in Scotland, whilst managed to keep United successful and the best team in the country over a period of 15 years, after rebuilding the club more or less from scratch.

No other manager has managed to achieve this over the last 30 years.
 
St Red said:
Liverpool were not the best team in England when Paisley took over, Leeds were, by far.
Look at their achievments in the 6 years prior to Paisley taking over at Anfield.
2 Uefa Cups
1 European cup Winners Cup
1 League Cup
1 FA Cup
2 League titles.

They also reached the European Cup semi final during that period, and European finals either side of that 6 year period.

Paisley turned a team that were challenging to be the best in England, into a team that were by far the best in England and Europe.
Click to expand...

You don't like Shankly do you? Leeds had gone off the boil, Liverpool had won the League, the UEFA Cup and FA Cup in the 12 months prior to Paisley taking over. FACT. Liverpool were comfortably the best team in England in 1974. FACT. Paisley took this team and improved on it. FACT.

Without the team being in such a position before he took over, he would not have achieved half as much. ALMOST CERTAINLY.

The fact that you quote Leeds' trophy winning history, when you've already said that the sheer number of trophies won proves nothing, is funny to be honest.

The fact that you chose to ignore the vast improvements Ferguson made to Aberdeen AND Manchester United, starting from a lower position in each case than Paisley did from his shows a remarkable case of :wenger: on your part.

Your previous arguments put together rather prove that Ferguson is comfortably the greater manager of the two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.