Mourinho | New old Chelsea manager

Sky1981 said:
1. The title he won is no myth
2. What are your definition of United Materials? Does SAF possess them 25 years ago?
3. Call me glory hunter, we wouldn't be respected and held with respect and adoration without trophies. Yes, trophy does matter. Success is the thing that differentiates the best from the rest. Fans loyalty, culture, history... heck Millwall have them all as well.
4. The cost of having a souness far outweights having a few cnutish moment from Jose (which we probably enjoy when he's our cnut)
5. Would we forgive Rooney, Keane, Cantona, SAF if they're not our cnut?
6. Again SAF didn't have all that respect overnight. If you want to compare Jose with SAF, compare him to the young AF managing United coming from aberdeen
7. Those clubs you mentioned didn't have the luxury of having a born and bred winner in SAF. Not every club does.
8. Who is proven on the sustained success ground? those that probably were was almost as old as the man they replace
9. The aftermath of SAF retirement could have been the biggest cross to bear by whomever succeeds him, I don't know what the future holds, but Jose is my best bet. If he can't handle the changing room and the board, no one does.
Click to expand...
1. The title Madrid won this season?
2. The incredible drive to win that Mourinho obviously possesses but with more humility and professionalism than he has ever shown. Again that is probably laughable to anyone considering Ferguson objectively but throughout all his time here it hasn't felt like Fergie has placed himself above the club. For me, Ferguson has given himself completely to United, adding his character and talent to the history and ideals of the club for which Busby and others laid the groundwork (on which other posters than me will be far more knowledgable). Ferguson has created something more for United, added to our DNA, our history. Mourinho's used the clubs he's been at to create more for himself. Now of course Ferguson is unique, this is simply a response to the argument that they are similar men. I don't think it's just the opportunity for longevity that separates their characters. Maybe this is just a special club and Mourinho would adapt but for me he has shown no indication of that, it seems he will always be a larger figure than the club he's at. Look at Madrid, the most successful club side in the world and already this title is 'Mourinho's.'
3. For sure, but there is more to winning, right?
4. Not really sure what you mean sorry. I would take a less image conscious manager than Mourinho if it means less success, as for the reasons I've stated I think he'd be harmful for this club.
5. Players are different, they don't represent the club in nearly the same way as a traditional manager (like Mourinho) does. But Ferguson got rid of Keane, our club captain, the moment he became harmful to the team/club. For me, he should have done the same with Rooney but it's evidently easier to move on a player who is no longer so crucial professionally. Regardless, someone like Keane had otherwise earned a much more dignified sendoff. Football is entertainment as much as it is a sport, I want to see characters but in the players, not someone on the touchline thinking they are the main attraction.
6. Look, I know comparatively nothing about football and maybe Mourinho presents to whoever selects our next manager an approach that's compatible with the club's history and identity, as Fergie obviously did all those years ago. I just don't personally see it and from comments Sir Bobby has made in the past, there are obviously some doubts there. On this point of comparing Mourinho now to a young Fergie, I wasn't around for the start of his reign - was he so outspoken from the get-go?
7. Those clubs made the decision to appoint the guy who they figured to have the most chance of bringing instant success and willingly put up with consequences. I don't think our club needs to do that at this point.
8. Again I have very little knowledge of world football so am clueless as to who is out there. It is just my personal preference that it is not Mourinho.
9. I completely agree that Fergie retiring will be such a huge and difficult moment, particularly for whoever follows him. As I've said I could almost concede Mourinho coming in to steady the ship as opposed to someone I'd consider 'the right man', but I'd rather it not happen.
 
LoveInTheAsylum said:
1. The title Madrid won this season?
2. The incredible drive to win that Mourinho obviously possesses but with more humility and professionalism than he has ever shown. Again that is probably laughable to anyone considering Ferguson objectively but throughout all his time here it hasn't felt like Fergie has placed himself above the club. For me, Ferguson has given himself completely to United, adding his character and talent to the history and ideals of the club for which Busby and others laid the groundwork (on which other posters than me will be far more knowledgable). Ferguson has created something more for United, added to our DNA, our history. Mourinho's used the clubs he's been at to create more for himself. Now of course Ferguson is unique, this is simply a response to the argument that they are similar men. I don't think it's just the opportunity for longevity that separates their characters. Maybe this is just a special club and Mourinho would adapt but for me he has shown no indication of that, it seems he will always be a larger figure than the club he's at. Look at Madrid, the most successful club side in the world and already this title is 'Mourinho's.'
3. For sure, but there is more to winning, right?
4. Not really sure what you mean sorry. I would take a less image conscious manager than Mourinho if it means less success, as for the reasons I've stated I think he'd be harmful for this club.
5. Players are different, they don't represent the club in nearly the same way as a traditional manager (like Mourinho) does. But Ferguson got rid of Keane, our club captain, the moment he became harmful to the team/club. For me, he should have done the same with Rooney but it's evidently easier to move on a player who is no longer so crucial professionally. Regardless, someone like Keane had otherwise earned a much more dignified sendoff. Football is entertainment as much as it is a sport, I want to see characters but in the players, not someone on the touchline thinking they are the main attraction.
6. Look, I know comparatively nothing about football and maybe Mourinho presents to whoever selects our next manager an approach that's compatible with the club's history and identity, as Fergie obviously did all those years ago. I just don't personally see it and from comments Sir Bobby has made in the past, there are obviously some doubts there. On this point of comparing Mourinho now to a young Fergie, I wasn't around for the start of his reign - was he so outspoken from the get-go?
7. Those clubs made the decision to appoint the guy who they figured to have the most chance of bringing instant success and willingly put up with consequences. I don't think our club needs to do that at this point.
8. Again I have very little knowledge of world football so am clueless as to who is out there. It is just my personal preference that it is not Mourinho.
9. I completely agree that Fergie retiring will be such a huge and difficult moment, particularly for whoever follows him. As I've said I could almost concede Mourinho coming in to steady the ship as opposed to someone I'd consider 'the right man', but I'd rather it not happen.
Click to expand...

1. The title Mourinho won for Madrid.

2. What exactly do you mean by that? Hasn't Sir Alex used United to cement his place as the greatest ever manager in football history? :confused:

3. Not really.

4. I'm just glad that you're not in charge of selecting our next manager. One quick look at Liverpool tells you how difficult it is to get back into the top echelon on football after dropping out of it - after Sir Alex, the most important thing for United is to maintain success on and off the pitch.

5. Sir Alex got rid of Keane then because of his age, do you think he'd have kicked him out if he was 5 years (or even 3 years) younger? Sir Alex did what was best for United.

6. Sir Alex was a lot more outspoken in his younger days than he is now, and I somehow doubt anyone will turn down Mourinho if we can afford him and he's interested.

7. As I said before, success after Sir Alex is VITAL, if we drop off the pace after Sir Alex, we don't know when we'd ever make it back to the top. Again, look at Liverpool.

8. Mourinho is by far the most qualified candidate to replace Sir Alex on the right side of 50 (even 60), other qualified candidates like Lippi or Hiddink and co are hardly younger than Sir Alex.

9. I really do hope Gill (or whoever gets to decide) can see how important replacing Sir Alex is.
 
LoveInTheAsylum said:
1. The title Madrid won this season?
2. The incredible drive to win that Mourinho obviously possesses but with more humility and professionalism than he has ever shown. Again that is probably laughable to anyone considering Ferguson objectively but throughout all his time here it hasn't felt like Fergie has placed himself above the club. For me, Ferguson has given himself completely to United, adding his character and talent to the history and ideals of the club for which Busby and others laid the groundwork (on which other posters than me will be far more knowledgable). Ferguson has created something more for United, added to our DNA, our history. Mourinho's used the clubs he's been at to create more for himself. Now of course Ferguson is unique, this is simply a response to the argument that they are similar men. I don't think it's just the opportunity for longevity that separates their characters. Maybe this is just a special club and Mourinho would adapt but for me he has shown no indication of that, it seems he will always be a larger figure than the club he's at. Look at Madrid, the most successful club side in the world and already this title is 'Mourinho's.'
3. For sure, but there is more to winning, right?
4. Not really sure what you mean sorry. I would take a less image conscious manager than Mourinho if it means less success, as for the reasons I've stated I think he'd be harmful for this club.
5. Players are different, they don't represent the club in nearly the same way as a traditional manager (like Mourinho) does. But Ferguson got rid of Keane, our club captain, the moment he became harmful to the team/club. For me, he should have done the same with Rooney but it's evidently easier to move on a player who is no longer so crucial professionally. Regardless, someone like Keane had otherwise earned a much more dignified sendoff. Football is entertainment as much as it is a sport, I want to see characters but in the players, not someone on the touchline thinking they are the main attraction.
6. Look, I know comparatively nothing about football and maybe Mourinho presents to whoever selects our next manager an approach that's compatible with the club's history and identity, as Fergie obviously did all those years ago. I just don't personally see it and from comments Sir Bobby has made in the past, there are obviously some doubts there. On this point of comparing Mourinho now to a young Fergie, I wasn't around for the start of his reign - was he so outspoken from the get-go?
7. Those clubs made the decision to appoint the guy who they figured to have the most chance of bringing instant success and willingly put up with consequences. I don't think our club needs to do that at this point.
8. Again I have very little knowledge of world football so am clueless as to who is out there. It is just my personal preference that it is not Mourinho.
9. I completely agree that Fergie retiring will be such a huge and difficult moment, particularly for whoever follows him. As I've said I could almost concede Mourinho coming in to steady the ship as opposed to someone I'd consider 'the right man', but I'd rather it not happen.
Click to expand...

All I'm trying to say is that he is not the man he is now. It took him trial and error, lots of hardwork, and lots of trophies, and a life long journey to become the man he is today.

I don't think it's fair to find a match to the 67yo SAF after all he's been through. We will never find the likes of that quality, because it is tempered along with experience.

Let's compare Jose and Fergie when they both retire, it'll paint a better picture.
 
I personally dislike Mourinho but also think there's no-one better than him to manage Manchester United whenver Fergie decides to retire.
 
Whatever you think of him as a person, his managerial abilities cant be questioned. Wherever he went, he has built a very succesful team who, after 1 season or 2, start playing good football and gets this winning mentality.

Still, he's a bit mental
 
Cal? said:
1. The title Mourinho won for Madrid.

2. What exactly do you mean by that? Hasn't Sir Alex used United to cement his place as the greatest ever manager in football history? :confused:

3. Not really.

4. I'm just glad that you're not in charge of selecting our next manager. One quick look at Liverpool tells you how difficult it is to get back into the top echelon on football after dropping out of it - after Sir Alex, the most important thing for United is to maintain success on and off the pitch.

5. Sir Alex got rid of Keane then because of his age, do you think he'd have kicked him out if he was 5 years (or even 3 years) younger? Sir Alex did what was best for United.

6. Sir Alex was a lot more outspoken in his younger days than he is now, and I somehow doubt anyone will turn down Mourinho if we can afford him and he's interested.

7. As I said before, success after Sir Alex is VITAL, if we drop off the pace after Sir Alex, we don't know when we'd ever make it back to the top. Again, look at Liverpool.

8. Mourinho is by far the most qualified candidate to replace Sir Alex on the right side of 50 (even 60), other qualified candidates like Lippi or Hiddink and co are hardly younger than Sir Alex.

9. I really do hope Gill (or whoever gets to decide) can see how important replacing Sir Alex is.
Click to expand...
If we don't agree that there is more to football than winning, then we'll never agree on Mourinho as obviously one cannot argue with his record. As I'm now at the stage of just regurgitating earlier posts I'll try to clear up a few points before I bow out, as I phrased some things horribly in the above post you quoted.

On 'Mourinho's trophies', my point is always that he is a self-hype machine. The titles to his name are not the individual achievements they can be made out to be. On him 'using clubs to further his name', again I just mean he is seen to be a bigger figure than every club he manages. It's another subjective argument that other managers build their reputations by becoming part of something bigger, giving themselves to a club's identity. With Mourinho the focus always has to be on him.

On the Liverpool comparison, if I supported them I'd find it a lot easier to accept the same mid-table mediocrity this season without the manager who helped drag the club's name through the dirt through his antagonistic off-the-field character.

With the Fergie comparisons, I didn't introduce them. They are always brought in as a defence of Mourinho's character so I was trying to explain the differences between them as I saw them. I agree of course that Fergie is incomparable.

It all comes down to the point that while I'm sure everyone agrees that maintaining success post-Fergie is vital, I do not want that to come at the expense of the club's identity. Which is a wishy-washy point to try and argue, I've tried to explain a little of what I mean by that and how I think Mourinho could be the wrong choice, but yeah, I'm bloody glad I'm not the one in charge of selecting our next manager, too.
 
Cal? said:
1. The title Mourinho won for Madrid.

2. What exactly do you mean by that? Hasn't Sir Alex used United to cement his place as the greatest ever manager in football history? :confused:

3. Not really.

4. I'm just glad that you're not in charge of selecting our next manager. One quick look at Liverpool tells you how difficult it is to get back into the top echelon on football after dropping out of it - after Sir Alex, the most important thing for United is to maintain success on and off the pitch.

5. Sir Alex got rid of Keane then because of his age, do you think he'd have kicked him out if he was 5 years (or even 3 years) younger? Sir Alex did what was best for United.

6. Sir Alex was a lot more outspoken in his younger days than he is now, and I somehow doubt anyone will turn down Mourinho if we can afford him and he's interested.

7. As I said before, success after Sir Alex is VITAL, if we drop off the pace after Sir Alex, we don't know when we'd ever make it back to the top. Again, look at Liverpool.

8. Mourinho is by far the most qualified candidate to replace Sir Alex on the right side of 50 (even 60), other qualified candidates like Lippi or Hiddink and co are hardly younger than Sir Alex.

9. I really do hope Gill (or whoever gets to decide) can see how important replacing Sir Alex is.
Click to expand...
spot on
 
Mourinho is a great coach, but unless he changes his (childish) attitude I wouldn't want him at United..

We don't know if he's a great manager or not by the way..
 
Are the people bringing up Mourinho's 'attitude' and manner deliberately ignoring Fergie's history?!

He refused to speak to the country's primary media outlet for the best part of a decade.
He's been in trouble for criticising officials more times than I can remember.
He's claimed that cup draws are fixed.
Oh, and he nearly tore the club apart over some horse sperm.

As much as we love Fergie, he's about as stubborn and occasionally childish as they come. That's part of what makes him such a fecking winner. Mourinho is of the same breed.
 
His attitude isn't that important for me. Almost every football fan who doesn't support Man United hates the club. Having a manager who a lot of people hate isn't going to change that at all.
 
Boycotting the BBC was the right decision.. The BBC started it first.. That's a silly comparison to what Mourinho is doing..
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Are the people bringing up Mourinho's 'attitude' and manner deliberately ignoring Fergie's history?!

He refused to speak to the country's primary media outlet for the best part of a decade.
He's been in trouble for criticising officials more times than I can remember.
He's claimed that cup draws are fixed.
Oh, and he nearly tore the club apart over some horse sperm.

As much as we love Fergie, he's about as stubborn and occasionally childish as they come. That's part of what makes him such a fecking winner. Mourinho is of the same breed.
Click to expand...

Cant argue with that.

If Mourinho arrived there is no doubt in my mind it would be good for the club, in the short term at least, and that he would deliver titles - and quite possibly more success than we have enjoyed under SAF in the CL.

Once he had been there for a period of time my personal distaste for him would probably gradually erode, too, and even ultimately be replaced by real affection.

What type of football would we play? How many youngsters would he bring through? How long would be stay? These and other questions would remain. The man is a cnut, just as people who dont support Man United see SAF as a cnut. I just remember that run of Clasicos in the latter stages of last season, with how Real and he behaved, the accusations he was making about favouritism towards Barca. In that one way he does differ from SAF. There was a touch of Rafa about that. He's like a hybrid of a lot of the good points of SAF, but with some elements of Rafa and Dagleish in there as well.

Glad Im not making the choice. If it was down to me, Id still say nay - just - but with less conviction with every passing day, on the basis that there just isnt anyone else. (Dont believe Pep would be able to translate his success with Barca to us the way Mourinho could).
 
FlawlessThaw said:
Probably become like Leeds but perhaps even worse than that
Click to expand...

Really? With the fantastic youth system we have? Massive fan base? I don't see it happening.

I just see all this "We need to keep winning after Ferguson leaves", and I wonder what would happen, if we just happened to have a few barren spells in midtable obscurity.
 
Cal? said:
1. The title Mourinho won for Madrid.

2. What exactly do you mean by that? Hasn't Sir Alex used United to cement his place as the greatest ever manager in football history? :confused:

3. Not really.

4. I'm just glad that you're not in charge of selecting our next manager. One quick look at Liverpool tells you how difficult it is to get back into the top echelon on football after dropping out of it - after Sir Alex, the most important thing for United is to maintain success on and off the pitch.

5. Sir Alex got rid of Keane then because of his age, do you think he'd have kicked him out if he was 5 years (or even 3 years) younger? Sir Alex did what was best for United.

6. Sir Alex was a lot more outspoken in his younger days than he is now, and I somehow doubt anyone will turn down Mourinho if we can afford him and he's interested.

7. As I said before, success after Sir Alex is VITAL, if we drop off the pace after Sir Alex, we don't know when we'd ever make it back to the top. Again, look at Liverpool.

8. Mourinho is by far the most qualified candidate to replace Sir Alex on the right side of 50 (even 60), other qualified candidates like Lippi or Hiddink and co are hardly younger than Sir Alex.

9. I really do hope Gill (or whoever gets to decide) can see how important replacing Sir Alex is.
Click to expand...


I agree with all of it but especially the bold part. To successfully replace a character like Sir Alex is more or less impossible, no matter what a new manager archive he will be in the shadow of the great old man. The only person who have the charisma and self belief to come close is José Mourinho. Apart from many other posters I like him, both as a person and as a manager. Off course his antics are sometime's way over the hill but that's goes with the territory to appoint a natural born winner. I'm not sure Pep Guardiola would succeed the way he do in another club but I'm 100% sure Mou would bring success to our club. And that's the bottom line for why he's the best candidate.
 
To think that there is NO other manager than Mourinho who can bring success to this club after SAF is just ridiculous..

Barcelona also had a chance to sign Mourinho in 2008, after their collapse under Rijkaard, and he also looked "the only one who can ensure bringing back success to Barcelona", but they didn't sign him, and ended up with a 37 year rookie.. Poor Barcelona, they should have signed Mourinho!

Manchester United > Mourinho.
 
Danny1982 said:
To think that there is NO other manager than Mourinho who can bring success to this club after SAF is just ridiculous..

Barcelona also had a chance to sign Mourinho in 2008, after their collapse under Rijkaard, and he also looked "the only one who can ensure bringing back success to Barcelona", but they didn't sign him, and ended up with a 37 year rookie.. Poor Barcelona, they should have signed Mourinho!

Manchester United > Mourinho.
Click to expand...

Not to slight Pep, but having three of the five best footballers in the world has made him look like a very good manager. We simply don't know how he would fare if he had to do it at another club. Mourinho's track record of success is quite simple. Wherever he goes, success follows.
 
It's tiresome how these 'Fergie's just as bad!' points are presented as unarguable, as if context doesn't matter.

Fergie began boycotting the BBC in 2004, 18 years into his reign here after winning 8 league titles, 4 FA Cups, and 1 Champions League.
His first touchline ban for criticising referees came in 2003 (according to wiki which could well be horribly inaccurate).
Rock of Gibraltar came about in 2003.

And what, it's supposed that we all love those moments from Ferguson and want more but from a new character within the first few years of his time here?

Do we really need to compare crimes? For Mourinho we have the constant assertion that Uefa fixes games for Barca, his beautiful handling of the Frisk controversy, Wenger the voyeur, waiting for refs in parking lots, the Vilanova poke and his great show of remorse calling him a penis, Dr. Needles...
 
It's far more tiresome how people ignore them and continue to present an argument based around Mourinho's perceived character.

Far more tiresome. As if Mourinho is the only manager to ever act up, or play the persecuted card, or slag off officials. Or as if Fergie has earned some kind of devine right to that no other manager has. Clough was a far bigger tit than Jose, but I would've had Clough here in a second.

Stop being all X Factor and judging people on your perceived media impression of them. I couldn't give a flying monkey feck how many people like our manager.
 
LoveInTheAsylum said:
It's tiresome how these 'Fergie's just as bad!' points are presented as unarguable, as if context doesn't matter.

Fergie began boycotting the BBC in 2004, 18 years into his reign here after winning 8 league titles, 4 FA Cups, and 1 Champions League.
His first touchline ban for criticising referees came in 2003 (according to wiki which could well be horribly inaccurate).
Rock of Gibraltar came about in 2003.

And what, it's supposed that we all love those moments from Ferguson and want more but from a new character within the first few years of his time here?

Do we really need to compare crimes? For Mourinho we have the constant assertion that Uefa fixes games for Barca, his beautiful handling of the Frisk controversy, Wenger the voyeur, waiting for refs in parking lots, the Vilanova poke and his great show of remorse calling him a penis, Dr. Needles...
Click to expand...
I don't understand the point you are trying to make? Fergie earned the right to boycott BBC, throw a hissy fit over the horse stuff etc.? And that too earned that on basis on his success? If that is the case then Jose certainly has earned it as well.

Regardless it is a stupid point. Either you condone such behaviour or you don;t, the status or position you may have achieved should have nothing to do with it.
 
Raoul said:
Not to slight Pep, but having three of the five best footballers in the world has made him look like a very good manager. We simply don't know how he would fare if he had to do it at another club. Mourinho's track record of success is quite simple. Wherever he goes, success follows.
Click to expand...

Well, Rijkaard had the exact same three players, and Barcelona ended up 3rd(!!) in La Liga, the year before they won the sextuple..

Besides, Mourinho's teams haven't been short of stars either!

Porto?
Chelsea?
Inter Milan?
Real Madrid?

Those are top clubs with top players.. The only win that's really impressive was when Porto won the CL, but then again Benitez won the CL too with Liverpool...

Mourinho didn't do a lot better than Hiddink or Grant or Ancelotti at Chelsea, nor much better than former Madrid managers at Madrid. And Inter Milan were already winning the league when Mourinho went there.

I think his next stop should be Manchester City.. Because that's where the money and the good players are now, so better take credit now before Mancini does!

Obviously Mourinho is a great coach, but:
1- We don't know yet if he's a good manager yet.
2- I don't buy that he is the "one and only" out there.
 
Mockney said:
It's far more tiresome how people ignore them and continue to present an argument based around Mourinho's perceived character.

Far more tiresome. As if Mourinho is the only manager to ever act up, or play the persecuted card, or slag off officials. Or as if Fergie has earned some kind of devine right to that no other manager has. Clough was a far bigger tit than Jose, but I would've had Clough here in a second.

Stop being all X Factor and judging people on your perceived media impression of them. I couldn't give a flying monkey feck how many people like our manager.
Click to expand...

well said as usual mockney, the only concern we should have is that he respects and honours the traditions of this great club and continues to bring through youth like those before him. This last point is what concerns most fans about Mourinho imo.
 
According to Xavi Rikjaard didn't like him and didn't trust him on the pitch. That might have been one of the reasons.

I don't think Pep should be downplayed. He might very well be the difference between Barcelona being a very good team like our own treble winning side or being touted as one of the best teams ever.

Mourinho did look better than all the other Chelsea coaches. He has the league record for points. His Porto side wasn't full of stars. You hardly knew the players before. It isn't any more star strutted than the current Benfica side or Napoli squad. Who went on to good things after he left Porto? Any other players besides the ones he bought himself?
 
Of course status and position dictate how much people tolerate from others, no-one would give these managers jobs unless that were the case. And these incidents must have context, if Ferguson had pulled the Rock of Gibraltar strop in his first year in charge, he'd have been out on his arse. And I don't ignore or gloss over Fergie's own failings, we don't have to agree with everything he's done.

I couldn't give a toss over how Mourinho's presented in the media (it's in a positive light by the way), but how his character would affect the club and the running of it. Apologies for being tiresome.
 
Danny1982 said:
Well, Rijkaard had the exact same three players, and Barcelona ended up 3rd(!!) in La Liga, the year before they won the sextuple..

Besides, Mourinho's teams haven't been short of stars either!

Porto?
Chelsea?
Inter Milan?
Real Madrid?

Those are top clubs with top players.. The only win that's really impressive was when Porto won the CL, but then again Benitez won the CL too with Liverpool...

Mourinho didn't do a lot better than Hiddink or Grant or Ancelotti at Chelsea, nor much better than former Madrid managers at Madrid. And Inter Milan were already winning the league when Mourinho went there.

I think his next stop should be Manchester City.. Because that's where the money and the good players are now, so better take credit now before Mancini does!

Obviously Mourinho is a great coach, but:
1- We don't know yet if he's a good manager yet.
2- I can't buy that he is the "one and only" out there.
Click to expand...

Not even close. Messi had not blossomed into what he's become in the last 2-3 years and Xavi and Iniesta, likewise weren't in sync the way they have been since Messi has emerged as the BPITW.

Mourinho had feck all at Porto. Those players became famous after they played for Mourinho in the UEFA Cup and CL wins. Chelsea hadn't won the league in 50 years when he arrived. He definitely benefited from Roman's money, but as we've seen since Mourinho left, Chelsea's luck spare one year under Ancelloti, has run out. As for Inter, the first treble in Italian history speaks for itself. What a coincidence that Mourinho took a good side and made them into CL winners.
 
Mockney said:
It's far more tiresome how people ignore them and continue to present an argument based around Mourinho's perceived character.
Click to expand...
No, the post directly above yours sums it up - he's a classless cnut and hence a great fit for Chelsea.
 
Why is everybody obsessed by 'class'? He's a fecking winner. It's a game of football not a diplomatic mission.
 
Raoul said:
Not even close. Messi had not blossomed into what he's become in the last 2-3 years and Xavi and Iniesta, likewise weren't in sync the way they have been since Messi has emerged as the BPITW.

Mourinho had feck all at Porto. Those players became famous after they played for Mourinho in the UEFA Cup and CL wins. Chelsea hadn't won the league in 50 years when he arrived. He definitely benefited from Roman's money, but as we've seen since Mourinho left, Chelsea's luck spare one year under Ancelloti, has run out. As for Inter, the first treble in Italian history speaks for itself. What a coincidence that Mourinho took a good side and made them into CL winners.
Click to expand...

I was talking about Porto compared to the other Portuguese teams. Porto has always been the best club in Portugal..

Chelsea won 2 league titles under Mourinho (when they were at their prime), and 1 without him (with a much weaker team). He failed to win the title on his last two years after we upped our game, when he had a very good team at his disposal.

He won the treble with Inter, but when Inter was already the best club in Italy (as they already won the league before he went there), with both Milan and Juventus struggling..

He's just being opportunistic.. Why doesn't he stay in a club for more than 5 years and show us how he can BUILD a team?

Also, winning the CL does not quite reflect how good a manager is.. As I said, Benitez also won it, and Mourinho failed to win it with a monster Chelsea team...

Mourinho is a great coach, but I think if other managers were given the chances he was given, they could have probably produced similar successes.

It's also ironic that when it comes to Pep, you look at the squad, but when it comes to Mourinho, you look at the achievements.
 
Mockney said:
It's far more tiresome how people ignore them and continue to present an argument based around Mourinho's perceived character.

Far more tiresome. As if Mourinho is the only manager to ever act up, or play the persecuted card, or slag off officials. Or as if Fergie has earned some kind of devine right to that no other manager has. Clough was a far bigger tit than Jose, but I would've had Clough here in a second.

Stop being all X Factor and judging people on your perceived media impression of them. I couldn't give a flying monkey feck how many people like our manager.
Click to expand...

Don't be so ridiculous. How is disliking a manager's character 'being all x factor'? It's a perfectly valid criticism to make of Jose, even his staunchest defenders would admit he's a bit of a twat. It has nothing to do with his perceived media impression either, whatever that even means, LoveInTheAsylum has made his judgement on the actions of Mourinho, it has feck all to do with the media.

When you poke an opposition assistant manager in the eye then his character is available for all to see. You're kidding yourself if you think his reputation for being controversial, and in my opinion unprofessional, doesn't stem from his own actions.

His character might not be important to you and you might not place any priority on it when deciding who should follow Ferguson, but other people do and it's a reasonable opinion to hold.
 
Danny1982 said:
It's also ironic that when it comes to Pep, you look at the squad, but when it comes to Mourinho, you look at the achievements.
Click to expand...

Well said.

People go on sometimes as if Mourinho is a magician who has had the crappiest players at his disposal and won everything with them.
 
People like to build their own mythologies for our club at times. We've had managers like Dave Sexton, Tommy Docherty and Big Racist Ron. We didn't just go Busby, then a fuzzy bit we don't talk about, then BAM Fergie! We've also played some tumescent, ugly and physical football at times under Fergie, so this idea of us having a similar aesthetic philosophy to Barca in terms of a "United way" is as much fan made as it is true. Yes we have certain traditions, but it's not like it's ever stood in SAFs way of stifling a Barca or intimidating an Arsenal. He's also done some particularly unclassy things in his time. Tommy Docherty was shagging the wife of the club's physicopherapist while he was here. Classy ey?

So I sort of object to this idea that Mourinho "isn't United" or would "ruin United" based on a sort of hazy, wishy washy self imagined idea of what that is, and partly influenced by the romance of the Guardiola situation and how good we've had it for 20 years. Whoever the new man is should be able to form his own empire here, and in his own image. Of course keeping certain traditions alive, but this idea that he'd "do things drastically differently" needs to be shook off. We aren't going to find a Fergie clone, and forcing whoever the new man is to be one will only stifle him and make it worse.
 
Theon said:
When you poke an opposition assistant manager in the eye then his character is available for all to see. You're kidding yourself if you think his reputation for being controversial, and in my opinion unprofessional, doesn't stem from his own actions.
Click to expand...

When you deliberately end a players career...When you kick a fan in the crowd...When you shag your brothers wife...when you la la la la etc etc etc. Double standards and personal bias. Mourinho's "eye poke" was also far less twatish and far less serious than any of these things. It was playground bollocks.

His character might not be important to you and you might not place any priority on it when deciding who should follow Ferguson, but other people do and it's a reasonable opinion to hold.
Click to expand...

Not if it's the only reason why you hold that opinion IMO. Hence why the only people with any bias or fanboyism are those who are staunchly against him simply because they don't like him quite enough, because their emotional opinion of someone they don't personally know is clouding any sensible judgement.
 
Mockney said:
People like to build their own mythologies for our club at times. We've had managers like Dave Sexton, Tommy Docherty and Big Racist Ron. We didn't just go Busby, then a fuzzy bit we don't talk about, then BAM Fergie! We've also played some tumescent, ugly and physical football at times under Fergie, so this idea of us having a similar aesthetic philosophy to Barca in terms of a "United way" is as much fan made as it is true. Yes we have certain traditions, but it's not like it's ever stood in SAFs way of stifling a Barca or intimidating an Arsenal. He's also done some particularly unclassy things in his time. Tommy Docherty was shagging the wife of the club's physicopherapist while he was here. Classy ey?

So I sort of object to this idea that Mourinho "isn't United" or would "ruin United" based on a sort of hazy, wishy washy self imagined idea of what that is, and partly influenced by the romance of the Guardiola situation and how good we've had it for 20 years. Whoever the new man is should be able to form his own empire here, and in his own image. Of course keeping certain traditions alive, but this idea that he'd "do things drastically differently" needs to be shook off. We aren't going to find a Fergie clone, and forcing whoever the new man is to be one will only stifle him and make it worse.
Click to expand...

Not sure what the point of that first paragraph is, just because things weren't particularly 'classy' 20/30 years ago, has no relevance on what fans can hope for today. Because Tommy Docherty was shagging some guys wife.. what? We can tolerate a modern manager showing the same lack of class?

Fans are obviously going to hope for a good manager with a certain level of professionalism, the indiscretions of past managers has no relevance on that as far as I can see.
 
It does when people keep brining up that he's "Not United" in either class, football or attitude. There is no such thing accept for a romantic self imagined idea. It's faintly delusional tbh.
 
Mockney said:
When you deliberately end a players career...When you kick a fan in the crowd...When you shag your brothers wife...when you la la la la etc etc etc. Double standards and personal bias. Mourinho's "eye poke" was also far less twatish and far less serious than any of these things. It was playground bollocks.

Not if it's the only reason why you hold that opinion IMO. Hence why the only people with any bias or fanboyism are those who are staunchly against him simply because they don't like him quite enough, because their emotional opinion of someone they don't personally know is clouding any sensible judgement.
Click to expand...

As has been said before in the thread, it's a different situation when it is the manager behaving inappropriately. That's just the way it is, quite rightly in my opinion. The manager is the boss of the players, so should be held to a higher standard, they are supposed to lead the players. A team could expect to have no discipline if the manager failed to reach a certain standard of professionalism.

People aren't only opposed to Mourinho because they don't like him as a person, not at all sure where you've got that from. You only need to skim the thread to see other reasons, such as his neglect of youth, that he requires a large transfer budget, plays poor football, that he only stays for a few seasons. That's a few other reasons, none of which have anything to do with his personality so aren't a result of any 'bias or fanboyism'.
 
Theon said:
You only need to skim the thread to see other reasons, such as his neglect of youth, that he requires a large transfer budget, plays poor football, that he only stays for a few seasons. That's a few other reasons, none of which have anything to do with his personality so aren't a result of any 'bias or fanboyism'.
Click to expand...

They're also all terrible reasons, from people who haven't watched nearly enough football, and have all virtually been debunked. Youth is the only one that holds water, and i've debated it myself a few pages back.

Which leaves, again "I don't like him...yeah yeah but Fergie's different"
 
adexkola said:
Really? With the fantastic youth system we have? Massive fan base? I don't see it happening.

I just see all this "We need to keep winning after Ferguson leaves", and I wonder what would happen, if we just happened to have a few barren spells in midtable obscurity.
Click to expand...

With both the "massive fan base", which will dwindle after a few years of no success (expect to see more City, Chelsea and Arsenal shirts home and abroad), and the fantastic youth system we would be ok as a mid table club in the league. It's easy to forget that Leeds too had a great youth system (just as good as ours) and decent sized fan base to boot.

It's the Glazer effect that isn't being taken into account. We need success Post-Fergie to ensure the bank is being paid for. Without a modicum of success the commercial fund will fall and that will mean players will have to be sold and the cycle will continue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.