Is Pep the greatest manager of all time?

Garnacho's Shoelaces said:
  • Took PEDs during playing career and caught twice
  • Managed Barca during period they were paying referees chief
  • Managed Bayern in a one team league
  • Managed City with financial doping, corruption and money laundering on an unprecedented scale unlikely to ever be repeated. Lies to media claiming to want a quick resolution while City's lawyers have been actively obstructing PL investigation and kicked can down the road with UEFA to invoke time limitations.
Pep is the greatest manager in the same way that Lance Armstrong had the best period of any cyclist in history and is also the greatest.
Click to expand...

Also the blood samples of Barcelona players being destroyed after the Spanish doctor was arrested. Also the Bayern doctor resigned because Pep thought players should recover faster and were being sent to Spain for ‘quicker recovery.’ His entire career is smeared in accusation of cheating.
 
Paisley won more without having a generational talent in his prime. Who’s the best ever isn’t really measurable. Best of his generation yes, best ever?
 
It’s too easy to dislike Pep, especially as a red. He got lucky with Barca walking into a team with Xavi, Iniesta, Messi and Ronaldinho. Later we’ve learnt about Barca paying refs. He had it easy in Bayerns one club league and failed to win the CL. And he’s had so much money at citeh.

I have however softened to appreciate him more recently. He effectively introduced inverted FBs to the EPL, has pretty much dominated the league, and the recent ability to change tactically proves he’s willing to adapt.

greatest of all time? It’s hard to call. SAF was a genius (as we’re others) and his time at Aberdeen can’t be underestimated. He was also in the EPL against teams like Oldham, Swindon, Barnsley and managed during a time when clubs would have to sell their best players.
 
I think he still has some ways to go, but again he is still youngish.

Right now, i would say he is the manager with the most influence on the way football is played in the last 2 decades.

But as a manager, if we want to judge him on his CV, he did the bare minimum with bayern, had a golden generation in barcelona that admittedly he molded into the best team ive ever seen, and at city hes basically had an open budget, while inheriting a team that had been geared around him taking over and taking them to the next level. He took over a pl winning side, spent 1.2 billion pounds, and kept them winning.

I think we would need to win a few more CLs (1 final in 12 years is pretty shocking), and maybe do it with a team when a direct rival can actually spend the same amount.
 
Raebareliwale said:
Undoubtedly the best coach ever.

A lot of you folks are ignoring the fact that he got the Barcelona job because of what he did with Barca B team.
Barca B team were relegated a season before and he revolutionized that team.

His great coaching work was so evident that he got the Barca job over Jose, an unbelievable and v risky decision by Barca at that time.
Barcelona always had great players but Frank Raijkard never fulfilled the teams potential.
It was Pep who delivered, and oh my god what a beauty that team was.

Bayern, I believe Bayern played incredibly well under him but no doubt the expectations were too high in Europe and he failed to meet those expectations but nonetheless the quality of football was outrageous. But if we only judge him on Champions League success, he failed.

City, what a progression it has been. Monumental.
Pellegrini's team was not the best one but the transition has been truly formidable.
There have been hiccups for sure but what a transformation.
If City manage to get the treble, it will be a historical achievement for sure.

SAF/Mourinho were great managers but SAF was always beaten by Pep. Mourinho was great at Madrid but he sort of tarnished his reputation at united.
Moreover, premier league's standard is probably at the highest right now.
Back in the days of SAF. it was mostly 2-3 teams that were competing.
Moreover, I don't recall SAF winning the Champions League more than 2 times in his overall tenure.

In my mind, Pep is definitely the best there is. He already has 2 champions league titles to his name and moreover has age on his side.
He will surely win alot more judging by his track record.

Notable mention is Jurgen Klopp. What Klopp has achieved with Liverpool is nothing short of incredible. I think Pep and Klopp have redefined the standards of football in recent history.
Click to expand...

Let’s counter some of your argument:

Rijkaard won the Champions League in 2005/06 then had 2 bad seasons (in Barcelona terms). It’s not like Barcelona were mid-table. The likes of Ronaldinho were boozing so Pep had to address that but the foundations were there. Barcelona were very successful after Pep left as well.

Bayern were an unbelievable side the season before Pep joined. Their Champions League campaign was beautiful to watch, particularly when they hammered Barcelona. In my opinion they played better football under Heynkes than under Pep. Bayern have now won the Bundesliga 10 years in a row. Domestic success doesn’t mean anything to Bayern. And Pep got embarrassed by Barcelona in the Champions League.

Now at City. He’s has made them the dominant force in England but with unlimited money. People will always talk about United’s spending and say we have spent just as much without the success. Let’s pretend there isn’t any financial charges going on at City. Before he joined he had a squad including Aguero, David Silva, De Bruyne, Fernandinho, Kompany and Yaya Toure. The spine of a great team was already there. He spent a fortune in his first season and won nothing. He then started spending world record fees for a goalkeeper and defenders multiple times in one transfer window. This happened consistently until he got the formula right. This meant City built two separate 11s that could win the league. Now suddenly the club isn’t spending as much because they don’t need to, and City fans start acting like they spend within their means now. It’s incredibly laughable. One youth player has been integrated into the squad during this time and now isn’t a starter.

Now add in the financial charges into the mix. Would you have Haaland upfront this season without the financial doping? We are meant be the best young player in the world cost £51m? Spurs had to spend £60m to get Richarlison. City are the most valuable club in the world? City can attract higher value sponsorship deals than Man Utd and Real Madrid? The whole thing stinks of financial cheating to get an advantage.

To anyone but City fans he’s bought his success there. I don’t care how good the football is it’s easy to be that successful when you can spend, spend, spend until you get the formula right. If United spend £80m on a CB we have to try and make it work for 3-5 years. City have never had to do that.
 
Guardiola has been the best since the time I started watching football. The detractors will say he had better resources or managed in a one league or something but SAF for the majority of his career managed us and we had huge resources compared to other PL clubs.

I’d say Guardiola had a lot to do with Spain winning the World Cup as well. Barcelona and Spain played exactly the same way and the core of Barca formed the core of that Spain side as well.

He has shown himself to be tactically adept as well learning from experience of being naive in CL knockouts.

The thing about not managing a weaker team doesn’t sit right with me. He was good enough to be given the huge job of transforming Barcelona with no experience whatsoever. He must have done something right to get that job. After his success with Barcelona there was no fecking way he is going to be managing the likes of Dortmund or Tottenham to prove internet warriors like us he is a good coach.

I think Klopp is up there with Guardiola as well. If Guardiola keeps up with the same for the next decade he will easily trump SAF. The one thing that makes SAF somewhat better is his longevity.
 
He's the manager that guarantees rich clubs league titles given he gets what he wants. His vision and dominance is hard to ignore but we all would love to see what he would do with a small club with limited funds.

I'd love to see him managing a club that hadnt won the treble before he joined or one that was relegation standard. Purely out of interest.


Dont get me wrong, his standard of play is higher than any other manager can do, but only with the right conditions. Hypothetically for instance, Moyes would do a better job with West Ham than Guardiola would, but Guardiola would do a MUCH better job with City than Moyes would -
 
redIndianDevil said:
Guardiola has been the best since the time I started watching football. The detractors will say he had better resources or managed in a one league or something but SAF for the majority of his career managed us and we had huge resources compared to other PL clubs.

I’d say Guardiola had a lot to do with Spain winning the World Cup as well. Barcelona and Spain played exactly the same way and the core of Barca formed the core of that Spain side as well.

He has shown himself to be tactically adept as well learning from experience of being naive in CL knockouts.
Click to expand...
These three points are spectacularly off the mark. First of all Ferguson never spent close to the money City have spent and we were never the highest spenders in the league under him. He still won leagues when Chelsea and City were spending ridiculous sums of money and we were being hamstrung by the Glazers. Pep also never had to go up against the great man for a league title and none of his current competitors even come close.

Spain won the Euros in 2008 before Guardiola started managing Barca, trying to give him credit for their World Cup win when they had a squad including Xavi, Iniesta, Villa, Torres, Ramon, Casillas and Puyol as their spine is bordering on insanity. You're giving him credit for a team he didn't even manage.

The final point is perhaps the worst. He's been given unlimited funds over 7 years and is only now finally about to win the competition. He shouldn't even need to be particularly tactically adept to beat the likes of Spurs, Monaco and Lyon. He's only going to win it this season because the competition is so poor. Bayern are the worst version of themselves since the 00s. Real are in transition, have been relying on a 38 year old in midfield and couldn't even win their own league against a team who couldn't even get past the Europa League round of 32. He now gets to play Inter in the final who finished 3rd in Serie A and are made up of PL rejects.
 
predator said:
He's the manager that guarantees rich clubs league titles given he gets what he wants. His vision and dominance is hard to ignore but we all would love to see what he would do with a small club with limited funds.

I'd love to see him managing a club that hadnt won the treble before he joined or one that was relegation standard. Purely out of interest.


Dont get me wrong, his standard of play is higher than any other manager can do, but only with the right conditions. Hypothetically for instance, Moyes would do a better job with West Ham than Guardiola would, but Guardiola would do a MUCH better job with City than Moyes would -
Click to expand...
I think the OPs question has been conclusively answered when people run out of excuses for the guy and posters start using a Moyes comparison to prop him up.
 
Josep Dowling said:
Also the blood samples of Barcelona players being destroyed after the Spanish doctor was arrested. Also the Bayern doctor resigned because Pep thought players should recover faster and were being sent to Spain for ‘quicker recovery.’ His entire career is smeared in accusation of cheating.
Click to expand...

Also Barcelona players would avoid UEFA's blood testing by faking injuries or randomly swapping training grounds while he was the manager there
 
He's very good, one of the best - but the best ever? I'm not sure. He's not done it where he hasn't had an unfair advantage.

Klopps Liverpool winning the league were more impressive, same as the Invincible era Arsenal. Our own domination during the SAF reign was not funded by financial doping.

He needs to do it somewhere he doesn't have a HUGE advantage.

He's still amazing though.
 
Can you leave the cheating out and claim he's the best manager because the footballing side is fantastic and he gets the trophies in? Can you claim you have a fantastic sex life because you cum 7 times a day by having a wank?
 
Josep Dowling said:
Let’s counter some of your argument:

Rijkaard won the Champions League in 2005/06 then had 2 bad seasons (in Barcelona terms). It’s not like Barcelona were mid-table. The likes of Ronaldinho were boozing so Pep had to address that but the foundations were there. Barcelona were very successful after Pep left as well.

Bayern were an unbelievable side the season before Pep joined. Their Champions League campaign was beautiful to watch, particularly when they hammered Barcelona. In my opinion they played better football under Heynkes than under Pep. Bayern have now won the Bundesliga 10 years in a row. Domestic success doesn’t mean anything to Bayern. And Pep got embarrassed by Barcelona in the Champions League.

Now at City. He’s has made them the dominant force in England but with unlimited money. People will always talk about United’s spending and say we have spent just as much without the success. Let’s pretend there isn’t any financial charges going on at City. Before he joined he had a squad including Aguero, David Silva, De Bruyne, Fernandinho, Kompany and Yaya Toure. The spine of a great team was already there. He spent a fortune in his first season and won nothing. He then started spending world record fees for a goalkeeper and defenders multiple times in one transfer window. This happened consistently until he got the formula right. This meant City built two separate 11s that could win the league. Now suddenly the club isn’t spending as much because they don’t need to, and City fans start acting like they spend within their means now. It’s incredibly laughable. One youth player has been integrated into the squad during this time and now isn’t a starter.

Now add in the financial charges into the mix. Would you have Haaland upfront this season without the financial doping? We are meant be the best young player in the world cost £51m? Spurs had to spend £60m to get Richarlison. City are the most valuable club in the world? City can attract higher value sponsorship deals than Man Utd and Real Madrid? The whole thing stinks of financial cheating to get an advantage.

To anyone but City fans he’s bought his success there. I don’t care how good the football is it’s easy to be that successful when you can spend, spend, spend until you get the formula right. If United spend £80m on a CB we have to try and make it work for 3-5 years. City have never had to do that.
Click to expand...

I believe that even if you take out 3-400 mil from City's spending and you gave it to Woodward or LVG or Mourinho or Ole, they would still won more than us and we would still end up with no CL and no PL titles. Maybe it's better this way, otherwise Liverpool would have one 1 or 2 leagues more.
He's just a far better manager that we got post SAF, no question about that.
 
Garnacho's Shoelaces said:
  • Took PEDs during playing career and caught twice
  • Managed Barca during period they were paying referees chief
  • Managed Bayern in a one team league
  • Managed City with financial doping, corruption and money laundering on an unprecedented scale unlikely to ever be repeated. Lies to media claiming to want a quick resolution while City's lawyers have been actively obstructing PL investigation and kicked can down the road with UEFA to invoke time limitations.
Pep is the greatest manager in the same way that Lance Armstrong had the best period of any cyclist in history and is also the greatest.
Click to expand...
With a few exceptions, this is speculation presented as fact. Very little you have presented has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt or even on the balance of probabilities.

Probably best to judge just by what he won and how his teams played. On that basis, there are a few managers that could be considered to be better at this stage, Fergie being chief among them.
 
I agree about the storytelling element. There really is no story to City's success. The media can try and churn it out but it doesn't seem to stick. Partly because people expect them to win everything.

Guardiola is a great coach, probably the best there is. I think his management style is helped by the fact that City were able to mould the backroom staff and business so he could hit the ground running. Not many clubs can afford to do that. Not even Ferguson at United.

Klopp winning a title at Liverpool means more. For the history, fans and context.
 
Andrade said:
With a few exceptions, this is speculation presented as fact. Very little you have presented has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt or even on the balance of probabilities.

Probably best to judge just by what he won and how his teams played. On that basis, there are a few managers that could be considered to be better at this stage, Fergie being chief among them.
Click to expand...
Barcelona paying the refs isn't just speculation, it's a fact. Their only argument is that it wasn't to give them an advantage, which is bollocks.

City were found guilty by UEFA but it was time barred and the sentence couldn't be carried out.

Then there is the background of 115 charges and the blood doping.

You can't ignore this stuff in these kind of debates because sporting competition relies on the principle that everyone plays by the same rules.

It'd be like someone editing all their players stats and adding a few billion to their club in the Football Manager editor, but then expecting people to ignore that when he's talking about how good he is at the game.
 
I always wonder why people continously bring up Fergie's time in Aberdeen as if it would make any difference in these conversations. Sure, it was a great achievement, but Pep winning the treble in his first season as top tier manager is a quite considerably bigger achievement (considering how rare it is for clubs to win trebles). Ferguson's own treble is certainly far more impressive as well, and up there with the most impressive achievements in football (more so than anything Pep has done).

Anyway, it's much too early saying Pep is the greatest ever. If he keeps winning another 15 years, he will certainly be in contention though.
 
Cloudface said:
Barcelona paying the refs isn't just speculation, it's a fact. Their only argument is that it wasn't to give them an advantage, which is bollocks.

City were found guilty by UEFA but it was time barred and the sentence couldn't be carried out.

Then there is the background of 115 charges and the blood doping.

You can't ignore this stuff in these kind of debates because sporting competition relies on the principle that everyone plays by the same rules.

It'd be like someone editing all their players stats and adding a few billion to their club in the Football Manager editor, but then expecting people to ignore that when he's talking about how good he is at the game.
Click to expand...
Juve have been punished multiple times. Where are the punishments for Barca and City?
 
CoopersDream said:
I always wonder why people continously bring up Fergie's time in Aberdeen as if it would make any difference in these conversations. Sure, it was a great achievement, but Pep winning the treble in his first season as top tier manager is a quite considerably bigger achievement (considering how rare it is for clubs to win trebles). Ferguson's own treble is certainly far more impressive as well, and up there with the most impressive achievements in football (more so than anything Pep has done).

Anyway, it's much too early saying Pep is the greatest ever. If he keeps winning another 15 years, he will certainly be in contention though.
Click to expand...
You don't know why people bring up Ferguson disrupting the Old Firm duopoly and winning European silverware with Aberdeen is brought up?!
 
Amadaeus said:
Nah, not yet, because Pochettino hasn't really gotten that platform yet. He created a platform for spurs, only for Levy to mess it up, by not backing him when they needed few world class players. Not surprised about how things are going with the clubs he has left.
Click to expand...

It's quite fascinating how you always stay in character. It really is some commitment to the bit.
 
Andrade said:
You don't know why people bring up Ferguson disrupting the Old Firm duopoly and winning European silverware with Aberdeen is brought up?!
Click to expand...
Oh, I know exactly why it's brought up in all threads regarding Pep. It's not really hard to figure out.

The thing is that Ferguson, for all that he did at Aberdeen, will still absolutely be defined by his time at United. Which is how it should be. And in regards to being the greatest of all time, his achievements at United weighs a lot heavier than what he did at Aberdeen.
 
Andrade said:
You don't know why people bring up Ferguson disrupting the Old Firm duopoly and winning European silverware with Aberdeen is brought up?!
Click to expand...

Probably because those people dont know that the Scottish league back then wasnt as shit as it is now(not saying it was Seria A). But even so, its the reason why Fergie was so highly rated for the United job in the first place.
 
Josep Dowling said:
Let’s counter some of your argument:

Rijkaard won the Champions League in 2005/06 then had 2 bad seasons (in Barcelona terms). It’s not like Barcelona were mid-table. The likes of Ronaldinho were boozing so Pep had to address that but the foundations were there. Barcelona were very successful after Pep left as well.

Bayern were an unbelievable side the season before Pep joined. Their Champions League campaign was beautiful to watch, particularly when they hammered Barcelona. In my opinion they played better football under Heynkes than under Pep. Bayern have now won the Bundesliga 10 years in a row. Domestic success doesn’t mean anything to Bayern. And Pep got embarrassed by Barcelona in the Champions League.

Now at City. He’s has made them the dominant force in England but with unlimited money. People will always talk about United’s spending and say we have spent just as much without the success. Let’s pretend there isn’t any financial charges going on at City. Before he joined he had a squad including Aguero, David Silva, De Bruyne, Fernandinho, Kompany and Yaya Toure. The spine of a great team was already there. He spent a fortune in his first season and won nothing. He then started spending world record fees for a goalkeeper and defenders multiple times in one transfer window. This happened consistently until he got the formula right. This meant City built two separate 11s that could win the league. Now suddenly the club isn’t spending as much because they don’t need to, and City fans start acting like they spend within their means now. It’s incredibly laughable. One youth player has been integrated into the squad during this time and now isn’t a starter.

Now add in the financial charges into the mix. Would you have Haaland upfront this season without the financial doping? We are meant be the best young player in the world cost £51m? Spurs had to spend £60m to get Richarlison. City are the most valuable club in the world? City can attract higher value sponsorship deals than Man Utd and Real Madrid? The whole thing stinks of financial cheating to get an advantage.

To anyone but City fans he’s bought his success there. I don’t care how good the football is it’s easy to be that successful when you can spend, spend, spend until you get the formula right. If United spend £80m on a CB we have to try and make it work for 3-5 years. City have never had to do that.
Click to expand...
You see, most top managers start from a lower club, get success at that level and then make the step up. It’s never a one-way route and even at the top it’s also never straight forward because success needs to be maintained and you can be judged more definitively because at that stage, the excuses of “no resources”, “he’s done well with little before”, “you know last season was too much so the players are fatigued” become less and less sellable. There are managers that it was said about them, once they are properly backed they’ll do wonders. Mourinho, Potter, Pochettino highlight this point.

In Pep’s case, huge faith was placed in him because of his doings in Barca B and he never looked back. In other words his first senior job was at big Barca which is not the normal route for managers. There have been many “Next Messis” over the decades but most never lived up to that hype. Messi was a world class talent but it took a Pep to nurture that talent by his on-field and off-field mentoring. It’s quite lazy to suggest that if it was Moyes that took hold of young Messi, we’d have the Messi we have today. There was so much meticulous planning and mentorship which included doing away with Pep’s most gifted player. Doubt if Moyes, or even most managers let alone any rookie manager, would have the balls to do that inspite of the player’s behavioral issues. The rookie manager went ahead to create his own Barca with a number of his own players and in the process created the most dominant European team in this era. He underwhelmed at Bayern alright but I think it’s fair to note that Pep is held to a higher standard to any manager in the world. I know that he walked into a treble winning team but when you look critically, you’d see that he just got a very hard job because he has to at minimum achieve a treble to not be seen to have performed worse Heynkes. Before Pep Bundesliga was very competitive mind you and Heynkes won the treble on the back of back-to-back league defeats to Dortmund. Of course we’ll only remember the treble win but it was Pep that removed the competitiveness from Bundesliga so to say.

Don’t get me wrong he’s had some spectacular failings but I’m saying he’s not alone in that. I recognize that He walked into a City team with world class stars but it was easily the oldest team in a physical league like the Epl with a number of players having a big name but having their best years behind them. They were a top heavy and bottom light team and their league position the year before was testament to that. Thing is he’s not the first or last manager at Barca, Bayern and City but if his success was all down to just having all the resources he required, why haven’t all the other managers that have rocked up at these clubs had a similar profile to Pep at the highest levels? When managers go from Madrid to Roma it’s because their employers, who pay their hard money, at Madrid found them unsuitable to continue the managing project. Saying that Pep will outdo Moyes at City but Moyes will outdo him at Westham is lazy. There would be time for adjustment with Pep alright and he may not have the world class stars but he will over a few years eke out a very good and competitive team because he is a stickler to his style and he understands the modern game quite well as you can see his footprints in managers like Kompany at Burnley and seeing what managers like Arteta are producing at Arsenal. I don’t know many mangers that have that level of stylistic following.
At City when you mention Mahrez, Chelsea have got players like Ziyech. Foden and Grealish play second fiddle to Saka and Rashford in England. Partey and Rodri were both at Athletico, Gundo and Bernardo are not standouts from every other thing the epl has like Kovacic, Kante, Bruno, Thiago, Odegaard, etc. Liverpool have Jota, Diaz, Firminho, Salah, Gakpo and Nunez in attack. Let’s not pretend that they have some big big leverage over the best clubs in the epl. Even the argument of spending doesn’t hold up. When a manger comes in, he inherits the good and bad and also has the opportunity to change the bad whilst holding onto the good. The problem comes when that same manager’s signings don’t hold up and then he gets binned for someone else. It’s Pep’s success that has created the stability they have with transfers. No manager had it all 100%. Chelsea have had Auba, Morata, Werner, Lukaku in quick succession but hardly gets a mention. Also it doesn’t get mentioned that they have lost out trying to sign Cucurella, Sanchez, Jorginho, Kane, Pogba, etc so have they truly always gotten all they wanted? Please let’s give this poor man his due. We are holding him to a higher standard than other managers and requiring him to do the impossible act of moving to mid table clubs. I’d rather ask managers who are considered good enough to make the move to the bigger richer clubs and test themselves at that level against the very best because managers do not intentionally go down.



What we agree on is that City are a despicable club.
 
Last edited:
Josep Dowling said:
Let’s counter some of your argument:

Rijkaard won the Champions League in 2005/06 then had 2 bad seasons (in Barcelona terms). It’s not like Barcelona were mid-table. The likes of Ronaldinho were boozing so Pep had to address that but the foundations were there. Barcelona were very successful after Pep left as well.

Bayern were an unbelievable side the season before Pep joined. Their Champions League campaign was beautiful to watch, particularly when they hammered Barcelona. In my opinion they played better football under Heynkes than under Pep. Bayern have now won the Bundesliga 10 years in a row. Domestic success doesn’t mean anything to Bayern. And Pep got embarrassed by Barcelona in the Champions League.

Now at City. He’s has made them the dominant force in England but with unlimited money. People will always talk about United’s spending and say we have spent just as much without the success. Let’s pretend there isn’t any financial charges going on at City. Before he joined he had a squad including Aguero, David Silva, De Bruyne, Fernandinho, Kompany and Yaya Toure. The spine of a great team was already there. He spent a fortune in his first season and won nothing. He then started spending world record fees for a goalkeeper and defenders multiple times in one transfer window. This happened consistently until he got the formula right. This meant City built two separate 11s that could win the league. Now suddenly the club isn’t spending as much because they don’t need to, and City fans start acting like they spend within their means now. It’s incredibly laughable. One youth player has been integrated into the squad during this time and now isn’t a starter.

Now add in the financial charges into the mix. Would you have Haaland upfront this season without the financial doping? We are meant be the best young player in the world cost £51m? Spurs had to spend £60m to get Richarlison. City are the most valuable club in the world? City can attract higher value sponsorship deals than Man Utd and Real Madrid? The whole thing stinks of financial cheating to get an advantage.

To anyone but City fans he’s bought his success there. I don’t care how good the football is it’s easy to be that successful when you can spend, spend, spend until you get the formula right. If United spend £80m on a CB we have to try and make it work for 3-5 years. City have never had to do that.
Click to expand...

Wasnt that Haalands fixed Transfer clause? Which was like apparently the reason we didnt go for him before Dortmund because he insisted on having that clause in his contract?
 
Andrade said:
Juve have been punished multiple times. Where are the punishments for Barca and City?
Click to expand...

1- time barred

2- current charges are under investigation both in Spain and England

3- Juve has been punished for false accounting, the "plusvalenza". One case involves a deal with Barcelona (who did the same false accounting, and also did it in other deals with Valencia). Juve were punished by Italian authorities. Barcelona are no even under investigation for these.
Why? You tell me.
 
predator said:
I read the OP but not the following pages so I'm not sure what you are even saying.
Click to expand...
That the thread started off with comparisons to some of the true greats, but as those comparisons became harder to legitimise for various reasons he is now instead being compared to Moyes.

There are even some desperate attempts to give him credit for Spain winning a World Cup, a trophy he didn't even win, despite them being a legit great team and champions of Europe before he even started managing at the top level.

Klopp has also been brought up numerous times as some kind of vindication for Pep's greatness, this is a guy who has lost 5 out of 6 European finals and has as many CL titles as Benitez and as many PL* titles as Leicester. People are making out like Pep has been up against an all time great. It's almost as if our own team being terribly run for a decade has made us overrate our direct rivals and anything associated with them to a ridiculous degree.
 
tenpoless said:
The greatest manager at picking clubs where he cannot fail.
Click to expand...
Maybe there’s a reason why he turned us down when Sir Alex tried to entice him at the end of his reign to take over. With City breathing down our necks, several players at the end of their prime and other senior members leaving he knew the magnitude of the job on his hands, and ended up plumping for the guaranteed success at Bayern.
 
tenpoless said:
The greatest manager at picking clubs where he cannot fail.
Click to expand...

TBH most managers would do that if they were the highest rated in the world. Pep had such an impressive start to his career he didnt have to prove himself at a lower lvl first. Only Zidane managed to equal Pep´s start to their careers as managers.
 
dal said:
Klopp won one league, Ranieri did this also with a much inferior team. Saying Pep has no chance, a manager who has won five leagues is embarrassing.
Click to expand...

Pep has not shown that he can build a team with less resources than the competition, so I stand by what I wrote. Until now, even with all the insane spending he has done at City and all the financial breaches they have committed, he still hasn't been able to win the CL without Messi and co.
 
Pep isn’t even close to Cloughy in terms of management ability.
 
Gehrman said:
TBH most managers would do that if they were the highest rated in the world. Pep had such an impressive start to his career he didnt have to prove himself at a lower lvl first. Only Zidane managed to equal Pep´s start to their careers as managers.
Click to expand...
Yeah but of course when he chose that path it isnt as hard as most managers, his Barca stint was impressive because he started there but after that they are not so impressive.

Its like when a kid is educated very well since early age under a privileged family worth billions. If he grows up to be successful then its to be expected. That sums up his career after Barca. At the start of his career though he did brilliantly, not only restoring Barca but also dominating world of football. His Bayern and City career are way less impressive than the one he had at Barca. So if he werent the greatest then, why would he be now?

Irrational. said:
Maybe there’s a reason why he turned us down when Sir Alex tried to entice him at the end of his reign to take over. With City breathing down our necks, several players at the end of their prime and other senior members leaving he knew the magnitude of the job on his hands, and ended up plumping for the guaranteed success at Bayern.
Click to expand...
When Jose started to get the better of him, he took a sabatical, he said he wasnt up to it anymore (not at his best). I think he was one of those people obsessed with keeping a pristine record, he only took jobs he was 100% ready for and sure will be a success. Thats why he joined an oil club despite his earlier successes. If you look at his career, his job only became easier and not harder.
 
Convicted for doping while playing.
His best team has been caught paying the refs.
115 charges FC and it's still taken him 6 years to win the CL.

Best ever my arse.
 
It's a toss up between him and Fergie but probably when he retires and everyone realises just what he brought to football I think he'll go down as the greatest to ever do it.
 
There’s a lot of shite arguments here, Pep is clearly one of the best, he guarantees league success, won 12 out of 15 leagues in his career, has the record for most consecutive games won in the Premier League, Bundesliga and La Liga.

The people saying he wouldn’t do as well as Klopp at Liverpool - we will never know - but you’re saying that best league manager of all time couldn’t win a single Premier League in 8 years? I seriously doubt that. The way he coaches players and adapts them to his game is top-class, it’s the management equivalent of saying Messi couldn’t do it on a cold Tuesday in Stoke.

Anyway to answer the question, no he isn’t - it’s Alex Ferguson. There are a few other greats too to consider. But if he wins tonight he’s worthy of top 5 for sure.
 
I'm not really a fan of comparing across eras. I find it ridiculous. Different contexts, challenges, achievements. It's like comparing a current boxer to some fella from 1890 that fought 150 times. You wouldn't really compare directly because it makes no sense to do so. That's what comparing Pep to a manager from the 70s is like. Even comparing to Fergie is hard because the bulk of Fergie's career was a different football landscape and he took on very different challenges to Pep. It's more a case of being the best in your own time and certainly Pep is that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.