Is Pep the greatest manager of all time?

[Iker Quesadillas]

The reason we envy their bench is befause mahrez and grelaish two players signed for 160m who would have walked into our side from Leicester and villa sit on their bench.

Jack Graelish was one of the 11 most used players for City this season and the 12th last season (the 11th was Rihad Mahrez). Please just stop making things up.

 

[jm99]

Jack Graelish was one of the 11 most used players for City this season and the 12th last season (the 11th was Rihad Mahrez). Please just stop making things up.

Its not abiut the individual minutes played. It's a general statement about the quality of the side. So last season grealish was a bench option, this season mahrez is. That isn't the quality of players anyone else in the league can bring on. Both those players would start for every other side.

The pep defenders are utterly bizarre, I mean look at your post above about hindsight, who cares if it's hindsight? Are you genuinely suggesting with xavi, iniesta and Messi, Pep shouldn't have beaten that real side to the league?

And since you're such a big fan of hindsight and favourites, City have been favourites for the champions league for 6 seasons in a row now and finally won it once, maybe that's a little underwhelming for people who base everything on whether you were the favourite at the time

 

[jm99]

If Jadon was tearing it up every other week we wouldn’t have to envy. Mahrez sits on their bench but Grealish is a starter. I’m just saying that if we use our resources well we would compete favorably. Even now many of us are having doubts about Antony. I believe he’ll do well but I have made my point.

We aren't comparing rhe clubs though, we're talking about the managers. Pep having a great backroom at city that spends money welk and gives him a better squad is an advantage for pep not a disadvantage

 

[GatoLoco]

I think there's quite a bit of hindsight here.

Real Madrid won the league in 2008 with 85 points which I think was the highest tally of the decade at the time, hardly 'the least bad team.' They had failed to make it past R16 of the CL, which is not great, but most of those eliminations were against quality teams and not particularly lopsided. The defensive record in the previous two seasons was 36 and 40, not wonderful but nothing too bad.

In 08/09 the form collapsed into 52 goals conceded in the league and a 5-0 elimination to Liverpool in the CL.

Hindsight in their opinion? How is that possible if that opinion was from the end of the season in 2008. Their thought is that even if Madrid wins were deserved, Barcelona's squad was being very badly misused.

And in 07/08 they lost to Roma for an overall result of 4-2. I mean, it´s not peak Bayern or Manchester United we talk about. It's safe to say Madrid heavily underperformed.

08/09 as I said had many issues. I mostly spoke about Van Nistelrooy but much was said about Wesley Sneijder nickname "Whiskey Sneijder" that season. It turned out it was unfair because "vodka was his best friend": https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/37584505/vodka-became-my-greatest-friend

 

[Zehner]

Well I guess that given the high line and dominating possession that it requires, you can't have players who frequently make errors passing because it can leave you too vulnerable on the counter, being able to control possession to the degree he likes, which means more time spent in the opposition half and less time chasing the ball, therefore keeping your players fitter, requires a high degree of technical skill. It also requires having players capable of magic to break through opposition defences that sit back, there's plenty of games where without de bruyne being able to unlock the defence or hit in a thunderbolt they don't take the lead.

But maybe it works with lesser players, but the only time we've seen pep try it in his debut at City, it didn't result in a titleand needed 300m more

But Guardiola's system mostly on doing the easy things right. When you see their build up, it is rarely about making different passes but moving/occupying space in a way that the player on the ball has easy yet progressive passing options. We've seen lesser coaches than Guardiola being very successful with rather mediocre teams. This season we've seen Arteta putting up a challenge for the league title with a team that most would not have seen as a sure UCL spot challenger 12 months ago. Your current coach himself has played this system at Ajax with a much smaller budget, dominating a much superior Real Madrid and almost making it to the UCL final. What you're claiming just isn't very logical. Your entire argumentation revolves around him "only" improving his first City team by double digit points in his first season - in which the intensity of the EPL schedule caught up with an ageing squad. Can't you see that this is a very superficial kind of argument?

 

[Bearded One]

Its not abiut the individual minutes played. It's a general statement about the quality of the side. So last season grealish was a bench option, this season mahrez is. That isn't the quality of players anyone else in the league can bring on. Both those players would start for every other side.

The pep defenders are utterly bizarre, I mean look at your post above about hindsight, who cares if it's hindsight? Are you genuinely suggesting with xavi, iniesta and Messi, Pep shouldn't have beaten that real side to the league?

And since you're such a big fan of hindsight and favourites, City have been favourites for the champions league for 6 seasons in a row now and finally won it once, maybe that's a little underwhelming for people who base everything on whether you were the favourite at the time

If Pep had Christian Pulisic, Joao Felix, Hakim Ziyech,Kovacic, Kante, Kai Havertz, Kante, James, Cucurella, Chilwell and he wins consistently with these players you’d also accuse him of fielding teams that are not fair. Talent is not enough that’s why we can do better with our talent utilization. Most of us had high hopes in (and still do for some) Martial, Greenwood, Cavani, Wan Bisaka, Fred, Maguire, etc.

 

[Bearded One]

We aren't comparing rhe clubs though, we're talking about the managers. Pep having a great backroom at city that spends money welk and gives him a better squad is an advantage for pep not a disadvantage

Pep has an input in the players that come to City. We should do better in maximizing the talents we get. Sancho has a history of performing well.

 

[jm99]

But Guardiola's system mostly on doing the easy things right. When you see their build up, it is rarely about making different passes but moving/occupying space in a way that the player on the ball has easy yet progressive passing options. We've seen lesser coaches than Guardiola being very successful with rather mediocre teams. This season we've seen Arteta putting up a challenge for the league title with a team that most would not have seen as a sure UCL spot challenger 12 months ago. Your current coach himself has played this system at Ajax with a much smaller budget, dominating a much superior Real Madrid and almost making it to the UCL final. What you're claiming just isn't vemaybe ry logical. Your entire argumentation revolves around him "only" improving his first City team by double digit points in his first season - in which the intensity of the EPL schedule caught up with an ageing squad. Can't you see that this is a very superficial kind of argument?

What I'm basing it on is that he's managed 3 sides, one had perhaps the greatest collection of talent ever, one had just won the treble and one spent so much they basically had two first 11s by his third season. Maybe he could do it at a weaker side, but based on this, when there was a manager operating off far less resources that nearly matched him at city, that heynckes did a better job at Bayern and as I said Barca having perhaps the strongest collection of players ever, it's not e enough to be the greatest of all time. A great coach sure, but he's been about par in his career he was favourite for every title he won at bayern, he's been favourite for every title he's won at city and been favourite for the CL 6 years in a row. I don't think that he's done better than he should have, at least in zterms of results

 

[jm99]

If Pep had Christian Pulisic, Joao Felix, Hakim Ziyech,Kovacic, Kante, Kai Havertz, Kante, James, Cucurella, Chilwell and he wins consistently with these players you’d also accuse him of fielding teams that are not fair. Talent is not enough that’s why we can do better with our talent utilization. Most of us had high hopes in (and still do for some) Martial, Greenwood, Cavani, Wan Bisaka, Fred, Maguire, etc.

Pep has been favourite for the champions league 6 years in a row and only managed to win it this year, he's been favourite for every title he won at city and every title he won at Bayern, and he was favourite for every title at Barca except the first year, but knowing what we know now abiut Messi xavi and iniesta he should have been favourite. I'd maybe give it that he shouldn't have been fsviurritr for the champions league in 08/09 but certainly thr league. But I guess that's counteracted by being favourite every year at city and getting knocked iut by spurs, liverpool, lyon, Chelsea and Madrid.

Since you base everything om whether yiu were favourites, how does him being favourite for every trophy in his career apart from the first 3 impact yiurr thinking

 

[Bearded One]

Pep has been favourite for the champions league 6 years in a row and only managed to win it this year, he's been favourite for every title he won at city and every title he won at Bayern, and he was favourite for every title at Barca except the first year, but knowing what we know now abiut Messi xavi and iniesta he should have been favourite. I'd maybe give it that he shouldn't have been fsviurritr for the champions league in 08/09 but certainly thr league. But I guess that's counteracted by being favourite every year at city and getting knocked iut by spurs, liverpool, lyon, Chelsea and Madrid.

Since you base everything om whether yiu were favourites, how does him being favourite for every trophy in his career apart from the first 3 impact yiurr thinking

Every manger has his highs and lows but when you look at the entire careers only then can you find some reasonable explanation. Klopp has managed in a different challenge and since a managers’ job is just like every other one in the world, he wouldn’t go to Borussia Dortmund when the Madrids and Bayerns (examples) might be queueing for him. Even the best players in the world go to the clubs that have the best facilities that support their goals. CR7’s exploits were a thing of beauty at RM but the whole team worked for him from Marcelo to Carvajal to Xabi Alonso to Big Benz etc etc. If there’s any proving to do the mangers who have less trophy count can take up the challenge because the grass is not always greener on the other side.

 

[jm99]

Every manger has his highs and lows but when you look at the entire careers only then can you find some reasonable explanation. Klopp has managed in a different challenge and since a managers’ job is just like every other one in the world, he wouldn’t go to Borussia Dortmund when the Madrids and Bayerns (examples) might be queueing for him. Even the best players in the world go to the clubs that have the best facilities that support their goals. CR7’s exploits were a thing of beauty at RM but the whole team worked for him from Marcelo to Carvajal to Xabi Alonso to Big Benz etc etc. If there’s any proving to do the mangers who have less trophy count can take up the challenge because the grass is not always greener on the other side.

Well here's pep's entire career, he has been favourite for the league every single season apart from his first at Barca and I believe his first at city(though he might have been favourite for that) so he's won 1 league that he wasn't favourite for, and lost two he was favourite for. He was also favourite for the champions league every seaosn at Barca apart from the first and every season at city apart from the first, so he's won 1 champions league he wasn't favourite for and lost 7 that he was favourite for.

So he's performed at expectation at most, overperformed for one league and underperformed for 2, and overperforned for one champions league and underperformed for 7.

Conversely klopp has never been favourite for the league or champions league but has won 3 leagues and one champions league,

Based on your whole argument about hindsight and favorites. Klopp has overperformed on the whole and pep has underperformed

 

[Bearded One]

Well here's pep's entire career, he has been favourite for the league every single season apart from his first at Barca and I believe his first at city(though he might have been favourite for that) so he's won 1 league that he wasn't favourite for, and lost two he was favourite for. He was also favourite for the champions league every seaosn at Barca apart from the first and every season at city apart from the first, so he's won 1 champions league he wasn't favourite for and lost 7 that he was favourite for.

So he's performed at expectation at most, overperformed for one league and underperformed for 2, and overperforned for one champions league and underperformed for 7.

Conversely klopp has never been favourite for the league or champions league but has won 3 leagues and one champions league,

Based on your whole argument about hindsight and favorites. Klopp has overperformed on the whole and pep has underperformed

Your argument is flawed because it is biased against Pep. In the year that RM signed their galaticos you cannot claim that Barca were favourites. Also city have not been favourites for UCL crown for 7 years. Their fans and most of the players there if not all don’t know what European glory is. That mindset needed inculcating first. So subjective measures such as the ones like this that you employ wouldn’t cut it. How many times have his teams fallen below third in league campaign and how many times have Klopp teams fallen below third? The assumption that if Klopp had more resources he will do much much better is also guesswork seeing that he is yet to coach a side demanding immediate impact which comes with a totally different expectation.

 

[jm99]

Your argument is flawed because it is biased against Pep. In the year that RM signed their galati cos you cannot claim that they were favourites. Also city have not been favourites for UCL crown for 7 years. Their fans and most of the players there if not all don’t know what European glory is. That mindset needed inculcating first. So subjective measures such as the ones like this that you employ wouldn’t cut it. How many times have his teams fallen below third in league campaign and how many times have Klopp teams fallen below third? The assumption that if Klopp had more resources he will do much much better is also guesswork seeing that he is yet to coach a side demanding immediate impact which comes with a totally different expectation.

Barca were favourites in 09/10,they'd just won the treble and had 3 of the the 4 of thr ballon d'or city have been favourites for 6 years not 7 in thr CL, every year the bookmakers have them as favourites which is the only objective way to judge.

I'm just using your logic, Pep winning in 08/09 against Madrid even though he had Messi and xavi and ineista was a great achievement because his team weren't favourites at the start of the season which is the only thing that matters. His team have however always been favourites for every other trophy he won, whereas klopp has never been favourite, and whether you were favourite is the only thing that matters as you've told me when saying how difficult it was to win that 08/09 league with only Messi, xavi, inieesta, eto'o etc.

 

[Bearded One]

Barca were favourites in 09/10,they'd just won the treble and had 3 of the the 4 of thr ballon d'or city have been favourites for 6 years not 7 in thr CL, every year the bookmakers have them as favourites which is the only objective way to judge.

I'm just using your logic, Pep winning in 08/09 against Madrid even though he had Messi and xavi and ineista was a great achievement because his team weren't favourites at the start of the season which is the only thing that matters. His team have however always been favourites for every other trophy he won, whereas klopp has never been favourite, and whether you were favourite is the only thing that matters as you've told me when saying how difficult it was to win that 08/09 league with only Messi, xavi, inieesta, eto'o etc.

Who made that the sole authority for judging who the favourites should be? And of course the bookmakers prediction changes as time goes by with different predictions here and there. Whether it’s difficult or easy to win a trophy is not determined by perceptions as much as getting involved personally. While you argue that Pep has not had to build the way Klopp builds teams Klopp has not had the job of managing where instant success was required. I would have asked Pep to take the challenge but he has the trophies therefore the person to take up the challenge is Klopp if he fancies is because the grass is not always greener on the other side. Also the perception that maybe you are the favorite therefore you cannot afford to fault may have its added pressure. What about Klopp’s last season in BVB and the one we just finished, do they count too?

 

[jm99]

Who made that the sole authority for judging who the favourites should be? And of course the bookmakers prediction changes as time goes by with different predictions here and there. Whether it’s difficult or easy to win a trophy is not determined by perceptions as much as getting involved personally. While you argue that Pep has not had to build the way Klopp builds teams Klopp has not had the job of managing where instant success was required. I would have asked Pep to take the challenge but he has the trophies therefore the person to take up the challenge is Klopp if he fancies is because the grass is not always greener on the other side. Also the perception that maybe you are the favorite therefore you cannot afford to fault may have its added pressure. What about Klopp’s last season in BVB and the one we just finished, do they count too?

Well otherwise you're just basing it on random opinions, the betting odds at the start of the season are the closest ways to judge objectively who the favourite is. Hold on "whether it's difficult or easy to win a trophy isn't determined by preconceptions" you've been arguing for hours that Pep not being favourite at the start of 08/09 made winning the title more difficult. You've said "show me anyone who predicted that at the time" your whole argument is that preconceptions mattered more than talent now you've about turned.

You've also suggested Madrid were favourites after signing Ronaldo, Kaka, benzema and alonso even though Barca had won the treble, and 3 of the top 4 ballon d'or, and had signed zlatan who was 7th. Clearly you're just saying anything to make Pep seem better, no one who was watching football at that time would have said Madrid were even close to being favourites

 

[Bearded One]

Well otherwise you're just basing it on random opinions, the betting odds at the start of the season are the closest ways to judge objectively who the favourite is. Hold on "whether it's difficult or easy to win a trophy isn't determined by preconceptions" you've been arguing for hours that Pep not being favourite at the start of 08/09 made winning the title more difficult. You've said "show me anyone who predicted that at the time" your whole argument is that preconceptions mattered more than talent now you've about turned.

You've also suggested Madrid were favourites after signing Ronaldo, Kaka, benzema and alonso even though Barca had won the treble, and 3 of the top 4 ballon d'or, and had signed zlatan who was 7th. Clearly you're just saying anything to make Pep seem better, no one who was watching football at that time would have said Madrid were even close to being favourites

There were reasons I gave for my opinions and you could have a different opinion. There is no world wide acceptable way to measure which metric is superior than the other. These are subjective discussions. You are the one making up stuff to big up your anointed candidate and even deliberately ignoring to talk about his last season at BVB as well as the one we just ended.

 

[Theonas]

Your argument is flawed because it is biased against Pep. In the year that RM signed their galaticos you cannot claim that Barca were favourites. Also city have not been favourites for UCL crown for 7 years. Their fans and most of the players there if not all don’t know what European glory is. That mindset needed inculcating first. So subjective measures such as the ones like this that you employ wouldn’t cut it. How many times have his teams fallen below third in league campaign and how many times have Klopp teams fallen below third? The assumption that if Klopp had more resources he will do much much better is also guesswork seeing that he is yet to coach a side demanding immediate impact which comes with a totally different expectation.

Not to mention that in many of the years his teams were favorite was actually in part because of him. Put Pep at United and add few signings, we would be favorites to win the league. The conflict here is how much the coach actually affects performances which is impossible to quantify. But we can extrapolate a fair amount when looking at their body of work. Fergie's CV tells us to a great level of certainty that his presence alone affected the level to which the players performed over a number of years. The extent of which clearly varies from player to player, in the case of CR very little and in the case of Park Ji-sung very much indeed whereas in the case of someone like Vidic or Evra somewhere in the middle.

 

[Bearded One]

Not to mention that in many of the years his teams were favorite was actually in part because of him. Put Pep at United and add few signings, we would be favorites to win the league. The conflict here is how much the coach actually affects performances which is impossible to quantify. But we can extrapolate a fair amount when looking at their body of work. Fergie's CV tells us to a great level of certainty that his presence alone affected the level to which the players performed over a number of years. The extent of which clearly varies from player to player, in the case of CR very little and in the case of Park Ji-sung very much indeed whereas in the case of someone like Vidic or Evra somewhere in the middle.

Absolutely

 

[T00lsh3d]

Must I keep seeing this thread at the top every time I log onto the caf?

Are we gluttons for punishment?

 

[jm99]

There were reasons I gave for my opinions and you could have a different opinion. There is no world wide acceptable way to measure which metric is superior than the other. These are subjective discussions. You are the one making up stuff to big up your anointed candidate and even deliberately ignoring to talk about his last season at BVB as well as the one we just ended.

Most managers have bad seasons because they don't have the kind of resources Pep does, they can't replace a de bruyne and not notice the loss, an injury to a star player is a big deal for most players, burnout is a big deal when you can't basically recycle the team every 3 years.

You're thr one who said that Pep winningin his first season at Barca was a big challenge becussr they weren't favourites, now you're saying preconceptions don't matter, you said Madrid were favourites in 09/10 becusse they spent s lot of money (even though Barca had won the treble and 3 of the best 4 players in the world) but Pep spending loads at city doesn't make him favourite. You're twisting yourself in knots, and I don't know why. I've seen people go to some length to defend their manager, players, ex managers, ex players but never rival managers. It's astonishing to find a united fan arguing Pep hasn't managed teams that were almost always favourites for every trophy

 

[jm99]

Not to mention that in many of the years his teams were favorite was actually in part because of him. Put Pep at United and add few signings, we would be favorites to win the league. The conflict here is how much the coach actually affects performances which is impossible to quantify. But we can extrapolate a fair amount when looking at their body of work. Fergie's CV tells us to a great level of certainty that his presence alone affected the level to which the players performed over a number of years. The extent of which clearly varies from player to player, in the case of CR very little and in the case of Park Ji-sung very much indeed whereas in the case of someone like Vidic or Evra somewhere in the middle.

fecking hell, this is ridiculous. I genuinely thought that "pep guardiola has only ever managed sides with incredible players and massive resources" would be an uncontroversial opinion because it's a fact. I also thought that winning agaisnt the odds is a bigger achievement than winning with the odds heavily in your favour was also an uncontroversial statement, but the caf contrarians would argue night is day it seems

 

[Theonas]

Absolutely

I'd argue the only ones Pep had that were in the bracket of CR in terms of them being great with very little outside input are Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Lewandowski, Robben, Ribéry and maybe Boateng and Hummels at a stretch. The thing is he had so many players who are in the middle bracket, most even which is why his detractors; players who were clearly good but as you mention in other posts, not that far ahead of many similar players in terms of talent. The interesting question though is the ways these great coaches can affect performances because Fergie's influence is clearly more psychological and focused on bringing out the personality in players. Ancelotti and Zidane extracted the most out of their players through masterful handling of egos and understanding that at a club like Real, the coach can't be the protagonist (quote from Calderon I liked). Pep's methods are much more towards the mechanics of the system to the point that the players become almost robots. Klopp is an interesting one because he has a bit Fergie in him and a bit of Pep. All require a certain kind of genius but in very different ways.

 

[Bearded One]

Most managers have bad seasons because they don't have the kind of resources Pep does, they can't replace a de bruyne and not notice the loss, an injury to a star player is a big deal for most players, burnout is a big deal when you can't basically recycle the team every 3 years.

You're thr one who said that Pep winningin his first season at Barca was a big challenge becussr they weren't favourites, now you're saying preconceptions don't matter, you said Madrid were favourites in 09/10 becusse they spent s lot of money (even though Barca had won the treble and 3 of the best 4 players in the world) but Pep spending loads at city doesn't make him favourite. You're twisting yourself in knots, and I don't know why. I've seen people go to some length to defend their manager, players, ex managers, ex players but never rival managers. It's astonishing to find a united fan arguing Pep hasn't managed teams that were almost always favourites for every trophy

I’m not twisting myself I’m just saying that the definition of favourite is subjective. It’s astonishing that a United fan is defending Klopp. You are making excuses for failure by talking about burn outs. I don’t think Arsenal squad is better than Liverpool and even in his last season with BVB they went so low, I think they finished 7th or 8th. Does that also count for your favourites metric seeing that teams you’d consider worse than them finished better. “Favourites” metric is flawed and the only way we’d know for sure is if the two of them take up similar challenges to what they have been doing. And I have told you why the onus is on your man. I have also explained that a couple of premier league teams are just as blessed with talent but maybe are not fulfilling their potential.

 

[jm99]

I’m not twisting myself I’m just saying that the definition of favourite is subjective. It’s astonishing that a United fan is defending Klopp. You are making excuses for failure by talking about burn outs. I don’t think Arsenal squad is better than Liverpool and even in his last season with BVB they went so low, I think they finished 7th or 8th. Does that also count for your favourites metric seeing that teams you’d consider worse than them finished better. “Favourites” metric is flawed and the only way we’d know for sure is if the two of them take up similar challenges to what they have been doing. And I have told you why the onus is on your man. I have also explained that a couple of premier league teams are just as blessed with talent but maybe are not fulfilling their potential.

Yes the definition of favourite is subjective, the most objective way is to look at who was literally the favourite as it is a betting term, and city have been the favourite for 6 years for wvery single trophy they compete for, bayern were favourite for all the domestic trophies and Barca were favourites for every trophy apart from the first season.

Use whatever definition you want, the actual definition of favourite is the team viewed as most likely to win, and while we can talk anecdotal experience, the objective way to do it is with the odds prior to the tournament starting, but you won't like that because it makes pep seem like he was expected to win every trophy he has, which he was

 

[jm99]

I'd argue the only ones Pep had that were in the bracket of CR in terms of them being great with very little outside input are Messi, Xavi, Iniesta, Lewandowski, Robben, Ribéry and maybe Boateng and Hummels at a stretch. The thing is he had so many players who are in the middle bracket, most even which is why his detractors; players who were clearly good but as you mention in other posts, not that far ahead of many similar players in terms of talent. The interesting question though is the ways these great coaches can affect performances because Fergie's influence is clearly more psychological and focused on bringing out the personality in players. Ancelotti and Zidane extracted the most out of their players through masterful handling of egos and understanding that at a club like Real, the coach can't be the protagonist (quote from Calderon I liked). Pep's methods are much more towards the mechanics of the system to the point that the players become almost robots. Klopp is an interesting one because he has a bit Fergie in him and a bit of Pep. All require a certain kind of genius but in very different ways.

Haaland? De bruyne? Aguero? David Silva? Ibrahimovic? David villa? Dani alves? Eto'o?

Edit: Forgot neuer.


All those players

 

[Bearded One]

Yes the definition of favourite is subjective, the most objective way is to look at who was literally the favourite as it is a betting term, and city have been the favourite for 6 years for wvery single trophy they compete for, bayern were favourite for all the domestic trophies and Barca were favourites for every trophy apart from the first season.

Use whatever definition you want, the actual definition of favourite is the team viewed as most likely to win, and while we can talk anecdotal experience, the objective way to do it is with the odds prior to the tournament starting, but you won't like that because it makes pep seem like he was expected to win every trophy he has, which he was

Number one it’s ridiculous to suggest that City has been earmarked as the favourites to win the UCL for 6 straight years but even then I put it to you that your preferred metric doesn’t take account of times when BVB where building i.e. where did they finish or when they imploded or even when Liverpool imploded so it’s so biased against the man you want to eliminate from your memory for no just cause. If Klopp can take up a challenge where he is expected to win instantly rather than having time to build then he is welcome.

 

[jm99]

Number one it’s ridiculous to suggest that City has been earmarked as the favourites to win the UCL for 6 straight years but even then I put it to you that your preferred metric doesn’t take account of times when BVB where building i.e. where did they finish or when they imploded or even when Liverpool imploded so it’s so biased against the man you want to eliminate from your memory for no just cause. If Klopp can take up a challenge where he is expected to win instantly rather than having time to build then he is welcome.

Well it isn't, they've been favourites with the bookies every year since 17/18. I remember thinking it strange than real Madrid had won 2 in a row and city were still favourites but it is what it is and they have been favourites every year.

You're basing everything on a hypothetical that klopp might not succeed with unlimited resources and the best players, I'm saying what he did with Liverpool, and dortmund is more impressive than what Pep has done at any club. Not that he's the perfect manager or never failed, but winning 2 titles with dortmund, beating City to the title with Liverpool and reaching 3 CL finals with like the 10th highest spend in Europe is a far better achievement than winning the Premier league repeatedly with the best team and the best squad

 

[Joel Miller]

He's alresdy gotten a reply, it requires a certain type of player to break down defences, to retain possession, a high degree of technical skill, it's one thing playing a high line with lots of pressing with incredible players in every position but doing it with average players makes you more likely to get hit on the counter, to make mistakes, playing out from the back is far riskier with average players as we can see with de gea in goal. And even Spain in 2010, while they won their games, without having Messi and Dani Alves like at Barca, you ended up with a lot of possession but very little chance creation. These are some of the reasons, so maybe you can leave the smug posts off

Are you telling me guys like Fabian Delph, John Stones, Nicholas Otamendi, Akanji, Sterling, Rodri, Kyle Walker and Nathan Ake are world class footballers with superior technical skills?

You’d honestly be quicker just saying you don’t really like him and aren’t ready to accept how good he is. It’s pretty clear that’s the reality and it’s easier to admit that than to carry on trying to make yourself believe that black is white and up is down.

 

[Bearded One]

Well it isn't, they've been favourites with the bookies every year since 17/18. I remember thinking it strange than real Madrid had won 2 in a row and city were still favourites but it is what it is and they have been favourites every year.

You're basing everything on a hypothetical that klopp might not succeed with unlimited resources and the best players, I'm saying what he did with Liverpool, and dortmund is more impressive than what Pep has done at any club. Not that he's the perfect manager or never failed, but winning 2 titles with dortmund, beating City to the title with Liverpool and reaching 3 CL finals with like the 10th highest spend in Europe is a far better achievement than winning the Premier league repeatedly with the best team and the best squad

And I am telling you that the two challenges are different. For some reason you see the good in financial strength but you do not see the good in having time. Also financial strength can be very debilitating if one gets it wrong. So if you are sure that Klopp will triumph if backed very well why is he not keen on leaving his place of comfort? What he did with BVB and Liverpool is not more impressive because if Pep had not won the league second season he’d be out. If he dared finish 3rd in any season following his first he’d be likely out. Klopp on the other hand can build without pressure and if he wins trophies in a couple of seasons whatever happens after people can say, “oh you know the players are tired” and similar excuses. The odds you mention - do they capture Klopp’s off seasons or the excuses are also factored in?

 

[jm99]

Are you telling me guys like Fabian Delph, John Stones, Nicholas Otamendi, Akanji, Sterling, Rodri, Kyle Walker and Nathan Ake are world class footballers with superior technical skills?

You’d honestly be quicker just saying you don’t really like him and aren’t ready to accept how good he is. It’s pretty clear that’s the reality and it’s easier to admit that than to carry on trying to make yourself believe that black is white and up is down.

Well rodri certainly, stones also has quite good technical ability for a centre back. Probably why city spent nearly 120m on the two of them. Maybe yiu should admit you prefer Barcelona to man united and support them, becusse it isn't a strange statement to suggest that Pep has always had the best team in every league he's managed in

 

[jm99]

And I am telling you that the two challenges are different. For some reason you see the good in financial strength but you do not see the good in having time. Also financial strength can be very debilitating if one gets it wrong. So if you are sure that Klopp will triumph if backed very well why is he not keen on leaving his place of comfort? What he did with BVB and Liverpool is not more impressive because if Pep had not won the league second season he’d be out. If he dared finish 3rd in any season following his first he’d be likely out. Klopp on the other hand can build without pressure and if he wins trophies in a couple of seasons whatever happens after people can say, “oh you know the players are tired” and similar excuses. The odds you mention - do they capture Klopp’s off seasons or the excuses are also factored in?

Pep would not get sacked for a 4th place finish, that's ridiculous. The odds I've mentioned is that klopp has never been favourite for title that he's won. You're obsessing around off seasons and time, it's so weird. How would Klopp be expected to win the tittle within a year at liverpool? You could give someone 25 years with Nottingham forest and a budget of 20m a year and they'd be far less likely to win a title than someone who takes over Newcastle and gets 200m a year. Time and budget and not comparable no matter how you try to spin it

 

[Mercurial]

He is still bald, but is he no longer a fraud? Or is he still both? State backed kinda confuses the situation.

 

[jm99]

He is still bald, but is he no longer a fraud? Or is he still both? State backed kinda confuses the situation.

If you believe some of the posters on here managing a state backed club has no advantages. Neither does spending loads of money, which makes those 115 charges for breach of financial rules particularly odd

 

[Bearded One]

Pep would not get sacked for a 4th place finish, that's ridiculous. The odds I've mentioned is that klopp has never been favourite for title that he's won. You're obsessing around off seasons and time, it's so weird. How would Klopp be expected to win the tittle within a year at liverpool? You could give someone 25 years with Nottingham forest and a budget of 20m a year and they'd be far less likely to win a title than someone who takes over Newcastle and gets 200m a year. Time and budget and not comparable no matter how you try to spin it

And that’s why I’m saying both jobs are different. While you judge Guardiola for not taking a Liverpool-type team to victory which would imply him having to build and start from the scratch probably because he’s no magician, you are comfortable with Klopp not having to take up a challenge requiring instant success. It’s quite a safe place to be in for Klopp because so long as he can muster a couple of wins domestically and abroad (with little pressure) then people will make excuses for him and even if he doesn’t win so long as he shows some progress he doesn’t have to worry. His last season at BVB shouldn’t be part of the conversation? Or last season?

 

[jm99]

And that’s why I’m saying both jobs are different. While you judge Guardiola for not taking a Liverpool-type team to victory which would imply him having to build and start from the scratch probably because he’s no magician, you are comfortable with Klopp not having to take up a challenge requiring instant success. It’s quite a safe place to be in for Klopp because so long as he can muster a couple of wins domestically and abroad (with little pressure) then people will make excuses for him and even if he doesn’t win so long as he shows some progress he doesn’t have to worry. His last season at BVB shouldn’t be part of the conversation? Or last season?

Sure these things should be in the conversation klopp seems to have an issue with burnout eventually (maybe having the resources to almost completely replace the first 11 every 4 years might help that) but it's not enough to detract from how much harder taking Liverpool to the title and champions Leagues and Dortmund to the title was than any of pep's jobs. You say this as if it's commensurate challenge to get immediate success with the best players and take an average side and make them champions. It really isn't. Villanova managed to take over a top team and deliver a league title despite not much managerial experience otherwise. Average managers can get instant success with grest players. No average managers could do what klopp did at Liverpool and Dortmund or what simeone did at atletico. Surely you must be able to see that given how much rarer it is for a manager to take a team that's 6th and turn them into champions over a few years than it is for a manager to win something with a stacked team that the achievements are not just different, one is much harder than the other

 

[Mercurial]

If you believe some of the posters on here managing a state backed club has no advantages. Neither does spending loads of money, which makes those 115 charges for breach of financial rules particularly odd

Some of the posters here have raging Pep envy and some are closeted City fans. This pay2win treble just seemed so inorganic, hollow, meaningless and unemotional. Like a shrug and a fart.

 

[Bearded One]

Sure these things should be in the conversation klopp seems to have an issue with burnout eventually (maybe having the resources to almost completely replace the first 11 every 4 years might help that) but it's not enough to detract from how much harder taking Liverpool to the title and champions Leagues and Dortmund to the title was than any of pep's jobs. You say this as if it's commensurate challenge to get immediate success with the best players and take an average side and make them champions. It really isn't. Villanova managed to take over a top team and deliver a league title despite not much managerial experience otherwise. Average managers can get instant success with grest players. No average managers could do what klopp did at Liverpool and Dortmund or what simeone did at atletico. Surely you must be able to see that given how much rarer it is for a manager to take a team that's 6th and turn them into champions over a few years than it is for a manager to win something with a stacked team that the achievements are not just different, one is much harder than the other

Di Matteo won the UCL and Ranieri won the premier league. It’s one thing to win a cup one season and quite another to win consistently over the years. Pep has coached at clubs that have also won stuff but their names aren’t mentioned in the conversations where his is mentioned to be fair. Even Conte beat them both to the premier league in his first attempt hence a manager and a his team can have a very good season or couple of seasons but doing it consistently trumps the former. The reason why to quantify which is harder or not may be a mirage is because having resources is a double edged sword - it can help you and it can seriously expose you and dent your credentials. Just look at Potter who was considered the next big thing. Look at Poch. Look at Jose - we were all sure that Jose would conquer Europe having achieved what he did with Porto and Inter. Football is not a linear graph. The best way to know is to try your hands on the challenge - my two cents to Klopp of course.

 

[jm99]

Di Matteo won the UCL and Ranieri won the premier league. It’s one thing to win a cup one season and quite another to win consistently over the years. Pep has coached at clubs that have also won stuff but their names aren’t mentioned in the conversations where his is mentioned to be fair. Even Conte beat them both to the premier league in his first attempt hence a manager and a his team can have a very good season or couple of seasons but doing it consistently trumps the former. The reason why quantify which is harder or not may be a mirage is because having resources is a double edged sword - it can help you and it can seriously expose you and dent your credentials. Just look at Potter who was considered the next big thing. Look at Poch. Look at Jose - we were all sure that Jose would conquer Europe having achieved what he did with Porto and Inter. Football is not a linear graph. The best way to now is to try your hands on the challenge - my two cents to Klopp of course.

Di matter winning the champions league actually backs up my point, that average managers can achieve instant success but taking a team and turning them into champions over a couple of seasons does not happen with average managers. Personally for me, ranieri winning with Leicester is the greatest managerial achievement ever, it doesn't make him the best manager ever a lot of stars has to align but still. You haven't xcttually given an example of an average manager who built a team from 5th or 6th to consistently challenge, what you actually did was give examples of two average managers achieving instant success, the thing you've been trying to argue is more difficult

 

[Bearded One]

Di matter winning the champions league actually backs up my point, that average managers can achieve instant success but taking a team and turning them into champions over a couple of seasons does not happen with average managers. Personally for me, ranieri winning with Leicester is the greatest managerial achievement ever, it doesn't make him the best manager ever a lot of stars has to align but still. You haven't xcttually given an example of an average manager who built a team from 5th or 6th to consistently challenge, what you actually did was give examples of two average managers achieving instant success, the thing you've been trying to argue is more difficult

the average managers cannot win consistently year in year out though and I didn’t say challenge I said win. That’s the difference - challenging is different from winning. In some places if you come second that’s failure but in some other places if you gain champions league place you have done well so expectations differ per club and by extension per manager. Those mangers I listed achieved instant success but it was not consistent and this is my point. I also mentioned the point about having resources being a double edged sword.

 

[jm99]

the average managers cannot win consistently year in year out though and I didn’t say challenge I said win. That’s the difference - challenge in go is different from winning. In some places if you come second that’s failure but I’m so s places of you gain champions league place you have done well so expectations differ per club and by extension per manager. Those mangers I listed achieved instant success but it was not consistent and this is my point. I also mentioned the point about having resources being a double edged sword.

You're right, they can't consistently win year in and year out. And I'm not calling pep an average manager, he's a great manager, but for me, doing what klopp and simeone have done is more impressive by far. Maybe pep could do it, but he hasn't so I can't give him the credit for it. Resources are not a double edged sword because as you'll notice the managers who are called the best all manage teams who, while they have varying levels of resources, all have spent hundreds of millions, no one active right now being considered for greatest manager ever is getting there on the basis of having kept teams up from relegation. Resources are a massive part, but pep is on a different level in terms of resources. and I think you have to be wilfully ignorant to not see that