It's very off putting to open up the caf to read a bunch of these clickbaity thread titles about City these days.
Is Pep the greatest manager of all time?
- Thread starter Irrational.
- Start date
Until he goes somewhere he doesn't have by far the best players in the league there is no case for him to be the greatest ever. The only time he's ever come close to it was the first season at City, and he was very average. He needs to prove he can build a team without a cheat code to be considered alongside a Ferguson.
I rate Klopp's time at Liverpool above his City reign, let alone SAF.
I rate Klopp's time at Liverpool above his City reign, let alone SAF.
Could Pep do what Fergie did with some of those United sides?
Could Fergie do what Pep has done with those City sides?
There's the answer.
Could Fergie do what Pep has done with those City sides?
There's the answer.
Sorry, quoted you by mistake; you're obviously Wumming the Poch fan club on here
I'm not a fan of Mourinho, but could Pep do what Mourinho did with Porto and Inter?
Redditcafe
This debate is premature. Pep is only 52. He might have 15 seasons in charge ahead of him, be it at City or some other big club.
There's way too many haters in this thread. Pep obviously has a brilliant mind for football and he's obviously an elite manager. He's going to continue to win regularly. Ultimately his ego will determine whether he goes down as the best ever. It'll just be a matter of whether or not he feels like managing long enough to surpass SAF's trophy count.
There's way too many haters in this thread. Pep obviously has a brilliant mind for football and he's obviously an elite manager. He's going to continue to win regularly. Ultimately his ego will determine whether he goes down as the best ever. It'll just be a matter of whether or not he feels like managing long enough to surpass SAF's trophy count.
ok that’s not all
Because he’s better by an even bigger margin because he did the impossible with an underdog team.
No to both?
Pep has overcome a lot that was initially said about him when he managed in Spain. The talk when he first came in was that he couldn't do it in England; of course once he started to smash points records, then the tune changed and that was suddenly the minimum expectation.
Pep is a bit like Messi in that he's very efficient but the focus is on technical excellence over pure results ala Mourinho. This doesn't always work at the highest level because the margins are so thin, but when things do click, it is indeed devastating and some of the most dominant football you'll see.
I'd say he is very close based on the effect he seems to have had on this generation of coaches. Even the 2nd best coach in the world, Klopp, eventually had to incorporate some elements of Guardiola's style in order to truly compete. Indeed for Pep to cement his position he needs more achievements, but there are very few coaches that have had this level of impact combined with success.
Pep is a bit like Messi in that he's very efficient but the focus is on technical excellence over pure results ala Mourinho. This doesn't always work at the highest level because the margins are so thin, but when things do click, it is indeed devastating and some of the most dominant football you'll see.
I'd say he is very close based on the effect he seems to have had on this generation of coaches. Even the 2nd best coach in the world, Klopp, eventually had to incorporate some elements of Guardiola's style in order to truly compete. Indeed for Pep to cement his position he needs more achievements, but there are very few coaches that have had this level of impact combined with success.
Considering that the norm is having the resources and not winning anything (I mean, how many top teams are there in the world for only one champion spot?), I don't really think of it as a valid argument.
He still needs to win a ton to catch up to the true GOAT though.
He still needs to win a ton to catch up to the true GOAT though.
I don't think most managers would win 5 of 7 possible league titles. Top 4 is very, very far from even a title challenge let alone a win, as any United fan knows from the last 10 years.
The difference is that City was a young club back then, still finding its steps and had to compete with Sir Alex and despite all of that Mancini and Pellegrini both won titles and City were always second or first. Pep's only competition so far has been Klopp who has been severely limited in terms of budget.
Yes, he has taken them a level, but only that. He hasn't build anything. Can I ask you this: if Klopp was in charge of City, do you think he would have achieved the same thing maybe more? Then ask yourself if Pep would have achieved even remotely something similar to Klopp at Liverpool.
True. But SAF did that without funding from Abu Dhabi or a Russian gangster, winning 7 out of 9 titles from 1992-2001 (during a time when the league was much closer in every way, including financially, and United were far from the biggest spenders), and 5 out of 7 from 2006-2013, when Chelsea City completely dominated financially, while United where about on par with clubs like Liverpool and Spurs.
From 2003 to 2013 Chelsea spent €960m gross, and €703m net.
From 2007 to 2013 City spent €720m gross, and €537m net.
From 2003 to 2013 Liverpool spent €603m gross, and €259m net
From 2003 to 2013 Spurs spent €562m gross, and £224m net
From 2003 to 2013 United spent €524m gross, and €231m net
We've yet to see that bald cnut dominating like this going up against anything like those odds.
I know United have actually spent more money than City this last decade (officially anyway...), but it always makes me laugh when Pep makes comments to the tune of "we can't/couldn't afford him" about potential signings, which he's made several times. He's so desperate to not be viewed as a chequebook manager, but the truth is that he's been given just about everything (with perhaps a few exceptions) he could've wanted at City.
Still clearly a great manager (and a brilliant tactician, one of the best ever) mind.
Last edited:
His last Champions League trophy was 12 years ago, having managed Bayern and Man City. He got eliminated in Europe by "mighty' clubs like Spurs, Lyon and Monaco. I think any decent manager easily replicates everything Pep has achieved in all the clubs he's managed.
Enrique won the TREBLE at Barcelona(almost immediately after Pep)
Heynckes and Hansi Flick won the TREBLE at Bayern(before and after Pep).
All City managers hired by Abu Dhabi owners won the PL.
How then is Pep special?
But to consistently make it regardless of the manager i think speaks volumes of the club's wealth and power and how well set up they are (as I said, with a huge deal of corruption admittedly). I honestly do think if you put in another top manager or even if Sir Alex was still around and they/him had that basis to work from then you'd see equivalent success.
2009 CL final - Xavi/Iniesta(fresh from Euro 2008 victory) vs Carrick/Giggs(36 year old winger playing as CM)
2011 CL final - Busquets/Xavi/Iniesta(fresh from World cup victory) vs Carrick/Giggs(38 year old winger playing as CM).
If Tony Pulis managed those 2 Barcelona teams, they would still have beaten SAF's Man Utd in terms of the sheer talents scattered al over the squads.
Guardiola won a huge lottery managing Barcelona between 2008-2012 and he has said this many many times that he inherited a great squad.
Disagree with the bold, I have no idea how anyone can say that. There was a top team with great talents when he joined, now there's a machine with a particular style of play.
I don't know if Klopp would have achieved the same/more. His Liverpool hasn't been as consistent across seasons as Pep. who has had only one bad season after the first. But Klopp's (so far) been better in cup runs.
Pretty confident that neither Mancini or Pellegrini would come close, since we know exactly how they did when they were in charge. You call those early years, but when I said 2 in 5, it was already excluding the first 2 Etihad seasons, including Mancini's 1st season. They had Kompany, Zabaleta, de Jong, Barry, Yaya Toure, David Silva, Dzeko, and Tevez that season., it's not like Mancini started from scratch.
Don't think so! Arsenal and Liverpool made top 4 every season between Jose's arrival at Chelsea and Mancini's arrival at City, but had zero leagues and two title challenges between them, over 7 seasons.
About the bolded: probably, yes, he was a league winning machine too. But I don't think a random top manager matches what Pep has been doing at City.
Ya, I'm not taking a side in this GOAT debate, I don't think Pep's management will be suited to a "normal" club at all.
It was just a reply to people saying that he has done nothing at City, anyone else could go 5/7, etc.
e -
for Indians here, Pep is like Mukesh Ambani. Inherited an extremely rich company by national standards, and now it's an extremely rich company by any standard. Started with the perfect platform and political connections, and maximised it.
United of this decade is like his younger brother Anil, at least Anil can proudly say he financed the Dredd movie
Last edited:
And yet that is all completely irrelevant. My point is that Guardiola could be the manager of any team that he wanted to and it is well within his right to have what you would consider an easy job (there is no such thing) in doing so. He has made his case as one of the best managers of all time, what metric you determine that on is completely your own prerogative, and therefore he can do whatever the feck he wants and quite rightfully so. Klopp, Mourinho and Ferguson choosing jobs with "real battles" is their choice. I know that if you offered all four of those managers to any team in the world right now, they would still pick Guardiola.
He won a shit-ton of trophies. Of course, context matter, but it is not like every other manager had shit teams or a lack of resources. He is a very good manager, don't really know if we can call him the GOAT but he is clearly better than most.
This is just not true. It’s actually fantasy. In their prime most clubs will pick SAF and Klopp and some clubs even Mourinho because the majority of the clubs don’t have unlimited money and are not backed by a state.
I would also say if before ETH’s arrival you would have asked United fans to pick one of Pep and Klopp - knowing our incompetent board which in addition won’t just buy you Grealish for 100 mil and allow you to drop Foden, etc. - most would have picked Klopp.
My issue is every league he always has a massive advantage over the league opposition and the most technically gifted players in the league. Very specific requirements needed for it to work. SAF won leagues with Cleverley and Anderson. Jose won CL with Porto aswell as Pandev, and a midfield of Zanetti (a RB), Cambiasso and Sneijder. Are you really the best coach when you always require every advantage over your rivals? Things were a bit more balanced for other coaches.
Which players did he make so much better. Messi was already clearly a future GOAT from the age of 16, Xavi, Puyol and Iniesta had already won a European Championship without Messi before Pep started managing Barca, Heynckes and Flick elevated a similar group of players to greater heights than him and at City he's had the most expensive squad of all time assembled by illegal means. Players like De Bruyne, Haaland, Mahrez, Grealish, Gundogan and Bernado Silva were hardly scrubs before they joined City. Is Haaland a better player than he was a year ago or is De Bruyne just putting it on a plate for him game after game. The guy scores 3 hatricks in his first few months in the league, yet somehow we are supposed to believe that it is down to Pep's genius.
He's somehow getting credit in this thread now for having to play John Stones who cost £50m which at the time made him the second most expensive defender of all time. People are making out like he's taking a team of nobodies and getting them to the top. Fergie could win the league with Cleverly, Anderson, Carrick and a 38 year old Scholes as his midfield options. Can anyone honestly imagine Guardiola doing the same? Fergie would have absolutely cleaned up with this current City squad and he'd also have them playing more exciting football.
This sportwswashing exercise is proving surprisingly effective it seems.
I don't think there has been any other manager that has lucked out the way Pep has.
I saw a stat of all-time money spent by football managers the other day that claims Mourinho has only spent £60m more than Pep.
The amazing thing about the stat was that Mourinho bought players for 7 full seasons before Pep made his first signing and both managers are still active.
No.
Amen. In his defence he usually DESTROYS his league competition, raising the points requirement to new levels with a consistency rarely seen and he wins multiple in a row and has an average of 89 points in his time here. But hard to disagree with your points. He gets d1ckrided a bit much and will it will go to next levels when he wins the treble tomorrow
Yes and in a discussion about who is the best, that actually counts for something to a lot of people, which is the whole point of this thread.
That's because you're choosing to ignore the times when he's actually done something similar.
Yaya Toure played at CB when he won the first CL final against us.
Fabian Delph was the first choice LB for a team that broke the PL points total and goals record.
He won a PL title with Gundogan top scoring for him and no real striker.
His current team has no LB and he's using a CB as in this hybrid role.
The irony on this one is quite funny, when this forum was crying/moaning just last year about how you can't do anything of note unless you have Cancelo or a TAA quality fullbacks.
Yaya toure not technically gifted? Gundgan not technically gifted? Delph played 22 matches,
Both cheating. People keep forgetting this part.
Last edited:
When Klopp joined Dortmund they hadn’t won a major trophy (league or CL) for 6 years. Liverpool hadn’t for 10 years.
When Jose joined Chelsea they hadn’t won a major trophy for half a century.
When SAF joined Aberdeen and United they hadn’t won a major trophy for almost 2 decades.
When Pep joined Barca/Bayern/City they hadn’t won a major trophy for 2/0/2 years.
Yes he mostly won more / dominated more than the previous managers, but he always took over already (extremely) successful and winning teams.
When Jose joined Chelsea they hadn’t won a major trophy for half a century.
When SAF joined Aberdeen and United they hadn’t won a major trophy for almost 2 decades.
When Pep joined Barca/Bayern/City they hadn’t won a major trophy for 2/0/2 years.
Yes he mostly won more / dominated more than the previous managers, but he always took over already (extremely) successful and winning teams.
Because it took place? What kind of a question is that? Christ almighty.
It was an incredible feat, one that has not been equaled since. Not even when Rangers were relegated for a time did anyone shake up Scottish football as much. In fact, nobody but Rangers and Celtic have won the SPL since SAF did with Aberdeen. It's absurd and idiotic to pretend it didn't happen, or that it wasn't impressive. Is there now some sort of campaign to downplay that? Goodness gracious.
Let's see Pep take the reins at Celta Vigo and win La Liga as well as the EFL. We all know he wouldn't. He wouldn't even dare to try. He'll continue to take the path of least resistance, coasting through a career where he manages the clubs that are already favored to win. He has never faced a meaningful challenge. The audacity to say that this is as impressive as raising a club (two, even) from nowhere to the top. Pteu!
Last edited:
If he wins the treble unfortunately he will go down as the greatest. You should have stopped him.
No, UEFA and the FA should have stopped this farce before it got to this point, but hopefully they will in a year or two once the investigations are complete.
UEFA made a good attempt but were unable to keep City's lawyers from stalling until the case had to be dismissed due to time limitations. That's the one and only reason why they haven't already been made to stop cheating, which they've surely kept doing since then.
No other manager has ever had the kind of squad superiority that he has had. If anything, it’s pretty astounding that he hasn’t won more on the European stage.
I'll start by saying it's a bit futile to ask this question on a Man Utd forum, where our own legend is probably the one you try to dethrone If you'd like to be the best of the crop.
If we agree on the fact that a coach is responsible for making their team play the best possible football,
and a manager does that + lots of other stuff that have to do with squad management, instilling motivation, whatever...
Then Pep is surely in contention to be one of the best coaches there have ever been.
Manager? Nah.
I'd have taken the same career choices he took, and I wouldn't give 2 shits about what people on the internet think about how I compare to other greats in my field of expertise... But you gotta say that his career moves make it impossible to seriously consider him in discussions like this one,
where you have: Fergie/Aberdeen, Mourinho/Porto+Inter, Klopp/Dortmund+Liverpool...
So yeah, Pep improves (already quite good) players to lengths I've never seen before him.
but there's more than that to managing a team.
If we agree on the fact that a coach is responsible for making their team play the best possible football,
and a manager does that + lots of other stuff that have to do with squad management, instilling motivation, whatever...
Then Pep is surely in contention to be one of the best coaches there have ever been.
Manager? Nah.
I'd have taken the same career choices he took, and I wouldn't give 2 shits about what people on the internet think about how I compare to other greats in my field of expertise... But you gotta say that his career moves make it impossible to seriously consider him in discussions like this one,
where you have: Fergie/Aberdeen, Mourinho/Porto+Inter, Klopp/Dortmund+Liverpool...
So yeah, Pep improves (already quite good) players to lengths I've never seen before him.
but there's more than that to managing a team.
And that has been a shadow over him for more than a decade. Since he left Barcelona, he has managed Bayern - who are, at least in principle, favored in any year - and then City who have spent more than anyone even if we generously go by only the reported figured (which we know tell only half the story), and yet he has not succeeded outside of his domestic leagues since he left Barcelona. Not only that, but one can pinpoint quite a number of times where his tactics in Europe were demonstrably the reason he failed--in other words, those failures are down to him personally, not being up against better teams that were favored to win. If anything, the fact that his lack of success in the CL has repeatedly been the direct product of his bizarre tactical choices is the reason nobody in their right mind could ever consider him the greatest manager in history. He himself has proven that he isn't.
But tomorrow he gets to play a CL final against Inter of all people, and then we get to hear this nonsenical debate for a year or two. Then he'll go manage PSG and coast to another series of effortless trophies, and then more morons will go 'look, he has won x titles in y years, surely he's the best.'
Last edited:
Greatest manager of all time wouldn't have 12 year gap between his champions league wins and in a timeframe whereby every year since 2011 his team have been favourites. Signing the best goal scoring striker in world the final piece in ending that gap, a sign of pure greatest?
Pretty much. This treble isn’t so much of an achievement than it is a sad indictment on the reality of modern football.
One of the best. But unfortunately for him he's got no underdog success story. Fergie has Aberdeen - and he did the small thing of reviving this giant club.