He forged a team with thar money, something Hughes wasn't capable of with even more money, which is a dificult task
inter won under Mancini without rivals and he nearly fecked it up, something mourinho found much easier
- Status
He forged a team with thar money, something Hughes wasn't capable of with even more money, which is a dificult task
inter won under Mancini without rivals and he nearly fecked it up, something mourinho found much easier
If winning everything with money is so easy in the first place why have Madrid been so crap for years...surely they should be dominating everything...yet despite spending millions upon millions theyve gone through more managers every season than most of us do underwear....
Clearly Abramovich's billions make it all so easy to win the Premier League, every Chelsea manager since Abramovich's arrival have managed it with ease...
Oh wait...
Mourinhio had the advantage of timing over Hughes, when City came into money Chelsea had already inflated the markets and Real were doing their best to burn obscene amounts of cash on any top class player with half a mind to move.
What for? Do you always post such rubbish in that tone which is apparently attempting to be patronising?
Are you labouring under the impression that Grant, Scolari, Hiddink, and Ancelotti have operated with the same transfer budget Mourinho was afforded at Chelsea?
Perhaps you should revise your take on that and then try again...
Mourinho also had the advantage that Chelsea were a quite classy club, minus the likes off Geoff Cook or whoever, who were close to a title winning team under Ranieri and who could immediately attract top class signings, unlike City who under Hughes struggled to sell themselves to top class players...
What about Ranieri? He spent just as much and couldn't do it...
And that Abramovich's first move wasn't to sign a world class cnut who has looked like he'd rather be washing his car than playing for City....
So adebayor, toure, robinho, given, barry, tevez etc... Aren't class players?
Did he spend as much? Maybe if he'd been backed by the board, been allowed to stay on and then spend as much as Mourinho had to spend, he'd have won the title.
Some of them are good players but they're not at the same level as the players Mourinho was able to invest in at Chelsea.
So toure isn't as good as glen Johnson or paulo ferraira?
Adebayor is better now than drogba was then aswell
No he isn't...And why have you chosen to compare Chelsea's marquee defensive signing to Glen Johnson who was a disaster at Chelsea?
I think Ferreira is quite underrated actually...
As well as Robinhio being better than Wright phillips was when chelsea signed him.....
Some people just dislike Mourinhio and let that cloud their judgment.....you look back over this thread and most people who wouldnt want him here use the fact they strongly dislike him as one of the main reasons...silly really.
And why have you chosen to compare Chelsea's marquee defensive signing to Glen Johnson who was a disaster at Chelsea?
I think Ferreira is quite underrated actually...
You seriously believe that when chelsea signed drogba he was better than adebayor is
I think you have just killed your argument with that
Adebayor, Tevez and Robinho are footballing cancers, cut away by their previous clubs to prevent their teams becoming rotten.
You seriously believe that when chelsea signed drogba he was better than adebayor is
I think you have just killed your argument with that
I totally believe that Drogba was better in his first year at Chelsea than Adebayor is now. He was Player of the Year in France just before moving, lethal in the CL with Marseille, and cost 24 million pounds. Wasn't he the first name Mourinho told Abramovich he wanted?
I'm not sure why you're struggling so much with this concept - I think Drogba was almost as important in changing Chelsea into a title winning team as Mourinho was. Certainly, if Ranieri had had Drogba I think he'd have won the league.
Is that why we tried to keep tevez and arsenal requested such a large transfer fee?
Until mourinho's last season drogba was quite average for chelsea, he may have been lethal in ligue un but so wad souleymane diawara, so hardly a fantastic sign is it?
Why would Arsenal ever have asked for City for less than they could get? How does that have any say on what Arsenal thought of Adebayor by selling him? You really think if they liked him they'd have let City have him for less than his value in the current market?
We only tried once it was too late.
Arsenal aren't stupid, they knew that City had to spend big and were running out of options.
I give up. Drogba came with a huge reputation and it was obvious right from the off that he was going to be a sensational player who'd help Chelsea tremendously. For me there's no comparison with Adebayor, and never was...
If arsenal wanted to get rid as bad as made out then they would have accepted a much lower bid for the good of the team
Jesus... they got rid of him, and got a huge fee! Why would they have accepted less than they knew they could get?
Performances would suggest otherwise.
He's shown he's unplayable on form but he rarely hit form in his first season, or his second.
Drogba was average at best when he signed for Chelsea, as mentioned reputation in france means nothing ad I mentioned the awful diawara looked very good there and the fantastic cantona had a bad rep over there
Yeah, brilliant evidence. Well done.
From Wikipedia, on his first season:
Hardly worse than Adebayor at his best, and this was his first season in the PL and he was out for 2 months injured.
I've learnt through experience that it's not worth debating Drogba with Brwned. He's the guy that decided at the beginning of this season that Drogba was a 'one season wonder'.
I quoted goal scoring statisitics from Wikipedia. Are they wrong?
There is every possibilty it's wrong
it once had charlton scoring 999 goals for Waterford when he played 1 game
Is there? Are they wrong then?
10 goals in 26 league games compared to Adebayor's 6 goals in 13 league games this season.
So far I'd say Adebayor's first season at City has been at the same level as Drogba's first season at Chelsea, who I thought was on a level just below the best strikers in the league, just like Adebayor. I thought he stayed at that level for the next season.
He then became the best striker in the league for 06/07, went back to looking like another Adebayor for the next two seasons* and then this season went back to looking like the best striker in the league. I still think he lacks the consistency to be called the best striker in the world, and I've actually had Chelsea fans on this very forum echo that opinion.
*down to a lack of fitness and a poor attitude, rather than what I wrongly presumed as a lack of consistency to make him the best over a period of time, I'll admit.
Why does his first season matter, surely on arrival they can only be judged by the form of the previous season?
Oh dear!
Bordeaux's coach, Laurent Blanc, has distanced himself from speculation linking him with the Manchester United job, saying his past at the club and his close relationship with Sir Alex Ferguson counts for nothing when the club appoints the Scot's successor. "Just because I have strong links with Ferguson he's not going to come up to me and say 'Hey, here you go Laurent, I've saved the place for you'," he said.
The highly rated 44-year-old, who has also been mentioned as a possible successor to Raymond Domenech as France coach after next year's World Cup, added: "I signed a contract with Bordeaux for two more years so there is no urgency regarding my future. I have not received any approaches either from the federation or from abroad."
Blanc spent the final two years of his playing career at United and has only been in management for three seasons. In his first campaign he steered Bordeaux to second in Ligue 1 before finally ending Lyon's stranglehold on the French title last year.
Blanc claims that, while he would be delighted to be offered the France job, he could very well turn it down. "It would please me, that's obvious," he said. "But I could also refuse it.
"Contractually I'm not free. Don't forget I have an employer. But if they offer it to me, I would think about it of course. But the problem they will have is with dates.
"The World Cup final is on 11 July, unless they take a coach who's free, everyone else will be right in the middle of preparing for the new season and I don't see a coach giving all that up. For me anyway it would be difficult."
The highly rated 44-year-old, who has also been mentioned as a possible successor to Raymond Domenech as France coach after next year's World Cup, added: "I signed a contract with Bordeaux for two more years so there is no urgency regarding my future. I have not received any approaches either from the federation or from abroad."
Blanc spent the final two years of his playing career at United and has only been in management for three seasons. In his first campaign he steered Bordeaux to second in Ligue 1 before finally ending Lyon's stranglehold on the French title last year.
Blanc claims that, while he would be delighted to be offered the France job, he could very well turn it down. "It would please me, that's obvious," he said. "But I could also refuse it.
"Contractually I'm not free. Don't forget I have an employer. But if they offer it to me, I would think about it of course. But the problem they will have is with dates.
"The World Cup final is on 11 July, unless they take a coach who's free, everyone else will be right in the middle of preparing for the new season and I don't see a coach giving all that up. For me anyway it would be difficult."
One of the criticism by many people(including me) of Mourinho was that he don't give the youngsters too many chances(as based on his time with Chelsea), however reading Interista's latest post, it looks like I(and many others) were wrong about him.
He also introduced Santon into the action.
He also introduced Santon into the action.
With all the latest revelations, can United afford not to have Fergie for the next 3-4 years, even more? I fear all hell would break loose if he was to retire.
The Glazers have said that Fergie will remain on in some capacity when he's no longer manager. I can't see Mourinho accepting that.
Quite right too. We've been here before when Sir Matt jacked it in. Wilf McGuinness was given the job but couldn't keep it together. Players who had a grievance went behind Wilf's back to Busby which caused no end of trouble and resentment. The upshot was that McGuinness got the push and Busby came back.
When Fergie retires and if we bring in a high-profile manager from outside the club, Fergie ought to bow out gracefully.
- Status