Pep Guardiola agrees 1 year contract extension | Includes additional 1 year option

GlazersHater said:
The only way I can see Pep leaving City is if they get punished for the 115 charges. Where could Pep possibly go? I know every club would take him, but realistically who would have the financial muscle to be able to assemble a squad for Pep?

Italian clubs simply dont have the money, he's managed Bayern so thats it for the bundesliga, EPL is out of question, Barca are broke so I doubt they can afford him. That leaves PSG? I dont see anyone.
Click to expand...
Whoever has the most cash and best squad in Saudi or somewhere like that.
Or alternatively Spain or Brazil and find a way to convert the best players from elsewhere to those countries.
 
I think he plans to bring them up from the championship, or lower, if it comes to that.
 
Even if City manage to wriggle their way out of their guilt, the sooner Pep goes the better for the PL as a contest. That sounds bitter but its true, it's a dull league with any one team winning it every single season. City won't be the same team once he's gone, they'll still be good, but it will even the playing field massively.
 
Mb194dc said:
I think he plans to bring them up from the championship, or lower, if it comes to that.
Click to expand...

It in all honesty could be that.

Most people are leaning towards it being a sign of no punishment, but in contrast if City feel like relegation is on the cards then they need to do the prep work now.

Promotion won’t be a problem for them, but for them to compete at the top of the PL again asap they really need to keep hold of their biggest talent.

Maybe they have somehow convinc£d Pep to stay and make sure they can get back to where they are before he leaves.
 
They're winning or not getting hit hard by the case then. This serial cheater (refer to playing days) won't waste a year of his legacy in obscurity.
 
Unless they're bunging the EFL a big brown envelope I don't see why they want City in the championship, and only the sides with iffy owners would want them too.
 
Judas said:
Even if City manage to wriggle their way out of their guilt, the sooner Pep goes the better for the PL as a contest. That sounds bitter but its true, it's a dull league with any one team winning it every single season. City won't be the same team once he's gone, they'll still be good, but it will even the playing field massively.
Click to expand...

True.

Liverpool have a good chance this year. But the next two will be City again if he freshens up the squad. Doesn't affect us in the short term as long as Amorim has his squad set up for a title challenge just as Pep leaves. But Arsenal's title ambitions are probably fecked for a while.
 
Vault Dweller said:
So they're getting off with it then. Mint.
Click to expand...

Was this ever a question? Money trumps all.

The PL will not do nothing to City. the PL is taking the clubs for a ride.. cutting broadcast money to fund the legal proceedings, then they will get off with charges with a hefty fine that will line up PL directors pockets.

That's what this is all about, getting more money out of City for themselves rather than actually punishing them.
 
They will get a points deduction for the failure to cooperate alone. Relax people this means nothing.
 
Not necessarily bad news. I think we just need to make sure that we are ready to challenge for the league once he goes, which would probably take a couple of years anyway. No point being a good team right now, look at Liverpool, 1 title in god knows how many years when they have been good enough to win a couple more titles. Alas, Arsenal, been great for 3 years and will have nothing to show for it.
If we get the timing of our rise right, it could be wonderful again.
 
Where are we getting that they've beaten the charges? Has there been any news on that or are folks just putting 2 and 2 together?
 
It will probably be a year or two for them to actually get punished anyway, these things take forever with all the legal hoops to jump through.

For me it's quite telling he has only signed a 1 year extension, clearly coming to the end. Otherwise it would have been much longer.
 
SuperiorXI said:
It will probably be a year or two for them to actually get punished anyway, these things take forever with all the legal hoops to jump through.

For me it's quite telling he has only signed a 1 year extension, clearly coming to the end. Otherwise it would have been much longer.
Click to expand...

It is strange for a manager to sign a 1 year extension.. doesn't really help to plan for the future?

The squad will need a mini rebuild and the new manager will need alot of his signings as the City squad is too used to Pep's style.

We have seen players leave the Pep system and not do well, Sane, Sterling, Jesus have all left in their "prime" and not shown much.

Alvarez has started well but he was only there for a season or so.
 
romufc said:
It is strange for a manager to sign a 1 year extension.. doesn't really help to plan for the future?

The squad will need a mini rebuild and the new manager will need alot of his signings as the City squad is too used to Pep's style.

We have seen players leave the Pep system and not do well, Sane, Sterling, Jesus have all left in their "prime" and not shown much.

Alvarez has started well but he was only there for a season or so.
Click to expand...
It's not a good look when you read between the lines. People just see "Pep renews" and piss their pants.
 
clearest indication yet that they’re not even going to get a slap on the cock.
 
DarkLord1984 said:
This is the most hilarious aspect of all of this - 'the cartel' not only does not exist, but it wasn't even a saying until City fans made it up out of thin air to try and play the victim card.
Click to expand...

It's tragic to watch.
 
Gabriel Djemba-Bebe said:
So far-fetched from me. My bad. Admittedly I assumed that this short-term contract extension was a marriage of convenience for both parties until a verdict in court was reached on the most serious allegations of cheating in British football history. Nevertheless, you have now convinced me it is purely coincidental that your current manager has signed a short-term contract just like your previous manager did at a time your owners could sense that changes were afoot.

As you said - let's instead focus on City's current manager rather than his predecessor. Guardiola evidently has the enthusiasm to continue managing City, going into the next 2 seasons, regardless of the impending court case verdict, and he has never hinted at anything otherwise. Had he gotten any inclination that his employers were breaking the rules, I'm sure he would have resigned instantly, given his previously squeaky-clean record when it comes to alleged cheating in football.

Now, thanks to your clarification, I cannot see how this short-term contract extension could in any way benefit both parties until a verdict is reached in court. The dust will settle after the club is inevitably cleared of all 115 charges and Guardiola will hand over the torch to his successor a few weeks before his contract is due to expire. Any suggestion that a change in management could occur 12-18 months prior to Guardiola's contractual end date is nonsensical, illogical and certainly not based off the club's previous succession planning.
Click to expand...
Ok mate. He will be City manager next year whatever you say.

And as you have been told multiple times, any assumptions based on the Pellegrini situation is meaningless. If you want to continue to peddle that we did it with Pellegrini the only thing you will make clear is that you don't understand nuances no matter how detailed you get them explained
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't think this means much at all in regards to the charges. Contracts have exit clauses, buyouts etc.

Whilst the trial is still ongoing, City have no choice but to keep renewing contracts and acting as normal as possible.
 
Hughes35 said:
I honestly don't think this means much at all in regards to the charges. Contracts have exit clauses, buyouts etc.

Whilst the trial is still ongoing, City have no choice but to keep renewing contracts and acting as normal as possible.
Click to expand...

Its delusional not to think that Pep and his agent wouldn't have been informed. The main question would have been.. will we clear the charges?

No manager will sign a 1 year extension to be in the championship, he would have got assurances from the club that they are innocent and will bust the case.
 
Gabriel Djemba-Bebe said:
On your first point - I don't understand the link? Why would there have to be multiple reports about Pellegrini signing a 2 year extension leading up to him literally signing a 2 year extension in order for you to be confident he wouldn't step aside 6 months later?

On your last point - yes, that's what I'm asking. It makes sense for the board and the manager to agree a contract extension even when one (or both) of the two parties knows that the manager is leaving in a few months time, as the extension keeps the players motivated. The fact that you went from title favourites in Jan 2016 to scraping 4th on GD in May 2016 shows the impact of announcing a new manager mid-season. Imagine how low in the table you would have finished had you announced Pellegrini was leaving in September 2015 instead.
Click to expand...
Which is probably why City announced the extension then eh? Imagine how low in the table you lot would've been if you'd announced in September 2015 that van Gaal was getting sacked at the end of the 2015/16 season instead of announcing it straight after the 2016 FA Cup Final. It would've been lower than City for sure.

Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about Guardiola becoming City boss knew that he was being earmarked to come in after doing 3 years at Bayern, and that Pellegrini was happy to step in and do a similar stint while the foundations were being put in for his successor.
 
romufc said:
Its delusional not to think that Pep and his agent wouldn't have been informed. The main question would have been.. will we clear the charges?

No manager will sign a 1 year extension to be in the championship, he would have got assurances from the club that they are innocent and will bust the case.
Click to expand...

It's also delusional to think that after asking that question the club would ever respond with "No, we do not think we will clear the charges".

Regardless of the situation the club is ploughing on and not admit guilt. What the club has told Pep in relation to charges is irrelevant to the trial outcome IMO.
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
To think City’s owners wouldn’t have stopped this before now if they could, is very naive… given more corrupt things happen every day (including by them) and that they’re a nation state with Govt ties, unlimited wealth and the best sports lawyer in the country. They tried to stop the Oct case being heard but it was … they said they’d win all the charges but they didn’t.

Let’s see what Fridays vote brings. Hopefully City desperately pressurizing clubs and paying Samuels and Keegan tons to keep posting their viewpoint, isn’t enough. A lot of clubs will vote against City for their own reasons/the right thing to do… guessing City, Villa, Chelsea, Newcastle don’t.
Click to expand...
What October case is this? Are you referring to the APT case? If you are, I think you will find that it was the Premier League who wanted to delay the announcement of the outcome and City were more than happy to put it out there.

And what's all this about "they said they'd win all the charges but they didn't"? You do realise that there were no charges against City in the APT case because it was City who brought the case against the PL don't you? Not only that, City didn't have to win on every single point to prove that the rules were unlawful. They only had to win on a single one. And speaking of unlawful, it says a hell of a lot about you when your last paragraph basically says you're in favour of clubs voting for amended rules on Friday that could still turn out to be unlawful just because it's a vote against City. It'll be interesting to see which way United vote, considering you don't have a single penny of interest-free shareholder loans on your books and your new saviour Ratcliffe can't get enough of blowing smoke up City's arse in terms of how well we're run as a club.

Your post couldn't be more full of ignorance and bullshit if you tried. It's only topped by the sheer amount of unfounded horseshit spouted on the 115/129/130 charges thread. It often makes me wonder if anyone's doing any moderating when it comes to that particular topic.
 
Hughes35 said:
It's also delusional to think that after asking that question the club would ever respond with "No, we do not think we will clear the charges".

Regardless of the situation the club is ploughing on and not admit guilt. What the club has told Pep in relation to charges is irrelevant to the trial outcome IMO.
Click to expand...

Pep would ask for assurances, if the decision is due in January.. he wouldn't sign a contract in November without the assurances that the charges will be cleared.
 
M18CTID said:
Which is probably why City announced the extension then eh? Imagine how low in the table you lot would've been if you'd announced in September 2015 that van Gaal was getting sacked at the end of the 2015/16 season instead of announcing it straight after the 2016 FA Cup Final. It would've been lower than City for sure.

Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about Guardiola becoming City boss knew that he was being earmarked to come in after doing 3 years at Bayern, and that Pellegrini was happy to step in and do a similar stint while the foundations were being put in for his successor.
Click to expand...
I wonder how Bayern did that season after Guardiola made it known to them that he were leaving after his contract ends. They should have given him a suspiciously short contract extension really
 
romufc said:
Pep would ask for assurances, if the decision is due in January.. he wouldn't sign a contract in November without the assurances that the charges will be cleared.
Click to expand...

I don't dispute that at all. I just dispute that City would ever say anything other than they are 100% confident they will be cleared of the charges, regardless of what the reality is.
 
Hughes35 said:
I don't dispute that at all. I just dispute that City would ever say anything other than they are 100% confident they will be cleared of the charges, regardless of what the reality is.
Click to expand...

We know the case hearings have started so they must know something in order to give Pep assurances. Unless they are blatantly lying to him, he will leave but with a big pay day I assume.

I dont think Pep would manage in lower leagues, he signed a 1 year extension, he wouldn't just want to bring them up then leave.
 
Slevs said:
They're winning or not getting hit hard by the case then. This serial cheater (refer to playing days) won't waste a year of his legacy in obscurity.
Click to expand...
That's what I am afraid it means. If they are just fined or sent down to the Championship it will be a disgrace. They should be made to be sold to individuals who are not connected to the Abu Dhabi royal family and be demoted to League Two.
 
golden_blunder said:
We took their plan A. Pep is just giving them breathing space to find someone else
Click to expand...

It’s hard to believe that retaining Pep isn’t their Plan A.

The idea that Pep is finished because of a bad run of results is hyperbole. We all know full well that the league isn’t won in November and that come the second half of the season there’s a good chance City will barely drop points. They’re only 6 points off top as it is with such a long way to go, but fans are reacting like it’s some sort of implosion.

Maybe they won’t win the league this year, maybe they’ll only finish 2nd.

But I bet 95% of City fans would give Pep another 5 year contract if he’d sign one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.