The ultra defensive football of the 2000s, he destroyed it with his Barcelona side. The focus on the game with the ball and the emphasis on trying to control a game that is chaotic by nature. Even midtable sides, across Europe, are trying to make room in their teams for players who can produce something with the ball. I still remember the looks on SAF and Giggs' faces after the 2009 final: "We did everything in our power to become the ultimate 1-0 team to do well in Europe, and then he shows up and does this".
Is Pep the greatest manager of all time?
- Thread starter Irrational.
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) are here to discuss Amad saving our blushes in a win against Southampton as well as our now annual loss at home to Brighton. They discuss Amorim's post-match comments, revisit how mid-table we may or may not be, and discuss some transfer news.
The ultra defensive football of the 2000s, he destroyed it with his Barcelona side. The focus on the game with the ball and the emphasis on trying to control a game that is chaotic by nature. Even midtable sides, across Europe, are trying to make room in their teams for players who can produce something with the ball. I still remember the looks on SAF and Giggs' faces after the 2009 final: "We did everything in our power to become the ultimate 1-0 team to do well in Europe, and then he shows up and does this".
Why though? In my mind it clearly paints a picture about the average spending of top clubs in England, and also the varied success the spending brings? Should I refrain from using United as an example?
not exactly though, because the closest comparison you can make in this case is klopp at liverpool, who joined around the same time and in 9 years spent 850m to guardiolas near 1.5 billion. He's spent that much not just because he's been at a big club in the PL, but because hes been at city where he was able to crush the likes of klopp, his nearest rival, in the market. (again despite him joining with a incredibly superior squad to what klopp got, kompany, sterling, silva, de bruyne, aguero for example)
Theres truth to what you say of course, if you spend 10 years at a top 4 pl club youre going to spend more than a manager who spends 10 years split between a top 4 pl club, a serie a team, and a german team for example. So im not dismissing you outright, but his figures, on top of the players hes managed that were already at his clubs are staggering. The best argument people seem to come up with against that is a very confused 'what about united', as if we cant all agree that united wasting money for a decade isnt very clear. Ok Guardiola has spent well probably more often than not (despite wasting far more money than people acknowledge) but his spending can still be considered and contextualised without having to consider a separate, failing football club.
come on, poor Pep only spent almost half a billion between 2022 and their falling off a cliff by november 2024, of course it was time to 'invest' again.
now shut up and watch them cruise back to top 4 and marvel at how hes possibly managed to turn it around
You know what, I actually agree with a lot of this. Good post, and it shows that our recruitment has been very poor in the last couple of years compared to the years preceeding them which he has to take as much blame for as anyone else.Weird conclusion as hes spent 290m in the last 18 months, not including this january where hes probalby going to eclipse 150m or thereabouts. He spent 160m if you go back a summer more. To say its at a point where it needs to be invested in again after almost 300m in the previous 18 months isnt a strong argument.
What makes his huge spending remarkable to me is that he has always been at clubs where the core of his success was in place. Barcelona already had xavi iniesta busquets and messi among some others, all of his early success at city was the result of the core who were already there too. He has never had to rebuild a team from day 1, and there is an enromous difference between inheriting a strong squad and inheriting a mess, so if you're going to try compare clubs you'd have to find a more like for like situation im afraid. For example if a manager came into the current madrid set up with their wealth of talent, and splurged like crazy.
Bottom line is they invested massively just 18 months ago, (and that was after enormous invest the previous 2 summers of players still very much integral to his team), and he wasn't able to sustain the success despite this, so he's spraying money again in the rare case of mid season. Which will no doubt be followed up in summer.
In black and white terms since 2022 he's signed Haaland, Ortega, Akanji, Gvrdiol, Kovacic, Doku, Nunes, Savinho and several others at a cost of almost half a billion! then by late 2024 when they are performing abysmally, youre saying its time to reinvestjust imagine how much the majority of managers in england's heads would spin hearing that.
Still the point is that the squad currently has gaping holes in it whether it should have or not and is in a position where going into a market where the level you need are expensive is just the reality of the situation. I just think it is weird that most of the time when managers of top clubs go knto the market to solve issues it is talked about as the obvious thing to do, but now City are signing 2 young players that probably won't feature much this season the narrative about splashing the cash to save the season comes out. I just think it is a bit of a weird one.
And I appreciate that it weren't your original argument, but another poster but when the sustainability of it get questioned when you look at the famed net spend over the last few years (10th in that table over the last 5 years) makes it hard to not draw comparisions with other clubs. Clubs spend obscene amounts on players, it is just the reality. I appreciate that you can't compare Guardiola having a somewhat settled group of winners in that time compared to other clubs chasing success, but there is some credit due for actually maintaining that level of success over 9 years. We see how much other clubs spend to take some of it
Last edited:
I agree he's been able spend his way out of trouble whenever needed, however, he's normally very good at it bar the odd exception. United have squandered about 1.5 billion in the last decade, and look at where they are now. Had that been Pep doing all that spending, without a doubt United would be consistently challenging for titles. Very few teams at the top do it without spending a lot, the key is to spend it well and manage those players well, Pep is one of the best at that for sure.Highest spending manager in history of football even though he has always joined well stocked squads that never needed anything close to the rebuild of United
Rewrite it as "he's the top spending manager because he's been at a big spending club in PL for so long". He'd absolutely be top spending manager of all time if he was managing United or Chelsea. Heck, he could have taken a six year break and gotten the Chelsea job in 2022 and they would already have made him the top spending manager of all time since then. There's ridiculous money in the PL, and it's not just City that spends. I get that Liverpool doesn't really spend as much, and all credit to them and Klopp for being so competetive - but they still won one compared to six. Klopp assembled a world class squad, so not winning at least one league title would have been underwhelming as far as I'm concerned.
The reason City had such a strong squad for a long period of time (especially between 2017-23) is not because they bought so many more players than all the other clubs, or that they bought ready made world class stars, it's because they genuinely were great recruiters. The first five seasons Guardiola was manager for City, the only truly bad signing they made was Mendy (and even Mendy was because he got a lot of injuries the first years (and then ended up suspended) rather then not being good). Bravo and Nolito were obviously not great signings, but they were quite cheap so I wouldn't really count them anyway. The rest have been ranging from good to brilliant signings. You can see now the last few years when their recruitment hasn't been as strong (players like Grealish, Nunes and Phillips have been mediocre at best whereas guys like Savinho and Doku still has a lot to prove). They also got rid of Alvarez, who was quality. This together with the fact that some key players are aging (one will probably leave in this window) makes them look quite a bit weaker than what they did a couple of years ago. But anyway, no matter how much Pep spent in the market, if they had as low success rate as United for their signings City wouldn't have dominated anything.
Last edited:
Of course it depends on whos doing the signings. Was it pep or the people in charge. would he have faced the same chaos at united as our failures under woodward etc? almost certainlty. Regards his transfer record, of course its good, all he has to do is point at his trophy cabinet to prove it - but that said he (or city) have also spent 310m on Grealish, Mendy, Phillips, Torres, Nunes and Danilo. Jury very much out on Doku at 60. Even Laporte and Kovacic at 100m could be called ok signings, Laporte obviously a good part of some success but never really seemed to be trusted and was just upgraded on for another expensive defender. Its huge money to be able to be cavalier with.
Anyway I appreciate the engagement from all including @CoopersDream and @FeedTheGoat , i dont think its likely we'll ever end up on exactly the same page regarding guardiola. separately though, and i dont mean this as a parting jab, even just privately try consider him without considering man utd. it seems to be the constant fall back when any critique of the man exists, as if the two things cant be separated. Man United are almost an anomaly, a phenomenon of waste and chaos, no planning, no structure, in anything from managerial choices to season tickets. There is merit in pointing to their spending since ferguson, but only so much, they are an outlier of failure that is an enormous deviation from any norms and could be studied decades from now as an example of how a club was ruined. It truly is not the comparative study so many seem to think it is and I do wonder what Guardiola fans would resort to if Man Utd didnt exist.
But he didn't do that alone. I mean I fully understand your view as a United fan, that final was quite a shock and eye-opening in a way.
But from my German perspective: Yes, in the late 2000s there was a shift away from purely defensive football. Here we saw Rangnick and Klopp with their high-speed pressing football and on the other hand van Gaal introducing something similar to Pep at Bayern. Pep's wins proved that it was a good decision for Bayern to sign a manager who stands for something similar, but after all Pep's personal influence on changing styles was near zero and the CL final 2013 somewhat proved that the short dominance of purely possession based teams was already over as Klopp's Dortmund and a Heynckes Bayern (who played a very balanced mix between LvG-style possession and Klopp-style aggressiveness) showed that a more physical style could just overpower Barca and everybody else.
I appreciate your view, but i disagree. RR never achieved any kind of dominance (at least outside Germany) to influence European football. I have a lot of respect for LvG since it was his Ajax side that actually made me interested to start thinking about tactics, but his version of possession football is different to LvG's. It's no coincidence that Cruyff, who was always very adamant about hoe Total Football should be played, appreciated Guardiola but despised LvG with a passion. Klopp, for me, is the antidote to Pep's quest for absolute control. One aims to tame the chaos of football, the other wants to embrace it. These are their philosophies in their purest forms. Since then, they have both toned it down a bit. In my opinion, though, the point of reference is still Guardiola. Purposeful possession, pressing tactics, centre-halves playing as quarterbacks, redefining the #8 role, the way he looks to create central overloads etc. These are some of the things most managers worth their salt are still trying to incorporate in their sides. I'm not talking about possession for possession's sake, that's a Guardiola thing. He's obsessed with control. Managers can and will deviate from the "dogma". But the blueprints are still there for all to see.
True. It is Klopp who was way more influential on the European stage, Rangnick however opened the door in Germany for this style. He is a necessary precursor, nut I didn’t want to claim him himself as a huge influence on European football as a whole.
Absolutely, every manager has slightly different views. Nonetheless both have quite similar general ideas.
Dutch being Dutch
That's a good way to see it.
But none of that is happening (only) due to Pep, that's my point.
True. It is Klopp who was way more influential on the European stage, Rangnick however opened the door in Germany for this style. He is a necessary precursor, nut I didn’t want to claim him himself as a huge influence on European football as a whole.
Absolutely, every manager has slightly different views. Nonetheless both have quite similar general ideas.
Dutch being Dutch
That's a good way to see it.
But none of that is happening (only) due to Pep, that's my point.
Respectfully, again, i will disagree (i'd be more willing to shake hands if only wasn't in parentheses). His Barcelona side was an "incision in time", a pivotal moment that has led to the football we're watching today more than anything else. Each "school" has added its own elements since then, Guardiola has embraced some of these elements himself, but he is a point of reference. You don't see midtable managers, as the norm, trying to play out from the back, control the midfield and attack with more than just 2–3 players because Heynckes (who deserves more credit for what he's achieved in his career) won the CL with Bayern Munich or because Klopp won two Bundesliga titles with BvB. I won't disagree that after 15 years the styles are mixed, but for me the initial shift should be attributed to Guardiola back in 2009-11.
I agree so far that Pep's Barca team than was the prime example and early peak of that development in football.
But where it looks like we will just have to disagree: You see Pep as the main factor for the whole paradigm shift. I see him as the (fully deserved) poster boy for a development that was happening anyway at the time.