We've done it before against Barca and Arsenal
- Status
We've done it before against Barca and Arsenal
I've considered all of them but don't think they are strong enough to detract from the arguments made in favor of him. I do have one major concern about him, and that's his perceived pensiveness - and by that i don't mean the way he occasionally celebrates big wins. Its his lack of lengthy tenure during his previous jobs that concern me, because like everyone else, i'd like our next manager to stay in the job for a minimum of seven years or so. Conversely, i don't blame him for leaving Porto, as it was perfectly logical to move up the ladder after he won the Champions League there. I also don't blame him for what happened at Chelsea, because as we've seen since his departure, Abramovich has turned the club into managerial farce of musical chairs, which no self-respecting manager to include Fergie, would have tolerated. In that sense, I'm encouraged that if he came to United, the elements that previous made him move on wouldn't exist (minnowish club and meddling owner). That's all speculation on my part of of course, but if Fergie were to decide to retire in the next few years, Mourinho would have to be considered the leading candidate to replace him.
To be fair when reaching the european cup final the last 2 european cup finals we have harldy done it with all out attack, fergie now adopts a very tactical & cautious approach to not just european matches but big games at home, I would say one of the great things about fergie is that he not a old manager stuck in ways of the past and has been able to change his style by adopting the ways of younger coaches, in fact I remember when some young coaches was visiting Old Trafford and he said it is not just them who learn from him he picks up more modern ideas from them aswell and I really believe the way we play in big games now in big games is down to fergie having to look at what mourinho was doing when we was finding it so difficult to get anywhere near his chelsea team.
granted we are more attracking than they was but United are not afraid to play his type of football & I don't think mourinho would be afraid to adopt a slighty more attacking approach if he was United manager.
That's some statement.
I guess in a nutshell what you're saying is is that you'd take the 'shit on a stick' style football as long as we keep up the winning (which seems so important for you).
Do you know what 'pensive' means?
It doesn't make any sense whatsoever in the context you've used it in...
Calling him shit on a stick doesn't further your argument at all and just makes you look like you've run out of ideas on constructive ways to discuss this. Have a look at the numbers at the top of the page. A vast majority of posters here consider Mourinho to be the best option. We've been through the reasons in the may posts on the preceding pages.
- you've just commented on an article which says SAF say he would have done exactly the same thing and Jose got his tactics 'spot on'What planet are you living on?!
Do you understand the shit on a stick quote?
It comes from Valdano describing a Benitez-managed Liverpool playing at Anfield in the Champion's League and producing a defense-led display that lacked any aesthetic quality or entertainment value.
With my own eyes, I've seen many Mourinho teams do the exact same thing. It's a trend in modern football and one recurring factor is that the coaches that employ it are often those that didn't have a top flight career as a player.
It's a shame you thought it best to dismiss my argument as me having 'run out of ideas' rather than addressed it honestly and answered the question I asked you.
If this is the trend in modern football, do we really want to see it at Manchester United?
Several times this season SAF has spoken of 'the Manchester United way' - ie: fast, attacking football.
It's alright for everyone here to line up and salivate over YET MORE WINNING!!!!!! and vote for Mourinho, but they should be really, really aware what the club stands to lose in employing him.
May I ask why you'd hold a vote up here as some kind of evidence that Mourinho is the man for the job?
What I find far more telling is that slightly older posters, who generally have the respect of the board, are all very anti Mourinho coming to United. For example, Pogue, Noodlehair and I think I've read posts from Mockney and Smashed in the last 2 days along the same lines amongst several others.
Surely it says more that seasoned United watchers find the idea hugely unappealing? The majority of voters for Mourinho here have all seemed to argue in the thread that he should come because he's cool, has a lot of confidence, and would WIN us some more...
I'm still not sure what you meant by the pensive comment?
I can't believe I'm saying this but if you think Jose plays shit football or whatever, why don't you go grab a copy of Football Manager, play as United get to the second leg of a Champs League semi final after winning 3-1 at home vs Barcelona and then play as you think the next manager should set the team out, and go gung-ho (or whatever you are advocating)........and fill us in.........
in one sentence...football has evolved over the years whether we like it or not...ofcourse ALL fans want the swash buckling attacking style of play, but to suggest we should live in the past and not adapt to the modern game is frankly, naive. Even SAF plays with 1 striker these days!
Its in no way scientific, but its a good indicator of what people are thinking in terms of the available options.
Completely wrong choice of words on my part. What i meant to say was that i was concerned about his tendency to jump from club to club without staying for more than a few years.
What planet are you living on?!
What is that supposed to prove? I'm not talking about one game against the best team in the world - of course SAF might have tried to contain them the same way.
I'm speaking in a more general sense - generally, Ferguson managed teams approach the vast majority of games in a positive, attacking way whereas generally, Mourinho's teams tend to be less attacking and more tactical.
What sense does just talking about one game, against the world's best team, make?
Attacking tends to work against Big European teams on FM10
So what do you want then? I am confused
Jose's an unbelievable manager and will go down as one of the greatest ever.
But is the priority just winning? Is it just perfect if he comes in and keeps us winning things, but makes us an absolute shit team to watch. Because lets be honest here, Mourinho's team's play rubbish football (to watch that is). Barring the odd occasions where one of his players decides to do something that he's usually restrained to do, they play awful football.
You can point all you want to exceptions in his career so far, or exceptions of ours where we play defensively but at the heart of it we play fantastic football, meant to win and meant to entertain, and Mourinho's teams play to nullify the opposition and get the right result. Through every Fergie team there's an underlying 'pass, and move, and let's get a goal' attitude. That's what makes us special.
Why do people want Jose at United?
I think most of you want us to continue winning the trophies (nothing wrong with that, we all do) and at the same time would like to believe that at United he'll somehow blend into our culture, and become a manager who builds attacking teams. I really doubt that's going to happen.
But is the priority just winning? Is it just perfect if he comes in and keeps us winning things, but makes us an absolute shit team to watch. Because lets be honest here, Mourinho's team's play rubbish football (to watch that is). Barring the odd occasions where one of his players decides to do something that he's usually restrained to do, they play awful football.
You can point all you want to exceptions in his career so far, or exceptions of ours where we play defensively but at the heart of it we play fantastic football, meant to win and meant to entertain, and Mourinho's teams play to nullify the opposition and get the right result. Through every Fergie team there's an underlying 'pass, and move, and let's get a goal' attitude. That's what makes us special.
Why do people want Jose at United?
I think most of you want us to continue winning the trophies (nothing wrong with that, we all do) and at the same time would like to believe that at United he'll somehow blend into our culture, and become a manager who builds attacking teams. I really doubt that's going to happen.
I would definitely take a less sucessful period under a younger manager who likes to play football "the right way" and would bring through youngsters and remain less of a showpiece then winning a lot with Jose. I just cant' see him as a United manager.
When was the last time we played fantastic football consistently?
Manchester United always play to attack. We try and attack every time we get the ball. (apart from the odd away game in europe).
You're missing the point. It's not about playing great football, it's about trying to play great football. We always do. It came off magnificently in the 2006/2007 as well as the 2007/2008 season. We were a team that no Mourinho team can ever be. For me we were better to watch than Barca as well.
Since then we haven't been the same force in an attacking sense but the attempt is always there. And it has come off many times since but maybe not as consistently.
Mourinho's teams play ugly ugly football. They can score 4 goals and still play terrible football. His whole aim is to disrupt the other team and take advantage of any weakness. Boorrinngggg
I can understand those concerns, but the football he played at Chelsea seems to be severely underrated. Or perhaps I'm overrating it and remembering things that didn't exist. Regardless, how often do you watch Inter Milan?
Also, if Mourinho was approached for the job, I'm sure he would be told he has to maintain the club's philosophy of attacking football. This doesn't mean he has to go to the Camp Nou with a 3-1 lead in the Champions League semi-final and attack (As Baldwin would liked him to have done), but he'd have to, for the most part, play attacking football, football in the right way, football to entertain. And I'm sure he'd agree to that
But at the end of the day, most fans and players only care about results and trophies. I remember after the first City derby this season, the best derby I've ever seen, Fergie was asked whether he'd prefer a 4-3 or a 1-0, he said he would prefer the latter. Now, whether or not he was joking was anybody's guess, but like Mourinho, Fergie is motivated by success and winning trophies. We're a very adaptable team, we can play offensive football, defensive football, or a mixture of both. If your team is only suited to one style of football, you won't get very far (See Arsenal), Mourinho's teams have always been able to do both. I can, and have, given many examples of entertaining games where Chelsea have attacked and scored for fun, but those seem to go ignored.
You're severely overrating them. They always played terrible football. As i said, they could beat a team 4-0 and doing it ugly. A couple of deflected Lampard goals, a Terry header after elbowing someone and one more. There were certain exceptions like when Duff tore Barca a new one in the CL where they were 3 up in no time, but that's just what it is, an exception.
His teams in general play really awful football, which works. That's best way to put it. It isn't in the score line, it is just in how they play.
I watch enough of Inter. Probably every 3rd of 4th game. I've seen enough to know it's the same old Mourinho style.
You're being extremely hopeful. Great managers usually have very set philosophies. In fact not usually, pretty much always. Arsene Wenger and SAF will always get their teams to play attacking football, and Mourinho will always do the opposite IMO. He's far too good at it to do anything else. He cares only about the results and I really doubt he's going to go against the thing he's being doing all these years to become one of the top managers. He's too stubborn.
His teams don't do both, they never played entertaining football. This season Ancellotti has them playing far far far more entertaining stuff than Mourinho ever did.
And no that's not what all fans care about. That's what you care about. We've gotten so used to the football that SAF gets us to play. I think my eyes would hurt if I had to start getting used to the way Mourinho would make us play. It would really ruin United for me.
Still this myth that we supposedly play this attacking brand of football everyone keeps talking about against every team we play.....does make you wonder if half the people on this board who say this stuff have actually taken the time to even watch our European displays over the past few years never mind the 13 1-0 wins we had last season alone playing some of the most tumescent stuff we have in years, with Ronaldo/Rooney/Tevez/Berbatov/Giggs etc at our disposal…..
All this 'what Manchester united stands for' rubbish in terms of football style, i suppose Sir alex ignored what 'Manchester United stands for' last season when we won the league scoring just 68 goals and basing it entirely on a rock solid defence..........
Until people can actually once and for all accept the days of us playing 'you score 3 we'll score 4' football are a distant memory this is all rather pointless, because the arguments are all based on myths that dont even exist.…im struggling to remember the last time we went away from home against any top side and set out to attack them….it just doesn’t happen, hell these days we even line up 4-5-1 in home games against anyone half decent.
All this 'what Manchester united stands for' rubbish in terms of football style, i suppose Sir alex ignored what 'Manchester United stands for' last season when we won the league scoring just 68 goals and basing it entirely on a rock solid defence..........
Until people can actually once and for all accept the days of us playing 'you score 3 we'll score 4' football are a distant memory this is all rather pointless, because the arguments are all based on myths that dont even exist.…im struggling to remember the last time we went away from home against any top side and set out to attack them….it just doesn’t happen, hell these days we even line up 4-5-1 in home games against anyone half decent.
Some of you are ruthless...couple of points
1. Mourinho has, in my eyes, always been at a fairly 'underdog' type team: unfancied Porto, a new Chelsea in transition and a underachieving (in Europe) Inter Milan and he's pulled it off every single time. You can say what you want, but he has adapted to every team/league and gotten the best out of them.
2. As far as his character goes, would you rather a Martin O'Neill or David Moyes walking into the first press conference and starting with a 'It's a hugee job, I hope I do well and can follow in SAF's footsteps' or a Mourinho walk in and say 'Yeah no question if I'll keep winning, there's no pressure on me, I am a winner' (or something along those lines)?
I know what I'd rather prefer.
1. Mourinho has, in my eyes, always been at a fairly 'underdog' type team: unfancied Porto, a new Chelsea in transition and a underachieving (in Europe) Inter Milan and he's pulled it off every single time. You can say what you want, but he has adapted to every team/league and gotten the best out of them.
2. As far as his character goes, would you rather a Martin O'Neill or David Moyes walking into the first press conference and starting with a 'It's a hugee job, I hope I do well and can follow in SAF's footsteps' or a Mourinho walk in and say 'Yeah no question if I'll keep winning, there's no pressure on me, I am a winner' (or something along those lines)?
I know what I'd rather prefer.
The point here is that football has changed over the years, we (under SAF) have adapted to it and to want a manager to come in and play in the swash buckling 90's style that we used to is utterly unfair. It's all about pace, power and compactness now, whether you like it or not.
Perfect example is Arsenal, who have't embraced it as much as the likes of ourselves, Barca, Chelski, etc
Perfect example is Arsenal, who have't embraced it as much as the likes of ourselves, Barca, Chelski, etc
I know people might find him entertaining etc but when he comes out with distasteful shit like this I realize even more why i don't want him here.
Inter Milan manager Jose Mourinho has launched an attack on Claudio Ranieri on the club's official website, saying the Roma coach was considered a "loser" at Chelsea as well as mocking his match preparations.
Inter, currently leading Serie A two points ahead of Roma, kept their hopes of a treble alive on Wednesday night as they saw off Ranieri's men 1-0 to clinch the Coppa Italia in a bad-tempered match in which Roma captain Francesco Totti was dismissed.
The relationship between the clubs has not been good in recent times, and Mourinho has been referred to the Italian Football Federation's (FIGC) disciplinary commission over comments he made suggesting Roma could offer Siena a financial incentive to beat Inter on the final day of the Serie A season.
Ranieri was unhappy about Mourinho's behaviour and said: "This is not the kind of football I like. I'm different, as I like respect and I give respect. It's too easy to motivate a squad by creating a siege mentality and feeling under attack from everyone.
"Sport is an important vehicle for Italian society. Behaving like this is launching ticking time bombs. I am a man of sport and I like football.
"Is Mourinho a phenomenon? It is the media that gives him that aura. For me he is a good coach and I won't add anything more."
Mourinho has hit back at those remarks and, amid reports Ranieri had tried to inspire his players by showing them the film Gladiator, suggested his predecessor at Chelsea was treating his team like children.
In a statement on the Inter website, Mourinho said: "Bearing in mind that on Wednesday night Roma should've ended the Coppa Italia final with six men on the field, seeing as Philippe Mexes, Francesco Totti, Rodrigo Taddei and Nicolas Burdisso did what was necessary to get sent off, today there was talk of how to motivate players.
"You do it every day by working with the squad, session after session. You certainly don't do it by showing the team a film before a cup final. Players are professionals. They should not be treated like children.
"We preferred to work on the field and study Roma carefully to find their weak points. If before a match I made my team watch Gladiator, they'd start laughing or call the doctor asking if I was ill.
"I don't think I am a phenomenon, but I never cried over spilt milk and always worked hard to help my team.
"Before the Coppa Italia final, I watched six Roma games to find their weak points, spending three hours on each at the computer running programmes that help my work.
"Of course, it's easier to just pick a movie to project before a match, but Ranieri has forgotten his players are champions and not children.
"I never said I was a phenomenon, but it's certainly not my fault if, in 2004 after coming to Chelsea and asking why Ranieri was replaced, I was told they wanted to win and it was never going to happen with him.
"It is really not my fault if he was considered a loser at Chelsea."
Inter Milan manager Jose Mourinho has launched an attack on Claudio Ranieri on the club's official website, saying the Roma coach was considered a "loser" at Chelsea as well as mocking his match preparations.
Inter, currently leading Serie A two points ahead of Roma, kept their hopes of a treble alive on Wednesday night as they saw off Ranieri's men 1-0 to clinch the Coppa Italia in a bad-tempered match in which Roma captain Francesco Totti was dismissed.
The relationship between the clubs has not been good in recent times, and Mourinho has been referred to the Italian Football Federation's (FIGC) disciplinary commission over comments he made suggesting Roma could offer Siena a financial incentive to beat Inter on the final day of the Serie A season.
Ranieri was unhappy about Mourinho's behaviour and said: "This is not the kind of football I like. I'm different, as I like respect and I give respect. It's too easy to motivate a squad by creating a siege mentality and feeling under attack from everyone.
"Sport is an important vehicle for Italian society. Behaving like this is launching ticking time bombs. I am a man of sport and I like football.
"Is Mourinho a phenomenon? It is the media that gives him that aura. For me he is a good coach and I won't add anything more."
Mourinho has hit back at those remarks and, amid reports Ranieri had tried to inspire his players by showing them the film Gladiator, suggested his predecessor at Chelsea was treating his team like children.
In a statement on the Inter website, Mourinho said: "Bearing in mind that on Wednesday night Roma should've ended the Coppa Italia final with six men on the field, seeing as Philippe Mexes, Francesco Totti, Rodrigo Taddei and Nicolas Burdisso did what was necessary to get sent off, today there was talk of how to motivate players.
"You do it every day by working with the squad, session after session. You certainly don't do it by showing the team a film before a cup final. Players are professionals. They should not be treated like children.
"We preferred to work on the field and study Roma carefully to find their weak points. If before a match I made my team watch Gladiator, they'd start laughing or call the doctor asking if I was ill.
"I don't think I am a phenomenon, but I never cried over spilt milk and always worked hard to help my team.
"Before the Coppa Italia final, I watched six Roma games to find their weak points, spending three hours on each at the computer running programmes that help my work.
"Of course, it's easier to just pick a movie to project before a match, but Ranieri has forgotten his players are champions and not children.
"I never said I was a phenomenon, but it's certainly not my fault if, in 2004 after coming to Chelsea and asking why Ranieri was replaced, I was told they wanted to win and it was never going to happen with him.
"It is really not my fault if he was considered a loser at Chelsea."
I have been very vocal on the reasons why Jose Mourinho should never be manager of Manchester United. Whilst there’s no denying that he is a big character, and that is something you would imagine the man to replace Sir Alex Ferguson might have to be, and that he has had lots of success in his short career, there are too many failings with him.
It is important to note that Mourinho has only ever been a success in the short-term after being given a great team. Porto were second in the league by one point the year before he was given the job and he only won the European Cup thanks to a dreadful, match-defining decision at Old Trafford, before going on the easiest run I can think of in the remaining games. He then got the job at Chelsea, who had finished 2nd in the league and reached the European Cup semi-finals the season before. After two years of success and ridiculous sums of money spent in the transfer market, Chelsea then dropped to 2nd in the table and were 7 points behind the Champions on the day the title was won, a few games before the end of the season. He then got the job at Inter, who were already Champions, and he kept them as Champions in the first season, despite losing more games and picking up fewer points. They are currently top of the table by two points, although even if they win their remaining game, will not reach the points total of last season or the season before he took the job, with them steadily declining every year.
There is then Mourinho’s inability to bring through youth, a tradition Manchester United prides itself upon. From the ‘Busby Babes’ to the ‘Fergie Fledglings’, United should always strive to have a base of homegrown players who know all about the importance of playing for this club. There is no evidence to suggest Mourinho has any idea how to bring through young players in the squad because he has never done it before.
“I would hate for anyone to take this the wrong way but I don’t see him here,” said Sir Bobby Charlton. “He’s got a talent but maybe if he ever came here the philosophy of youth football might never be the same again.”
Then there is Mourinho’s style of football, which intends to neutralise the opponents rather than to attack them. I’ve heard people say things like “Well, Jose would have to play attacking football if he came to United.” Why? He’ll play whatever football he wants if he is the manager but more importantly, if he was forced in to playing the United way, there is no evidence to suggest he would have a clue how to do it. He has managed three teams and all three have them have played in the same way, and that way is different to United.
“Attacking football is a vital part of the club’s heritage,” said Bryan Robson. “For me, Jose Mourinho is too cautious in his approach to the game to be manager.”
The most important points can be grouped together though, and they are his total lack of class as well as his failings in the transfer market.
“It’s certainly not my fault if, in 2004 after coming to Chelsea and asking why Ranieri was replaced, I was told they wanted to win and it was never going to happen with him,” said Mourinho last week. “It is really not my fault if he was considered a loser at Chelsea.”
Now, it’s clear Ranieri and Mourinho aren’t the best of friends, with Roma and Inter fighting it out for the title, so maybe Ranieri said something to wind Mourinho up, so that is why he’s lashed out? Unfortunately, not.
The origin of this spat is because Mourinho claimed that Roma had the cash to pay Siena off in the final game of the season to beat Inter Milan. These scandalous comments have been referred to Italian Football Federation’s disciplinary commission, although Ranieri, dignified as ever, responded to what Mourinho had said. “This is not the kind of football I like,” he said. “I’m different, as I like respect and I give respect. Sport is an important vehicle for Italian society. Behaving like this is launching ticking time bombs. I am a man of sport and I like football. Is Mourinho a phenomenon? It is the media that gives him that aura. For me he is a good coach and I won’t add anything more.”
Clearly Mourinho didn’t like his “phenomenon” status being questioned so branded Ranieri a loser. In any circumstance, this wouldn’t be acceptable. It wasn’t acceptable when Mourinho launched an attack against a lad young enough to be his son, when he went to the media with comments about Cristiano Ronaldo’s “difficult childhood” and having “no education”. But it is even less acceptable to try and belittle, demean and embarrass Ranieri, given that without him, there is no way Mourinho would have had success at Chelsea.
The stats below show the group of players Mourinho inherited, alongside his own purchases, and how many appearances they made in the three seasons he was at the club.
2004-2005 – Champions, 95 points
(35) Petr Čech – Ranieri
(16) Glen Johnson – Ranieri
(4) Celestine Babayaro – Gullit
(36) Claude Makélélé – Ranieri
(16) Alexey Smertin – Ranieri
(25) Ricardo Carvalho – Mourinho
(38) Frank Lampard – Ranieri
(24) Mateja Kežman – Mourinho
(28) Joe Cole – Ranieri
(30) Damien Duff – Ranieri
(28) William Gallas – Ranieri
(13) Geremi – Ranieri
(26) Didier Drogba – Mourinho
(18) Arjen Robben – Ranieri
(15) Wayne Bridge – Ranieri
(4) Scott Parker – Ranieri
(29) Paulo Ferreira – Mourinho
(37) Eiður Guðjohnsen – Vialli
(36) John Terry – became a first team regular in Ranieri’s first season
(14) Jiří Jarošík – Mourinho
(10) Robert Huth – Ranieri
(29) Tiago – Mourinho
(3) Carlo Cudicini – Ranieri
Mourinho’s signings – 147 appearances (29%)
Ranieri’s signings – 326 appearances (63%)
Other signings – 41 appearance (8%)
2005-2006 – Champions, 91 points
(34) Petr Čech – Ranieri
(4) Glen Johnson – Ranieri
(25) Asier del Horno – Mourinho
(31) Claude Makélélé – Ranieri
(31) Michael Essien – Mourinho
(24) Ricardo Carvalho – Mourinho
(8) Maniche – Mourinho
(35) Frank Lampard – Ranieri
(30) Hernán Crespo – Ranieri
(34) Joe Cole – Ranieri
(28) Damien Duff – Ranieri
(9) Carlton Cole – Mourinho
(34) William Gallas – Ranieri
(15) Geremi – Ranieri
(29) Didier Drogba – Mourinho
(28) Arjen Robben – Ranieri
(3) Lassana Diarra – Mourinho
(21) Paulo Ferreira – Mourinho
(26) Eiður Guðjohnsen – Vialli
(27) Shaun Wright-Phillips – Mourinho
(36) John Terry – Ranieri
(13) Robert Huth – Ranieri
(4) Carlo Cudicini – Ranieri
Mourinho’s signings – 177 appearances (33%)
Ranieri’s signings – 326 appearances (60%)
Other signings – 41 appearance (7%)
2006-2007 – 2nd, 83 points.
(20) Petr Čech – Ranieri
(23) Ashley Cole – Mourinho
(29) Claude Makélélé – Ranieri
(33) Michael Essien – Mourinho
(31) Ricardo Carvalho – Mourinho
(30) Andriy Shevchenko – Mourinho
(37) Frank Lampard – Ranieri
(13) Khalid Boulahrouz – Mourinho
(10) Joe Cole – Ranieri
(36) Didier Drogba – Mourinho
(22) John Obi Mikel – Mourinho
(26) Michael Ballack – Mourinho
(19) Geremi – Ranieri
(21) Arjen Robben – Ranieri
(22) Wayne Bridge – Ranieri
(10) Lassana Diarra – Mourinho
(24) Paulo Ferreira – Mourinho
(33) Salomon Kalou – Mourinho
(8) Carlo Cudicini – Ranieri
(27) Shaun Wright-Phillips – Mourinho
(28) John Terry – Ranieri
(11) Henrique Hilário – Mourinho
Mourinho’s signings – 319 appearances (62%)
Ranieri’s signings – 194 appearances (38%)
In Mourinho’s first season, Chelsea made the step up from 2nd with Ranieri, who had just one year of Roman Abromovich’s cash, to being Champions. 63% of the players contributing to that were Ranieri’s purchases, with just 29% of them being Mourinho’s.
In Mourinho’s second season, Chelsea were again Champions, although lost 4 more matches and obviously collected fewer points. Jose spent another vast sum of money on players but still 60% of the appearances were by Ranieri’s players and 33% by those he’d bought.
In Mourinho’s third season, Chelsea dropped to 2nd in the league and were 7 points behind United on the day the title was won. What was the big change? Well now, 62% of the appearances were made by Mourinho’s signings, and just 38% by Ranieri’s signings.
So, what does this tell us? The more players he bought, the worse Chelsea got. Not only is Mourinho useless in the transfer market, something we simply cannot afford given our financial difficulties, but that Mourinho has no class or appreciation whatsoever. Without Ranieri building that great Chelsea squad, there is no way Mourinho would have won the league, which is proven by how quickly Chelsea declined once the squad was made up by a majority of his players.
“I’m privileged to have followed Sir Matt because all you have to do is to try and maintain the standards that he set so many years ago.” There’s only one Sir Alex Ferguson, but surely there are other managers with his mentality, his modesty and his respect, who would replace him and thank him for doing such a great job and leaving such a great foundation.
Not a manager like Mourinho, who bathes in the adoration and takes all the praise for himself. Let’s not forget, Ranieri got Chelsea to their first European Cup semi-final, and that is something Mourinho could not better in his time at Chelsea, despite the vast amounts of money he spent. Can you imagine what kind of squad and how many trophies Ranieri could have won if he had more than one summer of spending? From a United perspective, thankfully he was never given the opportunity, otherwise it’s hard to imagine we would have won the league for the past three years.
Mourinho recently enjoyed a brilliant success of knocking current holders, Barcelona, out of the European Cup. Despite the fact that yet again it was down to a dodgy decision, Inter Milan really did fight hard at the Nou Camp. They went down to ten men and pulled together and worked their arses off. But whose face was it all over the papers the following day? Was it Lucio, or Maicon, or Cambiasso, or Walter Samuel, or Cristian Chivu? The players who had given every ounce of their being to keep Barcelona out? Course not. It was Jose fecking Mourinho, as he grabbed the attention of the cameras away from his players and on to himself, as he charged on to the pitch. In The Telegraph, their opening seven paragraphs were dedicated to Mourinho. The same can be said of the match report in The Daily Mail, The New York Times, The Sun, ESPN, The Express and probably any other media source that talked about the game.
Is that what you want whenever our players achieve anything, for it to be all about Mourinho? Chelsea fans used to tell us the reason why his face was always in the papers was because he was taking pressure off his players. I always said it was because he was a media whore who loved himself more than he would ever love any team. But if the Chelsea fans were right, why on a night of celebration, not pressure, was it Mourinho grabbing the headlines? He couldn’t resist running on to the field and making a spectacle of himself, at the cost of his players getting the limelight they so clearly deserved. Over the past couple of seasons, with United beating Barcelona and Arsenal in the European Cup semi-finals and Chelsea in the final, the papers were full of praise for our players. It was Scholes’ celebration at Old Trafford all over the back pages, it was captain Rio Ferdinand grabbing Cristiano Ronaldo at the Emirates, it was our players running to celebrate with Edwin Van der Sar at the Luzhniki in Moscow. Sir Alex Ferguson was quite happy to step back and let our players enjoy the success they had earned. But wherever Jose manages, it will always be The Mourinho Show, and as fans, we should surely expect more from our club.
An argument is being put forward that there is no one out there better for the job, but our own manager tried to distance Mourinho from the United job this weekend when asked about TNSSO replacing him.
“You can talk about the successful managers right now who might be on everyone’s list but, in two years, they may not be – or even next year,” he said, “so it’s difficult to say who would replace me when the time came. Manchester United would need somebody successful for that kind of job. Most clubs would look for the most successful manager on the horizon, but two years ahead, they may not be successful anymore.”
It’s true. In 2004 we were told Chelsea were going to dominate world football for the next two decades, with Mourinho at the helm. Three years later he was sacked, Chelsea have still yet to do anything in Europe and have gone three years without the title. Just because there isn’t a wealth of top managers about at the moment it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t open our eyes to what might be around the corner. Laurent Blanc has made a good start to his career, albeit with a few blips, whilst Pep Guardiola has been incredible.
In conclusion, is Mourinho honestly the type of man you want in charge of United, regardless of the trophies he has won in the past, and could win with United? We’re not Chelsea or Manchester City, a club who has waited so long for any real success so will take it whatever way they find it, or buy it. We are United so surely we should have higher standards than just winning, however we have to do it. We shouldn’t have to settle for a manager who plays boring football, who is poor in the transfer market, who has no interest in bringing youth through, who will always be more important than our players and who has no class whatsoever. Whoever gets the job, and Ferguson keeps telling us that won’t be for a while yet, should be a better person than Mourinho.
It is important to note that Mourinho has only ever been a success in the short-term after being given a great team. Porto were second in the league by one point the year before he was given the job and he only won the European Cup thanks to a dreadful, match-defining decision at Old Trafford, before going on the easiest run I can think of in the remaining games. He then got the job at Chelsea, who had finished 2nd in the league and reached the European Cup semi-finals the season before. After two years of success and ridiculous sums of money spent in the transfer market, Chelsea then dropped to 2nd in the table and were 7 points behind the Champions on the day the title was won, a few games before the end of the season. He then got the job at Inter, who were already Champions, and he kept them as Champions in the first season, despite losing more games and picking up fewer points. They are currently top of the table by two points, although even if they win their remaining game, will not reach the points total of last season or the season before he took the job, with them steadily declining every year.
There is then Mourinho’s inability to bring through youth, a tradition Manchester United prides itself upon. From the ‘Busby Babes’ to the ‘Fergie Fledglings’, United should always strive to have a base of homegrown players who know all about the importance of playing for this club. There is no evidence to suggest Mourinho has any idea how to bring through young players in the squad because he has never done it before.
“I would hate for anyone to take this the wrong way but I don’t see him here,” said Sir Bobby Charlton. “He’s got a talent but maybe if he ever came here the philosophy of youth football might never be the same again.”
Then there is Mourinho’s style of football, which intends to neutralise the opponents rather than to attack them. I’ve heard people say things like “Well, Jose would have to play attacking football if he came to United.” Why? He’ll play whatever football he wants if he is the manager but more importantly, if he was forced in to playing the United way, there is no evidence to suggest he would have a clue how to do it. He has managed three teams and all three have them have played in the same way, and that way is different to United.
“Attacking football is a vital part of the club’s heritage,” said Bryan Robson. “For me, Jose Mourinho is too cautious in his approach to the game to be manager.”
The most important points can be grouped together though, and they are his total lack of class as well as his failings in the transfer market.
“It’s certainly not my fault if, in 2004 after coming to Chelsea and asking why Ranieri was replaced, I was told they wanted to win and it was never going to happen with him,” said Mourinho last week. “It is really not my fault if he was considered a loser at Chelsea.”
Now, it’s clear Ranieri and Mourinho aren’t the best of friends, with Roma and Inter fighting it out for the title, so maybe Ranieri said something to wind Mourinho up, so that is why he’s lashed out? Unfortunately, not.
The origin of this spat is because Mourinho claimed that Roma had the cash to pay Siena off in the final game of the season to beat Inter Milan. These scandalous comments have been referred to Italian Football Federation’s disciplinary commission, although Ranieri, dignified as ever, responded to what Mourinho had said. “This is not the kind of football I like,” he said. “I’m different, as I like respect and I give respect. Sport is an important vehicle for Italian society. Behaving like this is launching ticking time bombs. I am a man of sport and I like football. Is Mourinho a phenomenon? It is the media that gives him that aura. For me he is a good coach and I won’t add anything more.”
Clearly Mourinho didn’t like his “phenomenon” status being questioned so branded Ranieri a loser. In any circumstance, this wouldn’t be acceptable. It wasn’t acceptable when Mourinho launched an attack against a lad young enough to be his son, when he went to the media with comments about Cristiano Ronaldo’s “difficult childhood” and having “no education”. But it is even less acceptable to try and belittle, demean and embarrass Ranieri, given that without him, there is no way Mourinho would have had success at Chelsea.
The stats below show the group of players Mourinho inherited, alongside his own purchases, and how many appearances they made in the three seasons he was at the club.
2004-2005 – Champions, 95 points
(35) Petr Čech – Ranieri
(16) Glen Johnson – Ranieri
(4) Celestine Babayaro – Gullit
(36) Claude Makélélé – Ranieri
(16) Alexey Smertin – Ranieri
(25) Ricardo Carvalho – Mourinho
(38) Frank Lampard – Ranieri
(24) Mateja Kežman – Mourinho
(28) Joe Cole – Ranieri
(30) Damien Duff – Ranieri
(28) William Gallas – Ranieri
(13) Geremi – Ranieri
(26) Didier Drogba – Mourinho
(18) Arjen Robben – Ranieri
(15) Wayne Bridge – Ranieri
(4) Scott Parker – Ranieri
(29) Paulo Ferreira – Mourinho
(37) Eiður Guðjohnsen – Vialli
(36) John Terry – became a first team regular in Ranieri’s first season
(14) Jiří Jarošík – Mourinho
(10) Robert Huth – Ranieri
(29) Tiago – Mourinho
(3) Carlo Cudicini – Ranieri
Mourinho’s signings – 147 appearances (29%)
Ranieri’s signings – 326 appearances (63%)
Other signings – 41 appearance (8%)
2005-2006 – Champions, 91 points
(34) Petr Čech – Ranieri
(4) Glen Johnson – Ranieri
(25) Asier del Horno – Mourinho
(31) Claude Makélélé – Ranieri
(31) Michael Essien – Mourinho
(24) Ricardo Carvalho – Mourinho
(8) Maniche – Mourinho
(35) Frank Lampard – Ranieri
(30) Hernán Crespo – Ranieri
(34) Joe Cole – Ranieri
(28) Damien Duff – Ranieri
(9) Carlton Cole – Mourinho
(34) William Gallas – Ranieri
(15) Geremi – Ranieri
(29) Didier Drogba – Mourinho
(28) Arjen Robben – Ranieri
(3) Lassana Diarra – Mourinho
(21) Paulo Ferreira – Mourinho
(26) Eiður Guðjohnsen – Vialli
(27) Shaun Wright-Phillips – Mourinho
(36) John Terry – Ranieri
(13) Robert Huth – Ranieri
(4) Carlo Cudicini – Ranieri
Mourinho’s signings – 177 appearances (33%)
Ranieri’s signings – 326 appearances (60%)
Other signings – 41 appearance (7%)
2006-2007 – 2nd, 83 points.
(20) Petr Čech – Ranieri
(23) Ashley Cole – Mourinho
(29) Claude Makélélé – Ranieri
(33) Michael Essien – Mourinho
(31) Ricardo Carvalho – Mourinho
(30) Andriy Shevchenko – Mourinho
(37) Frank Lampard – Ranieri
(13) Khalid Boulahrouz – Mourinho
(10) Joe Cole – Ranieri
(36) Didier Drogba – Mourinho
(22) John Obi Mikel – Mourinho
(26) Michael Ballack – Mourinho
(19) Geremi – Ranieri
(21) Arjen Robben – Ranieri
(22) Wayne Bridge – Ranieri
(10) Lassana Diarra – Mourinho
(24) Paulo Ferreira – Mourinho
(33) Salomon Kalou – Mourinho
(8) Carlo Cudicini – Ranieri
(27) Shaun Wright-Phillips – Mourinho
(28) John Terry – Ranieri
(11) Henrique Hilário – Mourinho
Mourinho’s signings – 319 appearances (62%)
Ranieri’s signings – 194 appearances (38%)
In Mourinho’s first season, Chelsea made the step up from 2nd with Ranieri, who had just one year of Roman Abromovich’s cash, to being Champions. 63% of the players contributing to that were Ranieri’s purchases, with just 29% of them being Mourinho’s.
In Mourinho’s second season, Chelsea were again Champions, although lost 4 more matches and obviously collected fewer points. Jose spent another vast sum of money on players but still 60% of the appearances were by Ranieri’s players and 33% by those he’d bought.
In Mourinho’s third season, Chelsea dropped to 2nd in the league and were 7 points behind United on the day the title was won. What was the big change? Well now, 62% of the appearances were made by Mourinho’s signings, and just 38% by Ranieri’s signings.
So, what does this tell us? The more players he bought, the worse Chelsea got. Not only is Mourinho useless in the transfer market, something we simply cannot afford given our financial difficulties, but that Mourinho has no class or appreciation whatsoever. Without Ranieri building that great Chelsea squad, there is no way Mourinho would have won the league, which is proven by how quickly Chelsea declined once the squad was made up by a majority of his players.
“I’m privileged to have followed Sir Matt because all you have to do is to try and maintain the standards that he set so many years ago.” There’s only one Sir Alex Ferguson, but surely there are other managers with his mentality, his modesty and his respect, who would replace him and thank him for doing such a great job and leaving such a great foundation.
Not a manager like Mourinho, who bathes in the adoration and takes all the praise for himself. Let’s not forget, Ranieri got Chelsea to their first European Cup semi-final, and that is something Mourinho could not better in his time at Chelsea, despite the vast amounts of money he spent. Can you imagine what kind of squad and how many trophies Ranieri could have won if he had more than one summer of spending? From a United perspective, thankfully he was never given the opportunity, otherwise it’s hard to imagine we would have won the league for the past three years.
Mourinho recently enjoyed a brilliant success of knocking current holders, Barcelona, out of the European Cup. Despite the fact that yet again it was down to a dodgy decision, Inter Milan really did fight hard at the Nou Camp. They went down to ten men and pulled together and worked their arses off. But whose face was it all over the papers the following day? Was it Lucio, or Maicon, or Cambiasso, or Walter Samuel, or Cristian Chivu? The players who had given every ounce of their being to keep Barcelona out? Course not. It was Jose fecking Mourinho, as he grabbed the attention of the cameras away from his players and on to himself, as he charged on to the pitch. In The Telegraph, their opening seven paragraphs were dedicated to Mourinho. The same can be said of the match report in The Daily Mail, The New York Times, The Sun, ESPN, The Express and probably any other media source that talked about the game.
Is that what you want whenever our players achieve anything, for it to be all about Mourinho? Chelsea fans used to tell us the reason why his face was always in the papers was because he was taking pressure off his players. I always said it was because he was a media whore who loved himself more than he would ever love any team. But if the Chelsea fans were right, why on a night of celebration, not pressure, was it Mourinho grabbing the headlines? He couldn’t resist running on to the field and making a spectacle of himself, at the cost of his players getting the limelight they so clearly deserved. Over the past couple of seasons, with United beating Barcelona and Arsenal in the European Cup semi-finals and Chelsea in the final, the papers were full of praise for our players. It was Scholes’ celebration at Old Trafford all over the back pages, it was captain Rio Ferdinand grabbing Cristiano Ronaldo at the Emirates, it was our players running to celebrate with Edwin Van der Sar at the Luzhniki in Moscow. Sir Alex Ferguson was quite happy to step back and let our players enjoy the success they had earned. But wherever Jose manages, it will always be The Mourinho Show, and as fans, we should surely expect more from our club.
An argument is being put forward that there is no one out there better for the job, but our own manager tried to distance Mourinho from the United job this weekend when asked about TNSSO replacing him.
“You can talk about the successful managers right now who might be on everyone’s list but, in two years, they may not be – or even next year,” he said, “so it’s difficult to say who would replace me when the time came. Manchester United would need somebody successful for that kind of job. Most clubs would look for the most successful manager on the horizon, but two years ahead, they may not be successful anymore.”
It’s true. In 2004 we were told Chelsea were going to dominate world football for the next two decades, with Mourinho at the helm. Three years later he was sacked, Chelsea have still yet to do anything in Europe and have gone three years without the title. Just because there isn’t a wealth of top managers about at the moment it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t open our eyes to what might be around the corner. Laurent Blanc has made a good start to his career, albeit with a few blips, whilst Pep Guardiola has been incredible.
In conclusion, is Mourinho honestly the type of man you want in charge of United, regardless of the trophies he has won in the past, and could win with United? We’re not Chelsea or Manchester City, a club who has waited so long for any real success so will take it whatever way they find it, or buy it. We are United so surely we should have higher standards than just winning, however we have to do it. We shouldn’t have to settle for a manager who plays boring football, who is poor in the transfer market, who has no interest in bringing youth through, who will always be more important than our players and who has no class whatsoever. Whoever gets the job, and Ferguson keeps telling us that won’t be for a while yet, should be a better person than Mourinho.
I got half way through that post and got bored at how tedious it was, 29% of you own players is alot in your first season believe it or not so hardly a stick to beat him with.
Also with a tendancy of a larger club coming in after success or his being sacked he can't really be blamed for leaving now can he? Another pointless comment.
On a related note youth players, how can you bring through youth in 2/3 years? Ancelloti says he will bring through youth next year, surely josé should get the credit for getting this youth.
Do we have to talk attacking football again, it's argued every page.
Also with a tendancy of a larger club coming in after success or his being sacked he can't really be blamed for leaving now can he? Another pointless comment.
On a related note youth players, how can you bring through youth in 2/3 years? Ancelloti says he will bring through youth next year, surely josé should get the credit for getting this youth.
Do we have to talk attacking football again, it's argued every page.
He won't go to us unfortunately.
What a pretentious wanker.
It's hard to like Mourinho. I know it's very entertaining to us when we look at him doing all these kinds of stunts while he's not our manager but he's going to be embarrassing the club if he comes here. I wish he conducted himself slightly better. He makes a lot of enemies.
Interesting quotes from Robben about Mourinho today. I know he might have a chip on his shoulder about his time at Chelsea and the CL Final is coming up, but the quotes seem fair without being bitter.
A question for Elvis and other Mourinho fans: as it now seems fairly likely that Mourinho will move to Madrid this summer, does that change your view of him coming to United?
It seems clear to me that his preferred career path would be to move on now to Madrid having won the CL and Serie A with Inter. He'd like to win the CL again with Madrid as well as La Liga and have done that in time to succeed SAF at United.
That will mean that he's going through clubs at a rate of one every two years - are you really happy to just let United be a small factor on his CV before he inevitably leaves after 2 years to take on the Portugal job?
A question for Elvis and other Mourinho fans: as it now seems fairly likely that Mourinho will move to Madrid this summer, does that change your view of him coming to United?
It seems clear to me that his preferred career path would be to move on now to Madrid having won the CL and Serie A with Inter. He'd like to win the CL again with Madrid as well as La Liga and have done that in time to succeed SAF at United.
That will mean that he's going through clubs at a rate of one every two years - are you really happy to just let United be a small factor on his CV before he inevitably leaves after 2 years to take on the Portugal job?
I am shocked only two people voted for Louis Van Gaal
Well it's been a fairly fickle poll already so expect lots of Van Gaal votes depending on how things go on Saturday night.
He's doing great things at Bayern but surely you haven't missed the fact that he tends to behave like a total cock the whole time?
You really want this kind of stuff going on at Old Trafford?
Dude is leathered!
Seems stand up to me.
Seems stand up to me.
Who does he remind me of?
Each big club he goes to will just be another notch on his bedpost. He'll stay a while, increase his CV, and move on to the next conquest.
Really, going to Liverpool (if they get big money owners) would make more sense than going to United. A club that are so desperate that they will be happy with a short term jolt of success and don't worry about building for the long-term.
Cringe!
mourinho doesn't want to take over portugal until he is in his 60's.
he will stay at madrid only for a couple seasons, but the club after madrid (when he comes back to the premiership), he will stay for over 7 seasons atleast IMO. Whether that's us, city, dippers, or whomever else, his move after madrid will be for much longer as he doesn't want to go into international football while he's young.
So, i am happy to have mourinho at united for 7+ years. If he came in 2012, then he'll see us through to the end of the decade..by that time you'd hope Ole would be ready.
Absolutely stunning post.
FFS
And then, Giggs, followed by Beckham, to complete your happy little family?
This is football mate, not playing Sylvanian Families...
- Status