breakout67
Full Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2017
- Messages
- 9,050
- Supports
- Man City
How do you fit Poch's and Klopp's performances into that logic? United's spending dwarfs theirs much more than City does United's.
When talking about competition a lot of people can't stress finances enough when talking about City, but completely forget them when talking about the other two.
Just because money is a factor doesn't mean the coach is useless. Guardiola is one of the best managers in the world and spends a truckload of money. That is why he is a serial winner.
It's absolutely baffling that you bring up Poch when City bought directly from them, and the player they bought has been instrumental to the team. Klopp also had to sell one of his best players to fund transfers in other areas. If Poch could spend an extra £150m a year he might have actually won the league already (probably the season where Leicester won the league with a low points total).
You are basically arguing against what Guardiola admits himself. Without investment into the team City would not have achieved what they did this season. No manager in the world can turn average players into top players, you need top players in as many positions as possible to make the best team. After all that can you talk about tactics.
Aleggri said the exact same thing a few weeks ago. There's all this talk about tactics and coaching, when at the end of the day the players are the most important. Tactics are irrelevant without the right quality of player to execute them.