Jose Mourinho | 2017/18 Assessments | Poll Added
- Thread starter Suedesi
- Start date
- Status
I'm not ignoring at all, here you go .... you've still only listed 3 good sides and proven my point. In 1 specific era which I wasn't even talking about, you've still proven that a poor season could have us finish 3rd or 4th because of the competition. Yet in today's league with 5/6 super teams spending hundreds of millions, a bad season by default could end in 5th or 6th. You've proved me right, thank you.
Is it wrong to think that the backbone of the teams you mentioned is far better than any current PL teams?
For sure very much arguable and in most cases you can make a good argument that those teams are better than the current versions.
It’s almost like you pass these rules but don’t expect a sarcastic answer....
Please don’t be negative.....
Wow, comparing today's top 6 eras to 2000s and the 90s? Leeds and Newcastle were a lot stronger than it is today, they could give us a run for the money. In the 2000s Arsenal, Chelsea, United and Liverpool are much stronger than today, they pretty dominated Europe at least 3 teams reach semi-final regularly.
United's 99s treble winning sides are a mile ahead of everyone after beating club the likes of Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Juventus in Europe. if you thought the United 99-sides would finish as 3th in the 2017-18 season because of their points they gained in the 1998-99 season? That doesn't mean they would be weak and they would finish 3rd but they would win the league comfortably. No teams have managed to pick up more than 80 points for 3 years at end of the century, that's how the quality of PL was a lot stronger in back time especially the bottom teams and more competitive barring United. Today PL bottom teams have regressed a lot by a mile compared to the late 90s.
United's 99s treble winning sides are a mile ahead of everyone after beating club the likes of Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Juventus in Europe. if you thought the United 99-sides would finish as 3th in the 2017-18 season because of their points they gained in the 1998-99 season? That doesn't mean they would be weak and they would finish 3rd but they would win the league comfortably. No teams have managed to pick up more than 80 points for 3 years at end of the century, that's how the quality of PL was a lot stronger in back time especially the bottom teams and more competitive barring United. Today PL bottom teams have regressed a lot by a mile compared to the late 90s.
Some people will do anything to big up their hero Mourinho, even down playing the greatest manager in this clubs history’s achievements.
I'm confused again, why are people comparing different eras when the rules are different? Any manager should be compared to what we want as a club and not to past colleagues.
Here's an example of expectations, argue if you will.
Maximum ( unrealistic): Win PL every season, final of CL every season
Realistic: Win PL every 2-3 seasons, fight for PL every season, ~semi-finals of CL every season
Current: Be better than LvG and Moyes, get out of groups of CL, get into top 4
Is it only me who isn't happy with the current situation? Football quality could be ignored if we meet our goals on a consistent basis, which we don't knwo yet.
Here's an example of expectations, argue if you will.
Maximum ( unrealistic): Win PL every season, final of CL every season
Realistic: Win PL every 2-3 seasons, fight for PL every season, ~semi-finals of CL every season
Current: Be better than LvG and Moyes, get out of groups of CL, get into top 4
Is it only me who isn't happy with the current situation? Football quality could be ignored if we meet our goals on a consistent basis, which we don't knwo yet.
Will be very difficult to consistently challenge for the title every season, for any top team, let alone win it. Unless you spend like City did every season.
I think winning the league every 2-3 seasons, or occasionally coming close and not winning, and then making Top 4 in the gaps between these seasons (with domestic cups or good CL run) is fine, might be unrealistic pressure to ask for a title challenge every season.
For a club and fans that pride themselves on longevity and consistency of managers, (SMB, SAF) there seems to be a lot of trigger happy fans ready to axe Mou without giving him more time to get rid of the average players and bring in more of his own.
No one who is available is better than Mou, and I am not sure there are many if any managers out there better equipped to get United back to the top.
We do not want a revolving door of managers and end up like Chelsea and Real.
United get abuse from all other clubs fans this season, which is due to the fear factor gradually coming back. We haven’t had that in a long time and Mou is slowly getting us on track. We need to keep him long term, as we have seen what happens when we expect everything to happen quickly to get us back where we want to be.
No one who is available is better than Mou, and I am not sure there are many if any managers out there better equipped to get United back to the top.
We do not want a revolving door of managers and end up like Chelsea and Real.
United get abuse from all other clubs fans this season, which is due to the fear factor gradually coming back. We haven’t had that in a long time and Mou is slowly getting us on track. We need to keep him long term, as we have seen what happens when we expect everything to happen quickly to get us back where we want to be.
The realistic expectations seem mostly realistic. Maybe not sure about expecting CL semis every season when there's Barca, Madrid, PSG, Bayern, Juventus, City etc all probably expecting that too. Will often come down to luck of the draw. Don't think you can argue about Mourinho's European record for us at the moment though. Won the European competition we were in last season. Won our CL group this season. Time will tell how far we go from here. League wise, nearly any other season we'd be in a title challenging position with the points we currently have. Obviously the bar has been raised now and we have to raise ourselves equally next season.
My post was more suggestive than a fine representation. Mourinho has ticked quite a few of the boxes this season and when i've criticized him it's because i don't want to see us regress.
As for the European expectations, i agree and have (~) in the post because cup formats are always more unpredictable.
What i don't like, and we've seen it since LvG, is the lowering of the standards show by a part of our fan base.
@The holy trinity 68 Real won back-to-back CLs and Chelsea are now self sufficient and the most dominant club in London. Neither of those are good examples against changes in management.
Both those clubs had good squads when the managers changed. If Mourinho leaves us now and we appoint another, our squad is not yet good enough to achieve instant success and we may even go backwards.
Before you point out we have some good players too, the likes of Pogba and Martial need to learn more and are yet developing their game. Same goes for Lukaku, who seems to be buying into Jose's tactics. Other than De Gea and Sanchez, we do not have ready made CL/PL winning superstars. A new manager would take more time with them.
Sir Alex wouldn't finish 6th because he was a much better manager than Mourinho. Amusing that you run back 99 to make this point when we dominated when English football was at its strongest in recent times and then proceeded to win 2 in 4 when City joined the mix.
Are you crazy? Hardly any of our players are performing consistently to levels they have shown in the past so why would we go backwards. Do you think we are getting the most out of Lukaku, Sanchez, Pogba, Shaw, Martial, Mata?
It's also a Managers job to develop players and there are coaches out there who are very good at this. Klopp mentioned that in England we are obsessed with buying over coaching. Not every manager needs ready made finish articles as some have shown proficiency at developing existing talent.
There is nothing wrong with your opinions. However, we're missing the point. I showed you how your examples were flawed and the revolving door argument doesn't hold water, especially in this day and age.
As for those team having good squads, how is it related to the longevity of their managers? It shows only that clubs organized in a specific way, with preparedness, can ensure continuity in the playing personnel without the need for consistency in the names of the coaching staff.
You also simply assume a new manager would take more time with them. The whole topic is different and i don't see where your post connects to it.
Personally, i don't like Mourinho's style but can forgive it when winning. My issues have moved onto the board, as i think they need to restructure the club to be better prepared for the modern environment. The last couple of appointments before Mourinho should have thought us about the dangers of signing a current coach's players. I am 100% sure the people on top are much more knowledgeable than I and yet everyone makes mistakes or takes time to adapt.
We are too big to fail, at least that's my hope. We'll get it right eventually.
If we compare him with our previous managers like moyes and van gaal then of course he is a massive improvement. If we look at what he has achieved of course he is massive improvement. But united unfortunately do not play like he has asked them to play. The amount of money he has spent is also not less. Hence, if we are to finish below 4th then he must be sacked . Teams like liverpool has spent much less and plays much better attacking football than us.
I sort of disagree with this. Before his second stint at Chelsea Mourinho never finished below second at any club he took over and even then he was only 4 points off the title when he finished 3rd. While his longevity is obviously still questionable his feck up in 2015/16 clouds a previously spectacular career of his own.
Ferguson is obviously the greatest manager in the club's history and shaped a behemoth in his own image but it still took him 7 seasons to win the league when he first took over - finishing 11th, 2nd, 11th and 13th in his first four. His constant success after 92 was built on the back of his previous (and continued) brilliance but that position was hard earned and the initial transformation still required time. Although Utd of then and Utd of 2016 bear no great resemblance I'd still maintain that it deserves more scrutiny than the Utd from the middle of Ferguson's reign. Mourinho inherited a club down on its luck, out of the champions league, devoid of any clear direction and where the machine Ferguson had built and regularly oiled had been somewhat bent out of shape by consecutive and lesser managerial figures. No doubt Ferguson would stem this decline and reverse it but there is no evidence to suggest that even he wouldn't have required time.
Yeah, but when you think about the fact that LVG finished higher with lesser players(by his own doing), Mourinho only got 3 more points, people will use the Europa as an excuse but I think that it's a lame excuse, we had enough players to do better. LVG was bad and Mourinho hasn't been far better.
Edit: I'm only talking about last season.
If Mourinho brought in an attacking coach to get us being a bit more cohesive I would be happy.
Fact is though our attack is either very good or toothless. When the going get's tough we need to have a gameplan to fall back onto.
Fact is though our attack is either very good or toothless. When the going get's tough we need to have a gameplan to fall back onto.
Attacking coaches would suggest things such as higher lines and pressing which changes the shape of the team. It would conflict with Jose’s other tactics. It’s not as simple as just bringing in an attacking coach.
Sure, I think the team and club still lack an identity and lots of games have been absolutely tumescent affairs since he took over. He's found a way to win but it's often been in an ugly and underwhelming fashion - I'm often dissatisfied with the spectacle he provides and he's also had the benefit of a fair old wad of cash. I'm not saying he's been a smash hit just that I think any manager would have struggled with the initial situation. I still remain hopeful performances will improve. Mourinho's always been a results first kind of guy and he has at least elevated the club to a better position than it was in when he arrived.
Laughable. I didnt day Sir Alex wouldn't need time. I said he was a much better manager. Which he clearly was. Jose never finished lower than 2nd partly because he was in charge of Porto (Portugals top club), Chelsea (blank cheque club), Inter (already dominant in Italy due to Mancini) and Madrid (miles above the everyone else but Barca even under goodish managers).
It took Sir Alex 7 years because he didn't have the same kind of platform. Jose has and almost always has had.
Here is how I see things and why I'm not kind with Mourinho.
We all agree on the fact that LVG wasn't given a good situation but we all concluded that his job was below par and personally my gripe was almost exclusively regarding the terrible level of entertainment, the results were alright considering the starting point, his poor transfer business are perfectly normal for him, he has always been terrible in that department which is why I blamed the club for not bringing someone to oversee the head coach.
Now, when you sack LVG you do it because of the results, the level of performances or both during his first year Mourinho's results have been in my opinion comparable to LVG's, at some point one has to be serious, Zorya, Anderlecht, ASSE and I don't know who else are terrible teams, it's nice to have the cup but the competition was terrible, in the league Mourinho had 3 more points and again the excuse of the EL is a poor one, our opponents in EL were terrible. And in general it was a borefest.
To me LVG and Mourinho have had the same type of career at United, the difference being that Mourinho is in my opinion good on the transfer market which gives him more leeway but I can't understand anyone that tries to pretend that Mourinho deserves more time or stronger support, he does not, on the field he hasn't done a good job, he is below par, the only difference is that he doesn't hurt the club with his transfer dealings. If Mourinho was our DOF, I would be okay with his job but he isn't.
I don't want to see him leave the club but I expect a steady improvement and not something based on spending 400m€.
Haram is right. There's no point bring an attacking coach unless Mourinho is willing to change the way he plays, fundamentally.
Up until last month, I had no idea there were attacking coaches in football.
Looks past the fact Mourinho had to deal with the shite van gaal left behind, he also won 2 trophies and we are now in a better position in a league which has got stronger. The home form has improved from last year, and now next season we must improve the away form.
He is doing a better job than van Gaal. It’s not his fault Louis decided to buy players like Darmian and Schneiderlin.
I don't put any stock in the two trophies simply because Van Gaal won the FA who is a better trophy than the Caribou cup and the EL was terrible to watch and we dodged every good teams we could have faced, so when it comes to judge the performances of both manager, for me it's a tie but Mourinho gets the nod because he is a better manager, as head coaches they are in the same ballpark.
Yeah, you are still looking past the fact that Mourinho had to deal with the shit van Gaal left behind.
We are better now, simple as.
I'm not, I'm equating the shit left by LVG to Mourinho, with the shit left by Moyes to LVG.
He took over Chelsea who were richer than anyone. Then Inter Milan who were already the 1st placed team under Mancini. Then he took over Real Madrid...........before returning to Chelsea who were rebuilding and had finished 6th and 3rd. That was probably the most difficult situation. Also did Ferguson have more money than almost any other side in Europe when he came? Jose was able to break the transfer record in the world and we have allowed him to spend more than almost everyone in Europe. I don't think it was the same when Ferguson 1st came. It was the Italian sides who were buying the most expensive players where as it is generally the British sides today. different era
Not at all. Fergie brought in Quieroz to help with the defensive side. Yes we became more solid but our attacking football didn't disappear.
We don't need to completely change style, just work to be more effective with our movements and learn how to work as a team better.
I agree to an extent. The club definitely didn't face stellar opposition in either of the cup runs and remained uncompetitive in the league. Van Gaal's record against the big teams was actually superior to Mourinho's too. I would say, though, that Mourinho's problems in the league often stemmed from a gobsmacking inability to actually put the ball in the net as opposed to Van Gaal's recurring inability to even manufacture chances.
Another difference worth mentioning is that Van Gaal's second season actually saw the club regress despite winning a cup - went out of the Champions League group stages against fairly mediocre competition, got beat by Liverpool in the Europa, scored far fewer goals than in his first term, managed to accrue fewer points and so fell from fourth to fifth in the league. There was also an apparently better manager ready and waiting to take over.
By contrast Mourinho is currently 2nd in the league, the team has already scored more goals than in Van Gaal's final season and is on course to concede fewer. He's advanced from the group stages of the Champions League and remains in the FA cup. His points total, goals scored and position in other competitions all point to a steady improvement both over Van Gaal and his own first term. Certainly the team is still performing below my expectations and if things don't continue to improve then I agree that he will no longer deserve stronger support - as things are though he retains my tentative confidence.
Moyes signed 2 players. Van gaal signed 12. Moyes was here for 1 year. Van Gaal was here for 2 years. There was 3 years of rot Mourinho was dealing with. Van Gaal made Mourinho’s job more difficult.
Can’t believe people are trying to say things are the same to what they were under van Gaal. We are better. Mourinho has done a better job. Simple as.
CL we were more defensive and played counter attack. Mourinho can play counter attack as well, so I don’t get your point. We were also working with a better team back then. We dont have Rio, Evra, Vidic, Scholes, Carrick, Rooney and Ronaldo now.
I didn't say things are the same, I said Mourinho isn't doing a good job like LVG wasn't doing a good job. if you can't read don't respond to my post.
He is doing a better job than van Gaal. He is doing a good job.
That's your opinion.
I think SAF's willingness to adapt created the 'zombie football' phenomenon. He knew that the squad in 12/13 had to play a certain way to succeed, and took inspiration from coaches to utilize a single striker as a focal point. He has always preferred multiple strikers, but in that season Van Persie was basically given the ball and told to work his magic like a Drogba type of striker. It wasn't really SAF's management but some sort of amalgamation of different coaches.
I think we are already seeing it with Mourinho; where he is losing his identity as a manager because he wants to please the club. Mourinho does not persist with players that keep on making mistakes or are not at the right level; yet our defense is still from the SAF era. As a result, we are conceding chances at a greater rate than normal Mourinho teams. The old Mourinho would have benched Martial for Perisic, but he seemed to just accept he wasn't coming (even though the player himself wanted to join) and is now trying to develop Martial.
Hiring a manager and trying to change fundamental parts of his coaching can destroy a manager. Most people would accept that JM is not at the level he was in his first 10 years, still a top manager, but he's just a bit different than before.
I think we are already seeing it with Mourinho; where he is losing his identity as a manager because he wants to please the club. Mourinho does not persist with players that keep on making mistakes or are not at the right level; yet our defense is still from the SAF era. As a result, we are conceding chances at a greater rate than normal Mourinho teams. The old Mourinho would have benched Martial for Perisic, but he seemed to just accept he wasn't coming (even though the player himself wanted to join) and is now trying to develop Martial.
Hiring a manager and trying to change fundamental parts of his coaching can destroy a manager. Most people would accept that JM is not at the level he was in his first 10 years, still a top manager, but he's just a bit different than before.
- Status