Its such a strange criteria to use. Guardiola must be absolutely destroying Mourinho in the head to head record. And his trophy record can't be that far behind either.
I'm enjoying these actually.
Redknapp: 1, Hiddink: 0, Draws: 0.
Mourinho | New old Chelsea manager
- Thread starter Suedesi
- Start date
Its such a strange criteria to use. Guardiola must be absolutely destroying Mourinho in the head to head record. And his trophy record can't be that far behind either.
I'm enjoying these actually.
Redknapp: 1, Hiddink: 0, Draws: 0.
Not really, it doesn't. But if we're using retarted logic then signing Ronaldo for £12m and selling him for £80m equals winning Champions League and coming back from 1-0 down to win 2-1 in 90th minute equals winning the World Cup in 60s. Ferguson has won one CL more and also a World Cup before Mourinho was even born too.
When Jose has won a league title in 4 different decades, let me know.
Look at how long Fergie has been here for. In 25 years at Man United, he's had to deal with the game tactically evolving over time, the mentality of the game and the club changing, as well as the skill required for the team to win the league. He may have only officially managed in one 'top' league, however it's been like managing in two or three different leagues in his time here.
While obviously the Fergie way is what I'd like for United - what any fan would want for his team - why is staying at one club and building different successful teams, better than going to different clubs in different countries, building different teams and winning things with them?
Both Fergie and Mourinho are brilliant at what they do, with the main difference being that Mourinho hasn't been at a club long enough to show an ability to build while using the youth system. Having said that, none of the clubs he was at were very interested at that at the time. They just wanted to win, yesterday if possible.
The guy who was saying that all of Mourinho's titles were overrated and started nitpicking. Not long above my comment.
That Instant Karma fellow though. I think he wouldn't say no to a pearl necklace from Jose.
Well, I'm not sure one is better than the other, but the scenarios test different skills. And one problem with the "win and run" method Jose has become known for, is that Inter and Chelsea are now paying for the lack of long-term planning. Although I guess you could argue that's as much down to how the club's are run in the boardroom, I dunno.
Fergie & Mourinho are both champions, but one thing Fergie is not is a master tactician. It may be unpopular but I have doubts whether Fergie would have been able to master wins in Spain or Italy, or at least would not have the universal success Mourinho has had so far. IMO Fergie is stubbornly too British for that kind of universal success. Of course Fergie has never been tested in a continental league, just as Mourinho hasn't been tested with longevity so it's purely speculation in that respect, but an opinion is an opinion. With regards to Mourinho having success as a long-term manager at one club, only time can really tell but I don't see much to doubt that he would be a success long term, we have to also remember that nowadays a 'long term' manager wouldn't have all of the responsibilities Fergie has had at United, so it could be argued being a long term manager is easier now if you disregard clubs itchy trigger fingers to fire their managers because the responsibilities are shared a lot more than what Fergie has been used to.
It's a fair enough opinion but goes too far to the other extreme imo, which is the problem with these kind of discussions. To me, you don't win consistently without tactics, no matter what country you're in.
The competition wasn't that strong when Inter won Serie A, was it? I think the quality of Inter's squad was what set them apart that season. In the Champions League, of course Mourinho's tactics worked a treat against Barcelona, but don't forget United have had tactical successes as well.
True, sorry I've edited my post since you replied btw. Obviously it takes tactics to win the English Premier League, but in my opinion Premier League tactics are inferior to other European leagues and also International football, some teams in the Premier League have made great efforts to catch up, such as Arsenal and now Man City, but Fergie seems happy to keep the team as it is.
Of course that's his prerogative, and if the team wins nobody will contest it, but to me it's a reason why I think Mourinho is just in this respect superior to Fergie, because for those reasons I doubt whether Fergie could adapt to foreign tactics, or at least master it and be a success on the same level as Mourinho has been. I think there is no reason not to improve the tactics and style of the team, especially as this club has the means to do so, and it'd hugely benefit us in Europe, maybe Fergie disagrees with me there, he's had ample opportunity to update things which he hasn't chosen to do, but to me it suggests maybe he isn't capable because he only knows one way - of course a way that we've been a successful club in terms of trophies, so many will reject any case against it.
Just to be clear, when I talk about superior tactics between leagues, I'm mainly referring to the differences such as in the Premier League, it's all about pace and strength, but in International/Spanish football it's all about technical ability. Of course there are exceptions so it's a generalisation but a fair one in my view. Fergie has always adhered to the English style and never tried to (drastically) evolve us into a modern European team, so I can't say I think he would know how to or adapt to a 'superior' league. I hope my point is clear, the anti Fergie bashing brigade will be on red alert I can tell.
Well again, that's fair comment
But a problem for me with the tactics discussion is that people will ascribe the tactical successes of 2007-2009 as purely down to Carlos Q. I'd imagine it had a great deal to do with Quieroz, but we still took those tactics on board and used them to the fullest, for which Fergie can take some credit. Similarly, breaking with the "two out and out strikers" method in 2001 was a tactical change that at the time people thought was barmy, but is now the norm.
I think Fergie can do tactics but he won't ever be known for establishing a new system or trend in world football. You say British football is lacking tactically, which I'm sure everyone agrees with, but then it becomes a case of different qualities needed for different leagues, rather than a case of one set of qualities being better than the other.
How bout 3 different leagues and possibly on his way to fourth different league. No one come close at the moment.
I think that's a nice summary of it, especially the bit in bold. Re Carlos Q, I know just as many people would credit that time to another certain Portugese young man! I agree with you though it did show Fergie can adapt, just not on a huge scale, domestically we have (I want to say never) fundamentally changed under Fergie's regime. If I didn't think that the benefits in Europe are huge and there for all to see, I would totally 100% be saying what you said in your last sentence - why change when the team suits the league? It's just putting square pegs in square holes.. but I think 1. the 'superior' style of play has just as much chance of winning the English Premier League, especially with a champion like Fergie, but most importantly 2. we would increase our chances in Europe by a mile, not just for winning one CL but producing great CL teams.
That also brings loads of more benefits, like more on-field success, more commercial success, more chance of the best players wanting to join us, less risk of them joining us etc etc.
BTW don't read too much into me keep calling it 'superior'... I just mean traditional strength/pace/size British football Vs. Spanish/International/European technical ability... there's no real short words to describe both of them! You're right btw I definitely see what you mean by taking it to the extreme, lesson learnt!
Well Sir Alex has only managed in 2 so we'll never know, but no one can convince me he wouldn't have had a very good chance of winning the league with the sides Mourinho inherited at Inter and Madrid.
You're not even good at wumming so stop it.
No one comes close, can't compare Ferguson with Mourinho etc. As if they were different class.
Personally I hope he goes to City; it would be a perfect match. If he did that then I wouldn't have to spend any more time worrying that he'll succeed SAF.
I get what you mean, I didn't mean to suggest you were being OTT with your argument (it's just how these sort of discussions seem to go). I think we agree, basically.
I think it is absolutely fair to say that we have been found lacking tactically at times. I think that was in Fergie's mind in 2001, when his plan was to gradually introduce a change in the style of play that would keep us at the top of the English game while taking us to that next level in Europe.
But in terms of increasing or chances in Europe now, do you think tactics is the issue? Because the last few seasons has shown that we can still get results despite not having as good a team as in 2008; is that not evidence of tactics playing a key role in keeping us in Finals? (I'm not very well-up on tactics so genuine question)
Yea I really hope our bitter local rivals with unlimited funds get their hands on a proven winner of a manager. Nothing would please me more.
Fair enough, I've probably gone too extreme in the past with this discussion though, hence people calling me a WUM before! So lesson still learnt!
Good points, I think gradual is the key word, maybe measured is another word that can describe it. Arsenal have had the biggest change, a change that has gone all the way down to their youth set up, commendable IMO. They produce players that could easily have been produced in Spain, or play in any major league, a very unique trait in the Premier League in my view.
City have just changed the way their first 11 plays, maybe even just to accommodate their best player in Silva, but either way at current they play nicely with lots of technique. As far as I know it's not something that the club has employed all the way into their youth, so maybe they're getting too much credit here, or maybe it is just too soon to judge them in that respect.
That's a good point, one that is hard (at least for me) to dissect. Results can be deceiving though, I'm always cautious to make the correlation between results and my opinions as sometimes results are lucky things, but more often there's a hell of a lot more involved in results than just tactics for example to make such direct correlations. I can't deny that the tactics in Europe in the past 5 years have been relatively successful though, but oddly I still think that we're limiting ourselves.
I'm not the one to be asking about specific tactics though, I'm only speaking in general terms, I'm no more clued up on the specifics than anyone else here, just my insignificant opinion.
Crap, didn't mention Mourinho once in that post, maybe good time to end!
TBH the funniest thing is, as much as I think Mourinho is better than Fergie in that one department, if he took over at United he would arguably not change anything but just master it like he did at Chelsea, you can't get any more 'British' than Lampard & Drogba!
Above everything else I want a manager with good football philosophy to take over at United, but Mourinho is the only manager I would sacrifice that for due to his ability to win like Fergie, maybe they aren't so different after all!
Above everything else I want a manager with good football philosophy to take over at United, but Mourinho is the only manager I would sacrifice that for due to his ability to win like Fergie, maybe they aren't so different after all!
Ferguson has always been much more of a motivator than a manager who deals with tactics. He most probably leaves that to his coaches, and while he probably does have an input into it, it wouldn't be on the same level as someone like Mourinho who is meticulous in his attention to tactical detail with respect to opponents.
That's why saf probably wouldn't make it Italy/Spain ect...great in England though. Just not a tactician like Mourinho.
I could most easily see him taking the England job, and if he does well, the Manchester United job will be his if he wants it when SAF steps down.
That's a great shout to be honest, the perfect local job to wait to pounce. I was imagining 'Arry taking the job though, I can't see Mourinho taking the Spurs job although it's a small possibility if he wants the United job. I doubt he will go to City as it could jeopardise his chance of managing United, Arsenal too much of a challenge, Chelsea I doubt it - thank ship has sailed. (and sunk)
As far as him taking the England job though it'd be ideal for him if he wants the United job and ideal for the English FA, only thing is I thought they were pretty convinced by Capello that the next manager should be English, not to mention this poison chalice potentially detracting from his reputation. I really don't see what kind of role he could take in England right now, he supposedly dreams of managing us so I don't think he would ruin that chance by signing for a close rival.
He is way too over qualified to be some kind of apprentice to Fergie at United too, so that is out of the question - although given the opportunity I don't think he would be too proud or afraid of that.
It makes me laugh all this drivel about fergie not being that great tactically. Someone somewhere made this comment and then some other muppet repeats it and before too long it's become accepted as some sort of truth.
That would amuse me.
I love how the idiots still continue to sprout Fergie isn't great tactically line. The fact of the matter is that Fergie would've been successful in any damn league with any team, people who say otherwise are utter morons.
Perhaps we will talk about hiring Rene Meulensteen as a Fergie move similarly influential as hiring Carlos Q? In that we are starting to see the benefits of his technical coaching at a young age with players coming into the first team and it could be a trend with the future players that come through.
I agree we can always do better; I'd be interested to know in general terms how we are limiting ourselves at the moment.
Can't see it myself.
Here come the anti Fergie opinions brigade..
I can think perfectly for myself thanks.
A moron would say his opinion is a fact and call others idiots for their opinions.
I can think perfectly for myself thanks.
A moron would say his opinion is a fact and call others idiots for their opinions.
Thinking about it 'football philosophy' might be more accurate than simply 'tactics' as tactics can be applied in all manor of football whether it be Stoke's tactics or Barcelona's and acquire relative success.
How do you explain our record in the CL the past few years? We've beaten teams from all over the continents you see. all of them playing different styles too..
What do you mean how do I explain our record? When did I say Fergie doesn't produce results? You are too patronising for someone not really understanding my view fully.
By what you've highlighted, you're saying that because he can master a win against a foreign side with an English side, you think he could obviously manage a Spanish team and do the same for 38 games? With the same football approach as United?
That must be what you're saying as Fergie has not proved he is the master of the kind of football they play in other countries, just that he can beat it.
Judging from what happened after Benitez took over from Mourinho, Madrid would be suicidal to go for the FSW
You said you had your doubts about SAF being able to master wins at italy or spain. I countered that by saying he's been successful against sides from both these countries over the years in the CL. I didnt meant to be patronizing at all, its just strange that you'd doubt whether he'd be successful at beating teams from other countries when he's been doing that in the CL.
I do get your point about the scenario being different if he managed a foreign side too but is there really a foundation your basing your comments on? The only we could judge is the CL, where he's proved himself.
Do you really believe SAF would not manage to win the Serie A with the inter squad that mourinho had? Or do you really believe SAF would somehow feck things up so much at Real that with the squad they have, they'd still somehow lose to the other teams other than barca?
Apparently Quieroz was a big part of our tactical success in Europe according to Nevilles book. Fergie isn't necessarily the one who focuses on minut tactical details like Mourinho (or Quieroz) but that's not to say he isn't clued up tactically. After all he's the one thats ultimately put together a highly versatile team who can play open expansive football, passing football or quick-counter attacking football.
We've not been a team which has stuck to one particular style of play like a Barcelona or Arsenal, we've chopped and changed depending on our opposition, and been pretty damn successful doing it. That arguably takes more tactical know-how than simply sticking to your one philosophy.
The team we won the CL with in 07/08 was one of the most un-British teams you'll see.
We've not been a team which has stuck to one particular style of play like a Barcelona or Arsenal, we've chopped and changed depending on our opposition, and been pretty damn successful doing it. That arguably takes more tactical know-how than simply sticking to your one philosophy.
The team we won the CL with in 07/08 was one of the most un-British teams you'll see.