Liverpool have sacked him? Where is he now then?
Moyes To Succeed Ferguson Anyone?
- Thread starter BeardedGenius
- Start date
- Status
Liverpool have sacked him? Where is he now then?
Did you also find yourself cheering on Joe Pesci in the Home Alone movies?
I find exactly the opposite. I actually think sglowrider's characterisation is spot on. I understand Mourinho to be the logical choice: he has the gravitas, the experience, the tactical nous and everything else, pretty much, that you could put in the job spec. But the way he conducts himself, at Real in particular, makes me not want him, despite all that. Pep has so much more class.
Based on the emotion requirement, then we ought to hire Martin O Neil, the world class sideline leaper!
That's a controversial statement
You'd find people laughing at you for good matter
We're Manchester United, we're not owned by sugar daddies, but to think that we would have gone for 2nd tier manager because we were worried about the wages are totally absurd.
By your rationale , plus the marginal benefit, we could do wonders with sacking SAF and replace him with Phelan? That'll save up more than 5M / year, which we can buy players with.
Seriously, there's 101 things you can blame the management, or suspect them of doing, but to think that they would not sign Mourinho or Pep once SAF retires because "They cost 5M / year more than Moyes" is laughable
It's one thing to state moyes is a good manager, and what he have achieved, etc. but then again, if we eventually getting him as the next manager, it wont be because we wanna save that wages to buy 1 vital player
You clearly don't understand the concept of marginal.
Edit: and it wouldn't anyway, there isn't a 5 million difference in their salaries, but that's beside the point really.
Do you think that's what's going on? I'd say it raises more questions than it answers even if it is.
Im not saying it is or it isnt, Im just making the point that my completely unfounded and baseless point has as much evedence or lack of as mateyboys constant " he hasnt been considered for bigger jobs" comments.
I find Jose highly entertaining. The media and the fans over here used to love him, I wouldn't want Mourinho to change anything if he ended up here. Pep is dull and a bit of a pussy too, the game would be boring if all managers were like him. I think the press would eat him alive over here when the going gets tough, especially as it's a pro-Mourinho crowd.
Nah, it's perfectly reasonable to think that a manager at a mid-table club hasn't been offered bigger positions if he hasn't taken them, it's a normal progression for a manager's career. If someone in real life stays in a low level job for a long time you generally don't assume they have been offered loads of better jobs but turned them down.
No.
Thats a little patronising though, Everton manager is not a "low level job". He is the manager at a premier league club who are nearer the top 4 than the bottom four more often than not, have a large fanbase, and given the right investment could be a real force in english football. Not to mention that Bill Kenwright is as canny a chairman as you will find and he knows finding another manager to achieve what Moyes does on the same budget would be a hell of a task, and could quite concievably deny approaches from other clubs before Moyes opinion on the matter is a factor. Just because many in football treat contracts as nothing but an opportunity for a pay rise there may well still be people who are prepapred to honour a commitment they have made........
According to you guys Moyes is overachieving by making Everton a team around 7th place though, he's actually only getting resources which should lead to him finishing in lower mid-table or fighting relegation. Apparently the only thing keeping them where they are is David Moyes' incredible abilities as a manager. Managers being locked into jobs by stubborn chairmen isn't something that happens in real life, no-one wants a manager who doesn't want to be there, and they know full well he can just walk if he wants to. The idea of Moyes not even being told about approaches is obviously absurd.
That's because Rogers is just about right for the level they are at - and will remain at. No way we should go for a manager who is "astute but lacking trophies".
Brendan Rogers is no where as proven as David Moyes. There have been countless british managers touted as potential great managers etc but few have ever gone on to repeat the success they might have in 1-2 seasons. David Moyes has continually exceeded expectations at Everton over 10 year or so period.
Like I said he's not number 1 but I would be surprised if he isn't in consideration and would certainly not be against him being appointed.
Like I said he's not number 1 but I would be surprised if he isn't in consideration and would certainly not be against him being appointed.
I aggree that would be absurd thats why I never said it. He can not just walk if he wants to. He is contracted to provide a service to them and contrary to what prima donna mercenary footballers might wish you can not just walk out on a contract without repercussions. Ive not said he is over achiving, he does what is expected of him given the circumstances.
Stop this crazy shit, if any of you really want Gollum as our next manager you're out of your mind.
Players can't walk, managers can - unless they're doing it as a publicity stunt a la Ian Holloway no club keeps hold of a manager after he offers his resignation, a manager who doesn't want to be there can't motivate his players. I can't think of a single example of a manager being kept at a club against his will in England.
If he's only doing what's expected of him then he's an average manager - why is he suitable for the United job? We're one of the biggest clubs in the world, why would we go for a manager who doesn't overachieve even at a minor club?
Neither do you, if you think the difference between Mourinho and Moyes is marginal.
I think all we can say is that Mourinho is a lot more proven. Moyes has done far more than could have been expected of him with both of his clubs, his achievements are seriously underrated.
Where would Mourinho be if that Scholes goal had not been disallowed or if Howard hadn't made that mistake. In my opinion the only fantastic achievement in his career is the treble with Inter, which was a complete tactical masterclass. Everything else hasn't been out of line with expectations.
You seem to think its all about luck.
Jose Mourinho divides opinion in terms of his personality - but nobody can deny that he's been massively succesful. That's not down to luck - its because he's a very good football manager with real tactical nouse.
Reminds me of a famous saying from a famous golfer years ago - "they say I'm lucky - but the more I practice the luckier I get". Jose keeps working, keeps doing what he does and keeps having success.
Moyes has won nothing, finishes mid table each year with a decent side - with players a lot of clubs in the PL couldn't afford. He's not had millions upon millions to spend but he's been backed in buying (and more importatly) being able to keep the players he has by virtue of the club paying higher wages than other sides around their level.
It really does depend on what is more important to you......if trophies are the be all and end all fine, have Jose and his its all about me show. Personally I find the way a club acts and carries itself is more important, hence my dislike for Jose, Rooney etc.....Yes I know Im old fashioned.......that doesnt always mean wrong or not as good.
What is this "way a club acts and carries itself"? How do we currently act and carry ourselves in a way that Mourinho wouldn't maintain?
Of course there's more than luck, but Mourinho so far in his career has taken a fantastic Porto side to the treble, great result but in the most difficult part of it, the Champions league, he had a lot of luck against us, had not many strong teams in Europe and played Monaco in the final. He then won the title twice with a Chelsea side that was far better than anyone else due to the money that had been spent more than Mourinho's influence, in my opinion, and when United's side matured he lost it, and would probably have lost it in 07/08 given the start he had.
With Inter rival teams weren't really yet competing after the Calciopoli, but he won the league in both years, of course an achievement, and the Champions league, which was a fantastic achievement. With Real he's done about what I'd expect, again one of the best funded teams in history.
I think Mourinho is a very good manager, but I don't think its proven that he's this God who's mere presence will bring success, it may be, I just don't think there's enough evidence to assert it yet. Just as there's not enough evidence to say whether Moyes can step up to the plate or not, even though that is a longer shot.
Oh trust me, we won't be this classy when we're on the Liverpool's shoe
They used to be the most knowledgeable fans yadda yadda, as much as half of them are probably hyped up, it's easy to stay classy when you're winning
my money's on Benitez.
howja like dem apples!
haha. some on here are taking this debate far too seriously.
howja like dem apples!
haha. some on here are taking this debate far too seriously.
Yeah agree with your post, that Inter side was completely dominant before he came, winning three Serie A's on the run under Mancini.
He won the CL with a side from Portugal. Probably never happen again in my lifetime.
He then came to Chelsea and built a side which not only won the league and various other trophies but formed the basis for the successes following managers had - including (eventually) the CL last year. Its only now the players he's brought in are leaving and or on the slide that they're having to rebuild.
At Inter he took an average side (at best) to the CL crown - having sanctioned the sale of their best player in Ibrahimovic - and beating Barca and Bayern along the way. The same Inter side were an utter and complete shambles under Benitez so to me he was the decisive factor.
At Madrid he's come up against the current best side in the world and arguably the best club side of all time - they've come up short at times but have a league title and a Spanish Cup to show for it, and you woudn't be surprised if they won the CL again this year.
He's one of the most succesful managers on the planet - has done it in 4 different leagues and in Europe consistently - that's not conjecture, its fact.
In football, as in life you can predict trends. I might be the next Alex Ferguson - but I very much doubt it. I tend to rely on those sort of things rather than taking a stab in the dark.
And getting nowhere in Europe. An average side from an average league.
All valid, but can be looked at a different way, what I'm saying is its quite possible to make the argument that Mourinho has been in the right place at the right time and ridden his luck.
Porto's route to the final: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_UEFA_Champions_League_Final
The big players he signed for Chelsea were Essien (£24.4m), Drogba (£24m), Carvalho (£19.85m) and Cole (£10m + Gallas), all huge signings, not matters of judgement, and they came into a side that had finished second, reached the champions league semi finals and were faced with a declining Arsenal and United sides.
Inter was as I have said above and Real he could only beat Barcelona when they had a lot of injuries, but no doubting it was a good achievement. I'm just not sure its a special achievement when you consider how much has been spent on the team that he manages, and who knows whether it could have been done by someone else.
Would you say Di Matteo is a great manager? Luck exists, it happens, there's no way to do statistical analysis on it that I can think of but I doubt that Mourinho's successes would be enough to draw any form of quantitative conclusion.
They weren't average and he did no better than Mancini in his first season.
He bought an entire new front 4 in the second with Eto'o, Pandev, Milito and Sneijder. Lucio was an upgrade at the back and Cambiasso especially hit his peak and played the best football of his career behind that front 4, it was a great side.
He made good, but expensive, signings and they were relatively short term solutions as the players would have little resale value due to their age. But that's not to say the CL wasn't an achievement because it was. My point originally was that the Serie A's weren't surprising as Mancini consistently managed the same, with a weaker side.
Regarding your post to Fiskey, most of that is true but you overstate his success at Madrid, it's an average tenure IMO. One La Liga and Copa is the minimum that squad should achieve, as good as Barcelona are there isn't a chasm between the individual players.
For a start I cannt see United condoning and excusing a manager for BITING someone......for making potentially libelous statements about another club ( The whole reading situation )
The man is a collosal cnut and I will be gutted if he is anywhere near our managers job.
Speak for yourself, Ive been supporting United since before the trophies started rolling in and have never reached RAWK levels of delusion
No. I wouldn't at the moment - but if he goes on to have success at other clubs in other leagues and wins a couple more CL and league titles it might change my view.
As I've said - funny how Jose seems to be "in the right place at the right time" everywhere he goes. Seems like a bit of a pattern to me.
He's yet to really achieve success at Madrid, if he wins the champions league this year you have more of a point.
I find Jose highly entertaining. The media and the fans over here used to love him, I wouldn't want Mourinho to change anything if he ended up here. Pep is dull and a bit of a pussy too, the game would be boring if all managers were like him. I think the press would eat him alive over here when the going gets tough, especially as it's a pro-Mourinho crowd.
Is he really that entertaining any more? I'm not sure. He has become almost a parody of himself in his desire to be the centre of attention. Also I'm not sure how someone who spearheaded arguably the most exciting club side in European football can be considered dull? Just because he doesn't subscribe to playground behaviour and pretentious self-promotion? He dealt with the media very well in Spain, and trust me they are so much more intrusive and deceitful than our lot in Fleet Street. At least there is some level of respite in the English media, in Spain it is wall-to-wall 24/7 day in day out. England will be a doddle compared to that.
He got Eto'o and cash in exchange for Ibrahimovic. Excellent piece of business if you ask me.
It was a ridiculously good deal, has little relevance to what I'm saying though. It was a great side with an entire new front 4, so the comparisons with Mancini aren't fair.
Yeah right, some of us probably are sane enough
Remember...cough..sack..fergie..cough..sell..giggs... brigade a few years back?
Fans are fickle.
He won La Liga last season, managing to topple a side that's being regarded as one of the greatest of all-time. That's a major achievement in itself. He could do with a Champions League as well admittedly, but what he's done so far should be acknowledged.
Yes, he does sign players, but people seem to act as if it's an incredibly easy part of the game. At the end of the day, these players still have to fit into a team and be successful, which they often are. Money aside, the likes of Essien and Drogba were still brilliant signings. We've spent big money on players too, but it doesn't stop the likes of Rooney and Ferdinand from being excellent signings, for example.
I don't get the luck part either. He's had luck on his side, but who hasn't? We were a kick away from losing the Champions League in 2008; a minute away from losing out in 1999. Perhaps he has been lucky at times, but either way he's won the Champions League with two sides, one from Portugal remember, and has won the three major European leagues. Only a top, top manager, far better than David Moyes, can do something like that.
- Status