Are you suggesting neither team won league titles before Pep, and he elevated them to suddenly doing so?
City had one season underachieving in 4th, after 4 straight seasons of either winning the title or just missing out for goodness sake.
'Pep' Guardiola sack watch
- Thread starter Classical Mechanic
- Start date
Are you suggesting neither team won league titles before Pep, and he elevated them to suddenly doing so?
City had one season underachieving in 4th, after 4 straight seasons of either winning the title or just missing out for goodness sake.
You were right, he totally ignored his average whoscored rating logic once it shown CR7 in a bad light compared to Messi. Easy to spot and call out double standards here in this plac
Was Xavi, Iniesta and Messi (i guess those are the 3 you're talking about) already considered all time greats before Pep coached them?
Silly, Pep won all of City's trophies and invented football
Ah my mistake, he made them what they were - of course!
You give Pep way too much credit my man.
I've already given examples of plenty of players that have had higher peaks before Pep.
Foden is better because he's gotten more game experience. His improvement is natural given his talent.
Pep made Messi. Bloody hell. Now I've heard it all
Why can't anyone who manages Bayern after Guardiola hold down the job for longer than two years?
Probably because winning europe is the be all and end all, as winning their league is not enough.
But Pep didn't win with them in Europe either hell he even got humiliation by RM, yet Bayern wanted to extend his contract. People keep talking about how he coached the big/rich clubs compared to other surely people should know the answer that question by now.
The question I asked was simple and both of you know damn well what the answer is, but since the obvious answer doesn't suit your agenda, you went out of your way to suggest something else without replying the question.
If that isn't trolling, i wonder what is it...
But somehow Pep has a sack watch thread... 
OK well here's a direct answer to your question.
Messi had just been voted as the 3rd best player in the world at the age of 20.
Xavi and Iniesta had just played in the final and won Euro 2008.
So yes all 3 were on the path to greatness whether they met Lord Pep or not.
Now put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Ah the classic "agenda" word. Plus even more classic "you don't agree with me, so you're a troll"
Classic.
Their recent managers have lost their jobs because they're not doing well in the league.
The broader point is, this all related. Guardiola wins more titles than other managers because he gets more opportunities to manage winning clubs longer. He gets those opportunities because he gets better results than other managers. You don't really get hired at top clubs and given infinite time to win stuff.
The point was made before, in whether it took him too long to take City to a CL final. Maybe. Would another manager have taken them to a CL final if given five years? Maybe. But another manager was not going to be given that time, because they would feck up earlier and get fired.
11-12 won last kick of season.
12-13 2nd, Miles behind a not very good United team.
13-14 won rather fortunately. Liverpool best team that season.
14-15 2nd. 8 points behind Jose’s Chelsea.
15-16 4th. 15 points behind Leicester. Only made CL on goal difference.
City were hardly dominant in the years preceding Pep’s arrival at City.
He spent a season reshaping the squad and won the next 2 titles with an aggregate of 197 points.
That’s great going in my book. He spent a shitload of cash but getting the right players in and getting them to play a demanding and complex style of play isn’t a given.
So basically they weren't considered all time greats yet then?
You're the one who needs to put down the pipe, the mental gymnastics you're doing in order to discredit Pep is hilarious.
Still defecting i see...
It's crazy to me how much Man Utd's problems would have been solved if they somehow could have got Pep as their coach.
But somehow Pep has a sack watch thread...
Its fascinating isn't it..
His winning record shouldn't be overlooked of course. The best managers tend to manage the best clubs the longest for sure.
But he's fawned over too much for my liking, overlooking simple facts like he picked up city with the best squad, and had the most money.
His best players in his time at City were mostly players he inherited. Aguero, D Silva, Sterling, De Bruyne, Kompany. Possibly one or two others I'm forgetting.
Didn't barcelona win the champions league just 1 or 2 years before Pep joined?
Sure, he got rid of Ronaldinho and deco but then messi was already on the rise. He had eto'o who he foolishly got rid of which helped Inter and mourinho win the treble.
Sure, he got rid of Ronaldinho and deco but then messi was already on the rise. He had eto'o who he foolishly got rid of which helped Inter and mourinho win the treble.
Madrid also won the CL a year before Zidane arrived, i don't see what the point is.
Barça also spent 2 seasons not winning anything and ending the season 19 points behind Madrid the season before he arrived.
As for the Eto argument, Pep's Barça still went on to win another CL playing even better than they did in 08/09 with Eto. I doubt Pep regrets letting Eto go when he did.
This thread has gone beyond ridiculous. Some people have made up their mind on the subject on purely emotional basis. They will always find the way to shift the goalposts or devise some nebulous squad strength / trophies equation, and use it selectively to diminish what he's achieved.
The main reason Guardiola is held in such high esteem is the way his teams play. Even in case he would fail to win trophies for couple of years, if his coaching was still there and visible, he would be the first name on the wish list for any elite club. Because no manager has been able to produce such consistently brilliant football at the highest level. That's all there is to it. You simply have to be a football analphabet not to see it.
The main reason Guardiola is held in such high esteem is the way his teams play. Even in case he would fail to win trophies for couple of years, if his coaching was still there and visible, he would be the first name on the wish list for any elite club. Because no manager has been able to produce such consistently brilliant football at the highest level. That's all there is to it. You simply have to be a football analphabet not to see it.
This is basically what it comes down to.
Teams aren't hiring Pep just because they want to win, they can hire other coaches for that though they might not win as much. They hire Pep because of the football he makes his teams play. They don't just win, but they do so playing an extremely high level of football.
Loads of Utd fans are just salty Pep Barca beat them at CL football.
Who are the low level clubs that Klopp has worked with? Clubs that demand trophies every season. Klopp has spent 5 seasons at Liverpool, 3 of them trophyless and no one is talking about sacking him.
SAF also never dealt with clubs where they have a complicated management team like Barca Madrid Bayern
Pep the only manager who could afford to spend 125m during pandemic.
How much did Chelsea spend during pandemic
It's not crazy to me. It's like people on here forget how important it is to have a world class manager and coach. They had it for 26 years and forgot it now. That's the most unbelievable thing about it all.
Man Utd fans have become the modern Galaticos fans. Because they aren't winning the best trophies, they want to win the transfer market every season.
No it's not. Pep worked with the second team at Barca, that's what earned him the job. The best want to work with the best,there's no two ways about it.
If anything, Pep is the exception to this rule since he willingly left a team with Messi, Iniesta and Xavi in their primes because he felt he achieved everything with them.
Not too sure about that. I believe United's problems root deeper than the manager position. For Guardiola, things like infrastructure, organisation, scouting, medical department, all that stuff is very important and City prepared everything for him in advance to his signature. There's a reason why he values those things so highly, they're important success factors for the quality of his work. A completely business driven guy like Woodward would probably be a big hindrance for Pep.
Conveniently ignoring City brought in just under £97m in the summer, so what was his net spend?
Some people are utterly ridiculous with their biased posts.
I don’t know a single United fan who is salty, where did you get that from? There’s no salt if a team outplays you.
Things that riled up United fans were Mou’s Porto when they knocked us out and spent 15mins diving around to waste time, the game we were controlling Real before the red card, Granada this year they just fouled all game and it was such a low level of football. There’s probably more but I have no issue if we’re simply 2nd best.I’ll add in that AC game when Gattuso made about 10 challenges form behind and wasn’t sent off.
Looking at your post history it's clear that you're not here for much aside from wumming. Understandable you'd have a deep rooted hatred of United, given the side you support. Just weird you'd spend your free time on a united forum...
You should bring up these simple facts to Guardiola's detractors in this thread, since their main argument is not that he inherited the best squad and the best players, but that he was given too much money to buy himself the best squad with the best players.
The Pep fans are so blind in their loyalty, that they slip deep into revisionism and try and suggest the likes of Sterling "weren't that good", pre Pep despite him ripping it up for Liverpool and costing 50m just before. We saw someone suggest Messi was made by Pep for goodness sake.
And the fact it's taken until this season to finally get centre backs to sort them out back there.
I always wonder how much Pep would have needed to spend if he'd picked us up when Jose did. Having no-one of the quality of any of those players he inherited.
The irony of you accusing anyone of revisionism and then going on to say this, is very hilarious.
If he had picked United up when José did, well he probably would have spent as much as José did while getting the team to play a much better brand of football.
I may be wrong, but did Sterling ever score 10 or more goals a season before playing for Pep? And are you seriously saying that Sterling pre-Pep was just as good as the one Pep has coached?
As for the defence issue, before this season City has once had the best defence in the league and 2nd best defence twice behind Liverpool (and not conceeding more than 3 more goals than Liverpool). It was in key CL moments that their defence cost them, so it's false that they've always been bad defensively.
Who did United have when Jose arrived, who was the same quality as Aguero/D Silva/Kompany/Sterling/De Bruyne? Genuinely interested in who you think we had of that quality.
Pep spent 50m on one full back for goodness sake that summer and a fair bit on two other full backs.
Probably a similar amount to what we booted into Pogba and Bailly.
There's nothing controversial about saying Sterling was already a good player at that point. He'd moved for 50m before that was a fee for a full back, after a great season at Liverpool.
That he scored more in future years doesn't at all reduce that.