Genuine question, but has Guardiola ever entered a match with a team that isn't the favourite? I don't think he has and certainly no more than evens, I can't think of even a single incidence where his team was overwhelming underdogs in a game.
'Pep' Guardiola sack watch
- Thread starter Classical Mechanic
- Start date
Yes, that's without all of them.
Fees over £20m in the 5 years prior to Pep (according to transfermarkt):
Kevin De Bruyne - £68.4m
Raheem Sterling - £57.3m
Nicolas Otamendi - £40m
Eliaquim Mangala - £40.5m
Wilfried Bony - £29.1m
Fernandinho - £36m
Stevan Jovetic - £23.4m
Alvaro Negredo - £22.5m
Sergio Aguero - £36m
Samir Nasri - £24.8m
There's also an additional 19 fees paid less than £20 million, bringing the total in the 5 years pre-Pep to over £520 million.
That still doesn't include the first 3 years of Sheikh spending they had where there are another 10 fees of £20 million or over, and a further 14 of less than £20 million. Then of course there's the brief Thai takeover immediately preceding the Sheikh where their spending suddenly increased, which is actually when they brought in Kompany.
Not even sure it's City fans tbh, they normally acknowledge they spend a lot(hard to deny it) and can rightly point out other coaches of theirs were also successful spending large sums. Always appears the cult of pep is Barca based imo.
City vs Barca, Bayern vs Barca ?
Maybe but there are city fans, just like how there were Chelsea fans pretending as ManUtd fans. It's easy to spot too.
Sorry I have an awful memory. Which one was that?
True. Weird thing to do on a forum that allows oppo fans too.
Pep inherited a triple-winning squad and was able to add quality to that (including taking Thiago from Barca). There is no way Pep's Bayern should have been considered as an underdog against Barca. A decade before that yes, Bayern had an atrocious time against Barca until van Gaal and Heynckes developed that team into a powerhouse.
United were favourites in the CL final 2008 and certainly the majority on here thought United would win.
More importantly, which fullback is he going to spunk money on this summer ?
I dunno if that's fair, it depends on the situation within the club - the former 2 are pretty difficult to match for toxicity but it's not like Liverpool aren't happy to give managers the boot if things aren't working.
It's £50m net difference, which is factual, whether you don't want to accept it or not.
An entire squads worth of players? Wit?
Would love to see the 25 players list under £20m.
United have brought in 20 players and paid 18 fees (Cavani and Zlatan on frees) since Guardiola took over at City.
City have brought in 43 players and paid 41 fees (Carson and Mooy frees) in that time. There's your squad's worth of players. Most are young prospects, but that just shows how much extra cash they have to burn.
The net spend between the clubs may not be too dissimilar (at least in recent years), but that just goes to show how poorly run United have been in comparison to City. The start of Pep's reign at City had Mourinho building a Mourinho team, and since then we've had Solskjaer picking up the pieces. The fact that all but one of Pep's 16 £20 million + signings are still at City, while 25% of the one's made by United have already left the club, all at a loss, tells you everything you need to know there.
As other's have pointed out, Pep has also benefited from hundreds of millions of shrewd in investment before his arrival that saw them add the likes of De Bruyne, Sterling, Fernandinho, Aguero, Toure and Silva to the squad, while with United, you go back to the incoherent mess caused by van Gaal's mad signings, Moyes' picking up Fellaini and Mata, and the last of Fergie's signings.
Absolutely. Also, I enjoyed those final two sentences!
Based entirely on a quick scan of transfermarkt's player valuations, Theo Hernandez.
I was actually going to say this might have been the only occasion. While Utd were favourites I don’t think they were huge favourites and hindsight now tells us just how exceptional that Barcelona team was. With that in mind I still don’t think that’s an example of Pep beating a team as an underdog.
Yeh not having the Bayern one at all. I had Bayern as favourites in that game. What’s the city vs Barca one?
I gave you the benefit of the doubt re the figures and you still came back with nothing of note. And I was around at the time
Real Madrid won 3. Man United won 2. Chopping and changing managers has nothing to do with anything, Madrid have always done that
Your argument is that Manchester United didn’t win the CL that much because they didn’t have enough money. That is a blinkered argument because (a) they had more than enough money and (b) teams with less money won as much during that time (Bayern, Porto etc).
I clearly recall Fergie being criticised for not doing better in the CL. At no point did anyone say ‘well they just don’t have the money to compete, that’s the problem.’ Because they did have the money to compete. But it’s a very hard competition to win.
The article below is an example of the criticism of the time. I don’t agree with much of it, but it’s notable that there’s no suggestion that Fergie has not had the funds to compete
https://www.itsroundanditswhite.co....e-places-question-mark-over-fergies-greatness
Also, you make reference to one signing by Milan in the early 90s and compare it to United’s most expensive player at the time as if SAF only signed players for £2 million throughout his entire United spell. Hilarious
Oh by the way, who won the Champions League the season after Milan signed the great Lentini? Marseille. How on earth did they defeat the mighty moneyed Milan?
If you count 1989-90 as being ‘in the 90s’ then sure. You’re still desperately scraping the bottom of the barrel though
So we’ve moved the goalposts from it being easier to win it to it being easier to make the final. Good to know. By the way, I think it’s safe to say that the Premier League has been the most moneyed league in the last decade, you’d think it would have managed more than 3 wins.
You’re arguing against common sense. Here’s what you need to win the champions league
(a) ENOUGH money to build a great squad/team
(b) A top quality coach (there are a few exceptions to this but generally it is required).
(b) Luck, because it is a knockout competition
If you watch this, it might help you understand why it’s not necessarily all about who spends the most money.
It was nice of you to give me the benefit of the doubt on the figures you didn’t know. I’ve given you figures. If they aren’t anything of note then you’ve clearly no interest in actually debating anything and are happy to ignore facts.
Yes, I consider 1990 to be in the 90’s. I’m crazy like that. It’s not like Italian teams weren’t the biggest spenders before that. How do you think Milan got all those players?
Lentini was a reference point to the early 90’s when Italy were the big spenders. I’ll give you another. Lentini beat the record that was held by Papin. Who do you think signed him? Would you like me to go through his whole spell? When Ronaldo broke the record at £13.2m, Andy Cole was our record signing at £7m. When Shearer broke it at £15m, it was still Andy Cole. When Real Madrid were spending £37m on Figo and £46m on Zidane. Our record was Veron at £28m. I could go on, but the pattern follows. In fact that spell in late 90’s early 00’s is the closest we got to those kind of fees under Fergie. Spending over £30m in 98 went a long way to helping us catch up enough to win the Champions League, further emphasising the point.
Real Madrid held the world record transfer between 2000 and 2016. They set five records in that time. They were able to steal United’s best player from them and went on to win 4 Champions League’s with him. You don’t think that made it easier for them? You’re living in cloud cuckoo land. When Real Madrid spent £230m in 09 United spent £24m. The most Fergie ever spent in a season was £93m in 07. We went on to win the Champions League.
Will that be the Marseille that were stripped of their title for match fixing? You think they didn’t spend money?
I don’t know if you understand this, but getting to finals is a key to winning the Champions League. It’s definitely easier to win it if you get to one. No nation won more than Italy in 90’s. No nation won more than Spain in the 00’s. No other nation had more finalists.
When the Premier League increased spending in line with those nations they all of a sudden started getting to finals regularly. England has had 13 finalists since 2005. Before that they had 1 since re-entering Europe. It’s funny how the success seems to have followed the money.
My initial point was spending the most money gives you the best chance. I’ve countered that with facts. All you’ve done is say neh, neh, neh, I don’t know any figures but I’m going to state things like fact as if I do. The closest you’ve been to being right was when you said this.
Last edited:
All of this is a smokescreen for your inability to actually address the point, which is Fergie being perceived to not have done well enough in the Champions League. Are you claiming that United won 2 CLs in 25 years because they didn’t have enough money? Yes or no? If your answer is yes, provide evidence that it was a commonly held view in the 90s and 00s. Cos I certainly don’t remember people lamenting United’s poverty in those years. Also, might be an idea to explain how Porto managed 2 wins in those 25 years.
It’s all because you didn’t understand my initial point that winning Champions League’s is made easier when you spend the most money. When you made your point about Alex Ferguson I pointed out if he could spend what others did, he’d have won more. I have no doubt he would. Just because you don’t remember people lamenting United’s spending power doesn’t mean they weren’t vastly outspent by teams abroad. Because they were. Again, you’re arguing against facts. People’s opinions on this don’t count for shit. You could go online and find opinions that Fergie was a fraud and only won because of referees.
Alex Ferguson wasn’t competing in Europe when Porto won the first of the two you’re referring to so let’s call it one that he was actually competing in. Ok, Porto did tremendously well to win the Champions League and it’s acknowledged as the biggest shock in the competition of the last 20 years. Why do you think that is?
United perhaps had the best team in Europe for at best 3 years. 1999 and 08-09. He won two. Could he have won more? Yes. Unlike Guardiola, Fergie was fighting against teams who outspent him. Guardiola has had the best team in Europe for considerably more time along with the benefit of outspending everybody else, something Fergie never had.
Game set and match right there
Any Bayern fan will recall we went into that game without Robben without Ribery and without Alaba. Lewandoski had a broken nose that was patched for the game vs Barcelona with MSN. Probably the best attacking trio in the past 20yrs
You were a treble winning team. Sure the injuries contribute but at worst you were slight underdogs. I still wouldn't class that as Pep winning a game where he is a massive underdog.
They had several crucial players injured, to be fair.
You said this:
So if Alex Ferguson had outspent every single other team in Europe every year for 25 years then he might have more Champions Leagues. Maybe so, but how realistic is that? Guardiola has been at City for 5 years, not his whole career. So he hasn’t always had the most money, in fact he won his two CLs with another club.
If we look at the facts (a word you use a lot, despite your clear ignorance of many of them), Ferguson lost many ties in Europe to teams like Basel, Dortmund, Lille, Sevilla, Galatasaray, Gothenburg and Bayer Leverkusen. All teams that he outspent.
He was also arguably outfoxed by other great managers such as Hitzfeld, Del Bosque, Mourinho, Van Gaal and of course Guardiola. None of this has anything to do with money. It’s the level of competition. All of those managers had bad results as well and none of them have won more than 2 CLs either.
Porto twice, Dortmund, PSV, RS Belgrade, Marseille, Ajax…..
He was beaten twice by Guardiola in finals at that time, what financial advantage did PG have then? What financial advantage over everyone else did PG have at Bayern?
The bolded part is the admission I was looking for, so it’s clear you realise that the money thing is an excuse. He could have won more. Not many more, no one appears to be able to win more than 3. But he could have won more and it’s actually OK to point that out rather than hiding behind falsehoods about shoestring budgets. It doesn’t take away from his greatness when you look at his overall career.
We won the treble in 2013, we played Barcelona 2yrs later.
A treble winning team is made up of players and losing 4 critical pieces of the starting 11 will affect any team. Bayern losing Robben Ribery Alaba was the equivalent of Barcelona losing Messi Neymar and Alves while Suarez plays with a broken nose. or Madrid losing Marcelo, Ronaldo and Bale while Benzema is patched up for the game. It significantly reduces your quality
At full strength, Bayern vs MSN Barcelona already slightly favours Barcelona given that MSN in attack is one of the best attacking trios of all time, never mind when we lose 3 of our best players
So you gave yourself no chance of winning that team. Talk about screaming poverty just to bug up the manager. You still have some exceptional players in that team.
Proves my point though. Whist Xavi was there they could still win it. Obviously Pep a big part but they had a bad season in his final year and Spain also fell off once Xavi went. A pattern
Can you imagine the posts on here if Guardiola never advanced from a CL group when he gets slagged for losing a final?
Imagine how much he would be slated going out in a group with Benfica, Basel and Galati. That is 100% much more of a failure than Pep losing in QF, SF or Finals of CL...
MSN Barcelona blew away every team on the continent when opponents were at full strenght, you now think Bayern missing 3-4 starters will be good enough to match them if you are being objective
Bayern last year blew every team away, this season missing Lewandowski Goretzka and Gnabry to injury changed things s PSG but should we assume that since we won the treble last season, Chupo Moting and Musiala should be able to deliver the same thing the treble team did 12months ago
Did he have the most expensive squad in history?
Xavi was a bit part player in 2015. Look at the humiliating results trailing the majority of Barcelona seasons since Pep left. So this Messi magic wand failed to deliver them. It shows that Messi and Pep helped each other in equal measure. None of them have been able to achieve the heights they did when they were together
Why do you keep saying 25 years? Alex Ferguson didn’t compete in Europe for 25 years. Are you sure you know what you’re talking about?
Yes, if Alex Ferguson had spent more he could’ve won more. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.
You ask what financial advantage Pep had? Well he spent £90m more than Ferguson while he was Barca manager. His record transfer was Ibrahimovic at £62.5m compared to Alex Ferguson’s being Berbatov at £34m. That was on top of having Messi, Iniesta and Xavi for free. That was the advantage he had.
Guardiola had less of a financial advantage over everybody else at Bayern. What he did have was taking over the best team at the time. Just like he took over the best team in England before spending more money than everybody else.
You’re arguing against facts. It’s your fault you started talking about how you doubt Real Madrid and the like spent more than United. It’s your fault you were made to look stupid and continue to ignore simple facts.
Will that be the requirement to qualify in a group of Villareal Lille and Benfica?
Even with all your injuries you were probably favourites against PSG this year and again even if that wasn’t the case you were only slight underdogs. I’d say that was the case even against and MSN led Barca. As a neutral I won a bet that night that Bayern would win so it wasn’t far fetched.
Anyway this is a circular discussion but honestly if that’s the only game we can think of where Pep went in with the weaker team it’s clear why questions will always remain about him. I really hope that by the time he retires he at least tackles one club up against some adversity. Before people pile in, that doesn’t need to be a Porto level club but if he came to any of Madrid, Barca, Utd, Juve during this point in time when they are off the top of their game and turned them around, I would rate him right up alongside Fergie as one of the best ever.
He did have Ferdinand who's transfer fee was more than whole Basel squad together..
1 win in 6 matches against those sides, how is that possible? We are constantly told it's solely about money, that's the difference, yet United failed to win 5/6 matches against those those mega rich sides..
Wasn't he depreciated?
Point is when you lose your star players the odds change, Barca vs Bayern both teams at full strength favors Barcelona is already 55-45, With 4 starters missing becomes more 65-35 or even 70-30.
City played Madrid last season, Played PSG this season. Won both sides home and away. Do you think those teams were not at a level close to City? if playing Madrid or PSG is not close enough to be a contest, then no one will ever be
I’m not making myself look stupid at all, you just can’t handle the fact that people think Fergie underachieved in Europe, that’s all. Here is the summary article again in case you missed it the first time round:
https://www.itsroundanditswhite.co....e-places-question-mark-over-fergies-greatness
Here is another:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/spor...uson-underachieve-in-the-champions-league/amp
And another
http://www.thehardtackle.com/2010/fergies-reign-an-underachieving-dominance/
Here’s one where the great man himself admits that United underachieved in Europe. If he can accept it without complaining about grinding poverty, why can’t you?
https://www.goal.com/en-sg/news/390...ex-ferguson-intent-on-winning-third-champions
I’d advise that you read them.