Amir I've heard you say you want Avram Grant before.
- Status
Not every manager who does well with a small or midtable team can do good with a top team. So I would not want Moyes. I would prefer Mourinho or Guardiola.
I think it's important you guys get someone who is going to stay for at least 5-6 years. I say that because whoever comes in, I will expect to make large changes to the team. There's no point doing that and receiving money and backing if he is just going to jump ship.
So Mourinho only if he agrees to minimum 5 years.
So Mourinho only if he agrees to minimum 5 years.
Nobody asked you.
Well, actually I am not sure if he has said it directly in a interview, so I guess it was a bad sentance. But among other Sneijder said that he wanted that job, he has always stated that he wanted to stay a few years abroad, and then return to England - knowing that Ferguson will retire in a few years as well. if you add two and two together you get four.
Many journalists has interpreted it like that, and I guess I buy that one from them.
Who's to say Mourinho would come running as soon as we click our finger's anyway? Like I already said, he'll not be leaving RM without winning their 10th CL and winning La Liga, and although he's got a history of moving around that's not to say he'll like Madrid and his own Iberian culture, even gypsies find a home eventually 
Mourinho isn't flavour of the month at all, people have been talking about him being Ferguson's successor since 2007. The board will go for whoever they believe will make the club the most successful, not whoever will play the most aesthetically pleasing football.
The greatest manager ever? Bold claim. For my money, and a lot of other people's, especially those who aren't United fans, Jose Mourinho is a better manager. A lot of other people would say Bob Paisley, Bill Shankly, or Brian Clough were better managers. It's not a view shared by all, you shouldn't assume it will be shared by the board.
You're right though, Gill is value conscious, that's why I think he will see the value of having the best manager in the world and paying him accordingly, rather than having a shit manager like O'Neill or an average manager like Moyes and paying him one of the top salaries in the world.
It's far from signed and sealed, his leaving Madrid might not coincide with Ferguson leaving United, but it's clear to me that he would be the best appointment, and I think he's the one the United board would go for.
I think if he comes he will stay for more than 5 years for sure. He has almost achieved all he wanted before he wants to come to United. All he has left after he wins the La Liga and UCL with Madrid is the Man United job and the Portugal job.
I know its easier said than done that Mourinho has to win both titles with Madrid but I think he HAS found a way to gel that team together somehow. I think they will win the La Liga this year and the UCL next year. I don't Inter retaining the UCL title this year. Barca and Inter have to be favorites to win it this year.
Frankly I don't see the difference. Mourinho has proven an excellent spotter of outstanding youth talent. On top of having a proven record of improving players. To bring through alot of youth at a club one has to spend nothing less than 5 years there. Jsoe is yet to have such a job. Given what we know he is capbel of as amanger. antyoen who think that he wouldn't be able to blood youth if he had a long term stay at club like United doesn't have one shred of evidence to back them up.
Is that so? Who do you think gave a debut to David Santon? Who do you think got Inter to purchase Coutinho? In addition whose idea do you think it was to send Bibiany on loan to gain experience?
That's it, this place has officially lost the plot.
The day Jose "quick-fix" Mourinho is considered a better manager than the man who's built trophy-hoovering team after team for the last 30 odd years, is the day football becomes completely dictated by Sky Sports and tabloid hype.
Mourinho had NOTHING to do with Coutinho signing, that was done before he arrived in Italy and anyway, Inter's transfers are done by the DOF Marco Branca. That's your first point blitzed.
Davide Santon, OK Jose blooded him, but Mourinho also froze him out last season, that's hardly a show of faith in youth is it?
Biabiany was well out of Mourinho's plan's, that's why Moratti sent him out and gave Parma 50% rights on him. Another assumption blitzed.
An example of faith in youth and how it can reward you...SAF kept faith in Nani who a lot of people gave up on, the sort of player Mourinho gives up on regularly ala Mancini, Queresma, Joe Cole, Balotelli etc, and was rewarded. Jose doesn't keep faith with young player's who struggle initially, which is why he's rarely brought through top player's during his management.
I can't believe how many people spout this bullshit about how he can't build sides. He does build sides fantastically well, people just don't seem to realise it because of the incredible speed at which he does it and gets it to work. In summer of 2009, he sold his best player and in the two transfer windows, brought in several players, refocused the team around a new player, and won the Treble. Compare that to Ferguson's efforts at rebuilding after selling his best player - maybe it'll come good, but it's not done at the same speed as how Mourinho did it, and I'd be very surprised if this team he is building now ever wins the Treble. The team Mourinho built at Chelsea continues to lead the Premier League even today after he has left.
Maybe on a plate served to a Cannibal.
And yes, Mourinho is excellent, period. Better than Fergie? maybe one day we'll be able to compare, if he shows something similar to Sir Alex's logevity. But what he's done in the past 8 years is bloody brilliant and Fergie would be damn proud of such achievements (Just like Mourinho would like to have Fergie's success over so many years).
I'm not saying he can't build a successful team, he clearly can. The problem is that he's a very short-term manager who doesn't think of building a side to span 5-6 years, he builds with 1-2 seasons in mind. He also fecks off before a period of transition can test him and his ability to re-build from scratch.
At Chelsea he had an blank cheque, at Inter he had the second highest transfer fee ever to play with and a team a country mile better than the rest of Italy, and now at Madrid he's got another blank cheque. I'd like to see him manage transition like SAF has and build a team from persevering with young talent, and moulding their potential rather than the high maintenance building he's been afforded for most of his career.
He may not have enough league titles to match Fergie but he has definitely matched Fergie's record in Europe. I think he has 7 league titles in 3 different countries. He is close to Fergie even in that aspect. Roman Abramovich must be kicking himself for letting Mourinho go because I m pretty sure he would have taken Chelsea pretty far in the UCL.
He doesn't need to go through a transition period, what would in normal circumstances spark such a period, selling the best player even for a high fee, with Mourinho simply sparks more success because he brings in fantastic players for good value and fits them into his team. This happened to 'the greatest manager ever' and he brought in young players and a past it player and didn't win anything important. Transitional periods aren't inevitable, it is possible to maintain success over a long period.
You say he can't build a side to span 5-6 years, the Chelsea side he took over 6 years ago and left 3 years ago continue to be the best team in England, all of their best players played under or were signed by Mourinho. They've had no transitional period, they just had two seasons where United were the best team in Europe above them (by a whisker mind) and spent the majority of a season with a shit manager. After that, when United declined, they won the League again, and they're red hot favourites to do that again this year - that's still largely Mourinho's team.
Do you think Ferguson's never had a lot of money to spend by the way? He's often had a shitload of money, far more than other English clubs, but he's never had a 9 years as good as Mourinho's last 9.
Wrong again. Mourinho was in total control of every transfer Inter made. That was the chief condition of the deal he made with Morrati. He is the one who told Branca who to buy. Branca never ever acted on his own.
That isn't the point. Your claim was he had nothing to do with any of the youngsters Inter has in their squad now.
Wrong again. It is Mourinho who enouraged Morrati to send him on loan. He is alo the one who got Morrati to buy the 50% rigths back after Mariga arrived. You dont seem to get that Mourinho was the sole controller of who came in and out of the club's transfer door whilst he was there.
Are you kidding me? Mancini wasn't a youth. Neither was Quaresma. 2 players who failled him compeletely despite the chances he gave them.
As for Joe Cole? Are you forgetting Cole finally became a a key player under him ?
and if you want to talk of faith in players. Remember Drogba in his first season?
John Obi Mikel
If he was to stay at any club more than 3 years, he'd have to manage a period of transition. It's a fact of life, you can't win with the same team every year, the fact he hasn't stuck with a team or the same club for more than 3 years means he hasn't had the adversity most other manager's have in their career.
As for the "Chelsea are still doing it 6 years on" bollocks, pfft, they needed us to lose our best player to even get a look in and stop the 3 year rot "Jose's team" went through.
I've never seen SAF spend at least £60m every summer 5 years on the trot as Jose has(2007 the exception).
Mourinho has won 2 champions league trophies with different sides. One with a side he had to rebuild into a European powerhouse. Has won the EPL, Serie A and The Portugeese Super liga. 2 trebles. The FA and Carling cups. All in the space of 8 years. Anyone who thinks it is mere ''Sky Sports and tabloid hype'' that this fella could actually be classed as better than SAF needs their head examined frankly.
What might have been.
Absolutely. You'd struggle to find coaches who've had a more successful period - not to mention the fact he did it with three teams, one a relative minnow in current European Football (Porto are a big club, of course, but you don't expect them to be winning the european cup any more), and another regular underachiever in Europe. He turned things around brilliantly, making some shrews and not too expensive signings for Inter.
The bold bit is you completely missing the point. The point being that Jose gives up on player's way too easily.
Pretty much all your other points are false. Mourinho was given Sneijder, Eto'o, Lucio, Coutinho(although he scarpered before he arrived), Mariga, and Motta. Jose merely requested player's to strengthen certain positions.
Mourinho was not the sole controller of transfer's, he may have had more power than Rafa has but he was still Nick Clegg to Branca's David Cameron.
Obi Mikel? The same Obi Mikel who only truly established himself at Chelsea two season's after Mourinho's departure?
No, not right now. and who knows how Fergie's career would have looked like had he started later and had been Mourinho's age now, as football is so different. A comparison between what Mourinho has done and what Fergie achieved by 47 doesn't really make sense either. Different times.
Still, for a coach his age, he must be at least as impressive as Fergie was at 47, a relative newcomer at United.
No one knows how the rest of that match would have penned out. For better or worse. Doesn't really matter any more than Schmeichel bringing some Inter player down in San Siro in 99'.
Mourinho has won 2 champions league trophies with different sides. One with a side he had to rebuild into a European powerhouse. Has won the EPL, Serie A and The Portugeese Super liga. 2 trebles. The FA and Carling cups. All in the space of 8 years. Anyone who thinks it is mere ''Sky Sports and tabloid hype'' that this fella could actually be classed as better than SAF needs their head examined frankly.
You and kietotheworld hoping Fergie puts United first and slings his hook allowing for his specialness to takeover and lead us to glory? If yes, then you's are just ungrateful sods. If not, have a word with yourself and maybe look back at SAF's achievements in the game.
The cow's analogy Fergie used last week could be applied here regarding the pining for Mourinho to come and rescue us from this plague of going one year without a title.
They 'got a look in' in 2008, they had a shit manager in 2008/09 until they appointed Hiddink. It's true that Chelsea's team has declined since Mourinho left, but it's still a pretty good one all the same, better than Ferguson's teams have been after 'rot's, eg. the 2003-06 team or the 2009/10 team. If he'd stayed there I expect he would have made the adjustments necessary to keep Chelsea near the top of the European tree (in fact I think they would have won Europe in 2008), rather than having to wait until United went downhill by selling their best player. Still, Mourinho proved in 2009 that selling your best player doesn't mean you have to get worse, you can improve massively.
I don't think he spent £60m in 2006? I didn't think he spent that much in 2008 either. Or even 2009, he got Sneijder for less than £20m, Militio and Motta in exchange for 4 players and some cash, and Eto'o as part of the Ibrahimovic deal. Where are you getting these figures?
Enormous strawman. You lose.
If that perfectly legitimate goal isn't disallowed by a complete mongoloid linesman then we are 2-0 (or 3-2 on aggregate) with the second half to hit them on the counter as they commit players forward to try and get a goal, but you know I'm so over it.
In 2006, he broke the PL record by signing Sheva for £30m, £12m splashed on Mikel and also signed Ballack on then record wages, the equivalent of a £20-30m player.
2009, he spent heavy cash, the fact it was from Ibra's sale matters not one jot, money is money and his club spent lots of it.
2007 apart, I'd be willing to bet that he's outspent SAF considerably during every year since he left Porto.
And if John Terry hadn't slipped, blah, blah, blah.
I am not advocating pushing Ferguson out of the door, I am saying Mourinho is a better manager than him, and that he is the ideal replacement when Ferguson eventually does leave.
One's a player making a mistake and the other is a linesman getting an obvious decision wrong- spot the difference.
Now you are just lying. As for signing a player on a free equating to a £20-30 million player?
Those players play for free?We get it, you hate Mourinho.
So, one is a player making a mistake, the other, is a linesman......making a mistake.
Outstanding.
Including wages generally isn't the done thing when you're talking about how much a manager has spent.
I don't see a source for this idea that he spent £60m. I think it is from your imagination. He bought Sneijder for below £20m and signed Motta and Militio in exchange for 4 players and an undisclosed amount of cash. I've not even brought net spend into it, because I don't think his gross spend was close to that.
Good for you, considering you have no sources for it and have made up some statistics, it doesn't mean an awful lot to me though.
Now you are just lying. As for signing a player on a free equating to a £20-30 million player?
We get it, you hate Mourinho.
Ballack's market value in 2006 was at least £20m, Chelsea got him for free but I bet a chunk of that figure ended up in a Swiss account bearing Ballack's name to cover his sign-on fee.
Hate Mourinho? Not at all, great character, the best in the business when it comes to preparing a team tactically and metally, for big games in particular. But better than SAF as an all round manager? Not in a million years.
- Status