Take your head of Pep’s arse for a minute and have a think about it. Do I need to see his contract to know they sacked league winning managers because they wanted somebody good enough to win them the Champions League?
'Pep' Guardiola sack watch
- Thread starter Classical Mechanic
- Start date
I don't defend City.And you spend your precious newbie posts defending Pep and City.
And only fanbois under the age of 16 think supporting united and admiring a rival manager is mutually exclusive.
City were defending champions and sitting top when they announced Guardiola would be taking over from Pellegrini. Eyes were taken off the ball. All those managers won the league before they were sacked. What have they won since? Obviously it is a bit more simple at those clubs.
How does he have it easier when United and Chelsea can spend just as much?
Once again, Bayern should not have tried to make him stay if they felt they were better before he took charge.
They won the CL before he took charge (technically, he had already signed with them before they won) but they obviously played at an extremely high level under Pep, which is why they wanted to keep him.
I guess him not winning the CL isn't held against him by big clubs as much as it is by armchair experts/coaches.
Point taken regards Pellegrini, Mancini though doesn't have that excuse, neither the two Bayern managers. Thing is, the fact that someone manages to win the league at one point means more or less nothing if he doesn't build on it and falls apart. Ranieri's win in 2016 was probably the greatest upset in the whole history of professional sports and yet he's coaching Sampdoria at the moment, Leicester unceremoniously booted him out during his second season there. It's always the case of "what have you done for me lately" unfortunately though it may be.
Well he has it easier because he had a better squad than them to begin with and outspent both.
I haven’t said he’s not a great coach. I said winning league’s at the clubs he’s been at it is easier than it is at just about any other club. That’s why average at best managers have won leagues at those clubs. This started with me saying he had it easier at those clubs than he would at others. How do you think any of the shite you’ve spouted has refuted that?
Last edited:
Think back to the post you responded to. If average managers can win leagues at these clubs it suggests that it’s easier to win leagues there than it is elsewhere.
I don't disagree in the slightest, but if you want to win a truckload of them it certainly helps if you don't follow up a 90 point season with a 60 point one, seeing as the latter is going to get you the boot (i've pulled the figures out of thin air for reference).
Average managers like Mancini and Pellers obviously could win the league (and they did win it), it's just the fact that they couldn't wrestle with the whole consistency aspect.
And like I said, he’s a great coach. But a great coach with enormous advantages. He earned some of them, but he’s had it a lot easier than most have.
There are jobs where the champions league is the difference between exceptional and acceptable. That's Bayern and PSG where the league is usually a forgone conclusion due to the disparity in wealth and stature. So while Pep did a lot of good things at Bayern and the club may have been happy to keep him due to the general work he was doing and the hope for winning big ears in the future if they kept going, as far as Pep's legacy especially in terms of the greatest managers ever, it ended up meaning very little as the genuine achievements were things others could replicate with ease and Bayern as a football club found to be child's play to do - win Bundesliga. So all in all, he did what was accepted of a normal manager and did nothing really worthy of considering special.
That's a good balanced summary honestly, it seems we were in agreement the whole time.
So 3 times Pep won the PL, all times he lost to a PL team in CL. Weird.
His 3 Premier League titles helped.
Stating facts about SAF = Wumming, but stating facts about Pep = its fine and dandy because its RedCafe!
You people want this place to be run like a North Korean forum or a CCP forum, where Xi Jin Ping has to be worshipped like a god who is perfect, that any comments on imperfections = wumming?
Sounds very much like it
I've never seen any of Pep's teams be more than the sum of their parts. They're always exactly as good as the players. He gets the expected performances out of them, and for literally 100% of his managerial career, he has had the best squad in the country at his disposal. I don't think he has done more than what you would take for granted. He's certainly not a bad manager, but until he actually proves that he can do more than win relatively regularly, domestically, with the best squad in the league, I'm not buying into the notion that he's one of the greatest ever. He has simply not achieved enough for that. If he'd won the CL with every club he's been at, or elevated a team like Tottenham or Atletico to the top, I'd give him the nod. Since he has simply never been tested with anything short of the best squad and the most money in the land, I'm skeptical.
I realize that the potential he had to work with at barca was incredible, but I still think that team was more than the sum of its parts. It was football on a level we'd never seen before.
Not to mention that there were big question marks on that team after Rijkaard left. What they did was far from what was expected when he took over.
Otherwise, 100% agree.
Since Pep Guardiola stopped managing Barcelona, there has been exactly one instance in world football of a manager being hired to win the CL based on their history of success in the CL, and them going on to actually achieve it: Carlo Ancelotti at Real Madrid. It's just not a thing you can actually do. Clubs know that, so they don't make firing decisions based on whether you win the CL.
There is a fair amount of hindsight bias in this post.
When Guardiola was announced as Bayern Munich manager, they hadn't won the title in two years. They'd only won consecutive titles twice over a twenty-year period. They were clearly the top club in Germany, but it was not a foregone conclusion that you'd coast to multiple league titles if you managed them. For all the talk about Heynckes' team being 'better,' that was a team that lost all titles in 2011-2012, including losing a CL final at home. The people who run Bayern Munich would not have hired Guardiola halfway through the season if they thought the job was a piece of cake that anyone could do.
Last edited:
His record in Europe is very underwhelming given how dominant some of the teams he has been a part of were, there's no other way about it. It's probably just as much a desperation for him as it is for City tbh
This. Always said the same. Until he actually does amazingly well where a team will be overplaying their potential, I can't say he's one of the greatest ever - and screw what Neville says about that.
Is anyone saying Zidane is one of the greatest ever despite winning 3 ChLs? No, cause its about how its done. He inherited one of the strongest Real teams in a very long time.
I have more respect of the work Poch did for Spurs from beginning to end.
Crikey
this forum is far from a big echo chamber and it’s why tons of opposition supporters have come here to post.I think he's definitely underperformed in Europe over the last decade, he's not particularly better than many other top managers there.
The problem is people try to use this as evidence that he must be underperforming domestically too. Then they twist themselves into pretzels trying to turn his extremely successful domestic career into a failure.
You can just say "he's a great manager but others are better in the CL," I promise you, nothing bad will happen.
The thing that some don't tend to understand or willingly ignore, is the fact that Pep isn't considered the best by specialists or ex great players just because of the things he's won, but because of the way he makes his teams play and because of the influence he's had in the way the game is been played.
This is pretty clear to see IMO but armchair experts are bent on telling us how he isn't that great.
He's just a bald, expensive Mancini.
No, this is wrong. We might not have won the league before the triple year against Klopp's Dortmund, but anything but winning the league - especially after the triple and with that insane squad - would've been absolutely unacceptable. Heynckes is one of Hoeneß' best friends and he was very close to getting the boot back then (and basically unofficially got it after the Pep signing announced). Klinsmann got fired the year before, and even Ancelotti/Kovac who started to struggle in the league and had way worse squads compared to the Pep years got kicked mid-season. Anything but winning the BL with the squad after the triple year would've been laughably bad, given the state of our rivalling clubs. Pep had us playing some great football in the league and there have never been any doubts of that ever happening when he was with us, though.
Chelsea has not been even close in spending to City since Pep was there. In fact, City had net spent not much less than PSG and Chelsea combined in the last 6 years. That's the price to have the best squad on the planet.
He is the best manager around easily. If we had him we would be loving things. It is a bit funny how he tactically did so badly this final. No idea what he was trying.
His management apart from the Chelsea games have been incredible still. Credit to Tuchel for tactical bearing him.
His management apart from the Chelsea games have been incredible still. Credit to Tuchel for tactical bearing him.
Using the timing of him being "announced" instead of starting as a way to play down the all conquering treble winning team he took over is ridiculous.
The achievement of Dortmund to break the monopoly was exceptional, but Bayern were always going to reclaim dominance, as they can just take the best players from domestic rivals like candy from a baby.
Can a manager that hasn't won the Champions League, the best club tournament in the world, in ten years be considered the best manager around?
Nobody can spend as much if you look at the real numbers, City were caught paying under the table. They won't even need to go through that pretense anymoree after the CAS passed a ruling that UEFA basically aren't allowed to enforce FFP.
That doesnt change the simple fact that they played better and achieved more under Heynckes?
Hindsight is a beautiful thing. Heynckes wasn't trusted or expected to get Bayern to that level he did in his last half saison but he could that team to its peak and Guardiola could only maintain that level (done it brilliantly in the league, failed in the CL as usual)
Needs to buy Mbappe, Haaland, Kimmich, Alphonso Davies and Varane to win the UCL. I mean without the best players, how can anyone expect the genius to deliver?
But that is not a simple fact. Heynckes had two seasons in that stint at Bayern. One was better than any of Guardiola's seasons, because he won the Champions League (unlike Guardiola, who 'merely' won domestic doubles in his two best seasons). But the other season was much worse than any of Guardiola's seasons at Bayern, because he didn't win anything and bottled a CL final at home to the worst team that's won it in a decade.
It isn't ridiculous. It's completely sound. We are having a discussion about club management's perceptions of Guardiola's job, so when and why they hired him is pretty damn important.
Last edited:
Have they bought two more defenders yet?
The Pope just called, he's finished with his business in the woods.
Success at Bayern is meassured in whether they win the Champions League. Anything else is expected.
He's just not as good as people expected him to become after his Barca achievements. He is a league machine but surprisingly flawed when it comes to managing high-stakes CL matches.
I wish you and others would stop using the ‘armchair experts’ tag to anyone who disagrees with you. You’ve made some great points about how ex players and coaches speak so highly of him but you completely undermine your argument with condescending name calling, I’d assume 99% of us are armchair experts including yourself doesn’t mean we can’t have a reasoned debate.
I think it’s impossible to argue that Pep won’t go down as an all time great and it’s a testament to how good he is that if he doesn’t end his career with more CL wins than any other coach it’ll be seen as him ‘failing’. He is a unique case though and his career is difficult to compare to anyone else’s other than maybe Zidane as it’s so strange for a coach to start their career at such a high profile club and be so successful from the get go. Unfortunately for him his City success will always come with an asterisk due to the money and setup he has in place, personally my admiration for him will always slowly decline the longer he stays there but I very much doubt he cares what a Utd fan on a Utd forum thinks about his career choices. The biggest complement I can give him is if City sacked him tomorrow I’d be delighted
I am going to play devils advocate here but similar to our very own legend no ? Not the first part you mention but the latter
Genius of a manager and will go down as one of the greats and rightfully so but also has a very underwhelming European Record, similar to Sir Alex
I didn’t say they would fire him based on it. I said that’s why they hired him. I mean it should be bloody obvious that’s their main ambition.