Why do you think he always manages top teams with top players ? It’s because the top teams want and trust him as a manager. Since he is being at City he has spent a whopping 840m, since then we have spent nearly 700m. If he was our manager since then and was giving 700m we would of won the league already.
'Pep' Guardiola sack watch
- Thread starter Classical Mechanic
- Start date
I think there's a genuine argument that his teams plays some of the most aesthetically pleasing and technical football but let's actually look at what he has won: 2 PL and 1 FA cup. Comm. shields, Coca Cola and Intertoto's are not major honours (I doubt they mean anything to him either in fairness)
Carte Blanche with money (the figures are actually staggering for his spending) joined a stacked team, always the deepest squad and yet has he actually win as much as I think people expected? I rate him, he's clearly a very good manager but I personally think for all the brilliance of how his teams play most people would have expected him to have won more and have at least 1 CL. Conte won 1 PL and an FA cup in 2 seasons, Klopp's trophies at Pool are more impressive than Pep's at City...this is in a weak PL and also in the age of no dominant La Liga teams in the CL as well. This season the PL is at it's absolute weakest and so is the CL so I am fearful he'll finally get the PL double CL this year and then I think your argument is a lot stronger.
I think you are looking at the wrong thing in terms of salary. City bought Pep's brother a club in Spain. We are talking about 100s of millions of dollars there. All this is beside the point, Pep is the best in the world along with Klopp and deserves what he is getting based on how much money football makes. What he is doing for Abu Dhabi's reputation shouldn't be underestimated either and is well worth the outlay for the Sheikhs.
I reckon If we had their team our fans would be making excuse after excuse why we couldn't compete.
It's not nice to admit but Pep really has done an outstanding job this season given their weaknesses. I'm just hoping they mess up in the cup competitions.
It's not nice to admit but Pep really has done an outstanding job this season given their weaknesses. I'm just hoping they mess up in the cup competitions.
He's a fantastic manager. Anyone that doesn't admit it is just deceiving themselves.
Its tough to admit
He loses: Pep is finished, he was never good, knew he will struggle, he can't handle a rebuild
He wins: Its the money, the league is weak, anyone can do this easily
His problems in the CL are well established but he'll very very likely end this year with three PL victories in five years, which is very impressive given the overall competitiveness of the league in the last decade. And right now they have to be the favorites for next year as well. I also don't know if the team was really that stacked when he took them over. He had a few great younger talents to build around in Sterling and De Bruyne as well as some still very talented older players but the 15-16 City team got 66 points. Within two years he had them on 100 points. Now he has rebuilt on the fly to create another great team that looks poised to win this year and to be very strong going forward. The CL failures still stick out but I don't see anybody can look on his PL track record as anything but an amazing success story.
He's an expert at fine tuning and maintaining great teams. In these aspects he's currently untouchable. He's even comparable to Fergie in this sense.
Like most others I too find it more impressive when managers are able to over-perform and with weaker teams, but Pep has by definition proved that this is almost completely irrelevant at the highest level. It's a completely different task.
Like most others I too find it more impressive when managers are able to over-perform and with weaker teams, but Pep has by definition proved that this is almost completely irrelevant at the highest level. It's a completely different task.
PL has been at it's least competitive since Leicester won, just look at the points variance - Pep arrived in a PL with no dominant team and yet his PL record is good, it's not exceptional. Even though Mourinho bought Chelsea's title when he arrived, you have to say his PL first stint was much more impressive because he came and won the title two years running (only lost a game in his first season) and that was against United at full power and Wenger's Invincibles. Ranieri won the league, Conte then came in and smashed the points total, the league has been completely open. Once Klopp got Liverpool up and running at elite level (and whilst I hate them, I respect that they actually had to take time building a team as they couldn't spend £200m a year) City held off Klopp by a single point the year he won the CL and then crumbled and ended up 18 points behind Liverpool.
To say he didn't inherit a stacked team is just baffling, his best players over 5 seasons have been those he did not sign directly. How has he rebuilt 'on the fly', he's spent over £800m on loads of signings and some have worked out? Also give Pellegrini some credit, he won the PL with most of that team and Maninci won the PL before him.
As I said, he is a top coach but nothing he has done in the PL with City from a trophy winning perspective is amazing. Let me ask you this: Would Mancini or Pellegrini with £800m to spend have ben able to win the PL twice in the time he has? I think most would probably say yes or at least maybe, it's not really that much of a stretch. The style, the entertainment factor and the football brand is absolutely world class but the trophy haul on it's own is not.
No, because they won 1 in 3 years, while spending a fortune themselves. I love how some people act like they were spending peanuts in their stints at City.
Who thinks that? They spent a hell of a lot but nowhere near Pep levels.
Most managers spend a lot and then win things, point is Pep is another level entirely when it comes to spending but his City trophy cabinet doesn't match up. As said, top manager but you have to factor in his Mary Poppins bag wallet.
Guardiola's domestic record is amazing. 3 titles in 4 years at Barcelona, 3 out of 3 at Bayern, and now most probably 3 out of 5 titles with City. He still have 2 more years left there so maybe he can win one more or even 2 more titles in England.. His CL record is poor and his shortcomings there are very well known. But i believe that with his new system for the first time in the years after his Barca stint he has a real chance to win it finally again.
You're 100 % correct here. It seems that even acknowleding these blatant facts annoys so many people. Of course Mancini and pellegrini would have added a second. As I said above, if we wait for Soldkjaer to spend another 530m I'd be stunned if he didn't win one. Likewise klopp to match 830m.
City didn't give this money for 3 titles.
They gave it to be the best in Europe. So far to not pass the last 8 is really poor.
Guardiola will pass 1 Billion this summer
At a single club, with a very solid squad inherited and recent history of titles too, winning the domestic title or getting close every year should be the least thsr is expected. 1 billion. Why do people find it so hard to accept that while admiring his football or rating him as a manager, the billion pounds might enter the discussion.
Mancini faced an entirely different challenge. He won them their first trophy and then first league title after several decades. Obviously it took time to build a title winning team after the takeover, they were never going to win the title in 2010 or 2011 already against United and Chelsea.
Pellegrini and Guardiola had easier tasks. You can’t just say Mancini only won 1 title in 3-4 years, what else was he supposed to do?
Pellegrini and Guardiola had easier tasks. You can’t just say Mancini only won 1 title in 3-4 years, what else was he supposed to do?
The mental gymnastics some people are doing here in order not to admit what a great coach he is and how what he's good what he's doing at City is, is very funny IMO
Mancini bought Aguero, Silva and Yaya for a combined 80m in his time, in todays market these guys are going close to 80m on their own, if you include inflation, then yes in a 3 year cycle they probably spent more or less the same amount Pep spent, yet in that 3 year cycle only Pep is the one to win back to back league titles, so the question shouldn't be they could do it, but instead WHY they didn't do it? The lack of spending I'm sorry simply doesn't apply here both spent money in an era that the record fees were a lot less then Pep City era.
What different chellenge? When we came to City he had Hart, Kompany, Robinho, de Jong and Zabaleta. He further added Adebayor, Tevez, Lescott, Santa Cruz, Kolo and his second season he added Aguero, Dezko, Yaya, Silva, Balotelli, Kolarov to the squad this is good enough to win the league title back to back. In his final season he lost the league title to RVP.
Also, their wages were batshit crazy back in the day, it's not like City do that sort of distortion anymore.Of all the arguments when trying to undermine Guardiola's work, this is such a weird take.
Easily the greatest coach of this generation. People keep changing the goalpost all the time. I remember most people on here said his football wouldn't work, then he got 100 points then people started going on about the money spent when City have been spending the most money for a while.
People keep going on about the Cl but the only 3 other managers to win 2+ European Cups are Paisley, Ancelotti and Zidane.
They have no striker, they haven't had a LB pretty much since he went there and he racked up 100 and 99 points in 2 seasons.
If City manage to get Haaland as they are rumoured to do, I fear for the league...
People keep going on about the Cl but the only 3 other managers to win 2+ European Cups are Paisley, Ancelotti and Zidane.
They have no striker, they haven't had a LB pretty much since he went there and he racked up 100 and 99 points in 2 seasons.
If City manage to get Haaland as they are rumoured to do, I fear for the league...
It's mental. Only 3 managers have won back to back PL titles, SAF, Mou and Pep with who are among the top 10 managers of all time, yet people assume Mancini and Pellegrini would've done (which they didn't despite being managers for City for 3-4 seasons), yell not even Carlo or Conte were able to do it at Chelsea.
If you can’t see the difference between the work they had to do and the challenge they were facing in 2012 compared to their later wins then you just don’t want to see it. Mancini couldn’t have won more titles than he already had as City were not a title winning team when he came, neither did they have the winning mentality. Mancini was never going to win 2 titles against SAF, he did well enough to win 1 which considering it was their first after decades was a great achievement.
No manager is going to win it every year but the manner that you lose it when expected to win it should matter.
The 1995 title was one of a few titles United left behind them on the last day of the season. The Cantona suspension played its part in that. Pep team was favourites to win the 2019/20 league title and he allowed Liverpool win that title with 7 games to spare, that unacceptable for a manager as highly rated as him.
Context is needed for what Ferguson achieved in Europe. Firstly English clubs had get over the ban they had in European competitions then you had the silly 3 foreign player rule and Before he arrived United reached only one European final and won one European trophy.
Everything has been in place for Manchester City the last 4 seasons to land the champions league instead Pep didn't even lead them to a semi final and none of the teams that knocked them out those seasons went on to win the CL.
Pre 2016: Let him come and prove himself in the EPL in a competitive league, not one you win by December
2016/17: I told you he will never survive the EPL he is a fraud
2017/18: He spent money and had no competition
2018/19: He spent too much money and depended on players he inherited, Lets see how he survives without Kompany Fernandinho Silva and Aguero
2019/20: I told you he can't survive when he has to compete with strong teams like Liverpool
1st part of 2020/21: I told you he can't manage a rebuild, he only worked with inherited players everyone he bought failed
2nd part of 2020/21: (Leading the league without Kompany Silva Fernandinho Aguero and KdB) The rebuild is only working because the league is weak and he has money
2016/17: I told you he will never survive the EPL he is a fraud
2017/18: He spent money and had no competition
2018/19: He spent too much money and depended on players he inherited, Lets see how he survives without Kompany Fernandinho Silva and Aguero
2019/20: I told you he can't survive when he has to compete with strong teams like Liverpool
1st part of 2020/21: I told you he can't manage a rebuild, he only worked with inherited players everyone he bought failed
2nd part of 2020/21: (Leading the league without Kompany Silva Fernandinho Aguero and KdB) The rebuild is only working because the league is weak and he has money
The mental gymnastics people go through are incredible.
Basically Pep was favorite to win every title, every season he played in. At the same time some of the best managers in the world like Conte, Sarri, Mourinho Klopp, Poch, Ancelotti etc are in the league
Since 2017/18 Pep has won almost 70% of titles league and cups in English football, A league many say is the most competitive, but that is unacceptable. If I can ask will winning everything, 100% of the time, everytime, with 7-0 scorelines like no coach has ever done in the history of football, Will this even be acceptable ?
Last edited:
Pointing out that it’s not that difficult to win titles at City is not undermining Pep’s work. Managers who are obviously not “Greats/world class” have won a title after all with them. Pep is a better manager that’s why he won them more convincingly/more often/back to back, but again the fact that every manager since Mancini / since they had a competitive squad has won the league title at City shows you that winning the title for City is not the most difficult task.
In his 6th year in the CL! Not 13th! I am sure you will find out yourself why he won the CL in his 6th CL year.
Losing a title with 7 games to spare isn't a competitive effort.
When Pep came to City they finished with 66 pts, had the 3rd oldest squad in the PL, were on the verge of losing their CL spot, lost the title to Leciester, this with players like KDB, Aguero, Silva, Yaya, Kompany, Fernandinho, so if people can't see the work he had to do then your refusing to see it too.
CL is a title you win every season? No coach has won more than 4. You know Fergie wh is considered probably the best coach of all time won 2 in about 20 seasons right?
After winning back to back titles with 198 points over 2 seasons or that is not acceptable. He has to do 100points every season to be acceptable
3. Only Paisley, Ancelotti and Zidane have 2+ at 3. It's crazy the standards Pep has to reach to convince people
Except he wins the treble every season he has flopped basically.
Yes as a United fan I should know this. The poster claimed Fergie took 13 years to win the CL. United won their first league title in 1993. So before that it was impossible for us to be in the CL as only champions were allowed. Btw still before that when the European ban was over he won the cup winners cup with United. Also won the same trophy with a much much smaller club against giants like Bayern and Real.
Anyway back to my original point.
Until 96/97 we could only take part as champions, nowadays top 4 are taking part.
SAF should still have won more CLs, he admitted that himself, but in his days United also could never outspend the other top clubs in Europe.
You don't have to build us and Arsenal up just to bring Pep down. We were nowhere near "full power", it was Djemba-Djemba and Kleberson years for us. The Invincibles were also already on their last legs. Both Keane and Vieira left the subsequent season signalling a transition for both teams. Look at any thread that talk about Chelsea 04-06 and you will find people saying that it was generally a weak PL era.
Football move in cycles, there will always be a dominant team. Breaking the points and goal scoring record for two years is an amazing feat regardless of how you look at it. And that is not even looking the brand of football they play which is easily one of the best we've seen in the entire PL era.
Minimal requirement of manager of his ranking and with such squad strength in depth is a competitive title challenge every season.
Until Roman came United routinely outspends every EPL club. You guys were breaking English transfer records for fun. The only competition United had was Wengers Arsenal and that was like taking a knife to a gunfight
Was Ferguson able to provide this competitive title challenge every season or Wenger or Mourinho or Klopp which coach in any league has done this before?
Again missing the point. I said we could not outspend top clubs in Europe as you were talking about CL. But if you want to talk about the league, even after Roman came we won the title back from him and went on to win 3 in a row by spending much less than Chelsea.
Ferguson and Wenger did when they had the title challenge squads available to them. Mourinho before he was past his best did also unless he fell out with everyone.
People are just making things up.
As if we were at full power when Mou won the league with Chelsea
Mou's Chelsea finished 12 points ahead of 2nd place Arsenal and 18 points ahead of us who were 3rd in 04/05 but the EPL was supposedly more competitive.
In 05/06 Chelsea finished 8 points ahead and won the league early. So much competitiveness
You are going to continue to ask pointless questions without doing some research, no? SAF was a total of 1 (!!!) point away from winning 7 league titles in a row from 2006-2013. In the end he won 5.
All those record breaking seasons from Pep or Klopp or whoever are really impressive, but for me such a consistency over so many seasons is unmatched. Anyway, if you have any more questions, feel free to google them.