Which of the past England managers would do the best with the current squad?

Reditus said:
He was a very good club manager but absolutely underachieved with Enlgland. And I would rank that 2002 side well above this one
Click to expand...

2004 we played the best football I remember from us at a tournament. If Rooney didn’t get injured I think we could have won the whole thing. Hard to say though.
 
LA BOMBA said:
How did he underachieve?

Lost to an all-time great Brazil team after a Seaman howler in 2002 in the most narrow game possible, then lost twice on penalties against a very strong Portugal that had better players than England.

There's no shame in losing to the teams that he lost, and in the way that he did. He simply wasn't lucky with the draw to get such strong teams as early in the competition.

The competition was simply much much stronger back when he was the mananger of England.

You can rate 2002 side as better than this, but then every national team at the time had a better national team than right now, and in most cases much better than current ones.
Click to expand...

Portugals squad wasn’t better. It was close but I think England had the better squad overall.
 
LA BOMBA said:
How did he underachieve?

Lost to an all-time great Brazil team after a Seaman howler in 2002 in the most narrow game possible, then lost twice on penalties against a very strong Portugal that had better players than England.

There's no shame in losing to the teams that he lost, and in the way that he did. He simply wasn't lucky with the draw to get such strong teams as early in the competition.

The competition was simply much much stronger back when he was the mananger of England.

You can rate 2002 side as better than this, but then every national team at the time had a better national team than right now, and in most cases much better than current ones.
Click to expand...

In 2002, England could have won its group ahead of Sweden and then avoided playing Brazil before the semifinal… The 1/4s probably only stayed narrow because Brazil went to 10 men (Ronaldinho red card) as soon as they took the lead.…
 
Bobby Robson is my guy. Think he would thrive with this team.

Terry Venables is a close second for me.

Southgate has to be third on that list in my lifetime. Yes I am frustrated as all get out with his selections, but it’s impossible to ignore his record. World Cup semi (on foreign soil), Euro Final (lost on penalties), WC QFs (lost to France).

People say he had the best squads etc., but that’s been said about loads of managers, and the fact is you still have to get it done. And he’s been our most successful manager since Ramsey.

I’m not a fan, but he’s gotten England further in tournaments than nearly any other England manager in the last 50 years.
 
simonhch said:
Bobby Robson is my guy. Think he would thrive with this team.

Terry Venables is a close second for me.

Southgate has to be third on that list in my lifetime. Yes I am frustrated as all get out with his selections, but it’s impossible to ignore his record. World Cup semi (on foreign soil), Euro Final (lost on penalties), WC QFs (lost to France).

People say he had the best squads etc., but that’s been said about loads of managers, and the fact is you still have to get it done. And he’s been our most successful manager since Ramsey.

I’m not a fan, but he’s gotten England further in tournaments than nearly any other England manager in the last 50 years.
Click to expand...
He's shit.
 
simonhch said:
Bobby Robson is my guy. Think he would thrive with this team.

Terry Venables is a close second for me.

Southgate has to be third on that list in my lifetime. Yes I am frustrated as all get out with his selections, but it’s impossible to ignore his record. World Cup semi (on foreign soil), Euro Final (lost on penalties), WC QFs (lost to France).

People say he had the best squads etc., but that’s been said about loads of managers, and the fact is you still have to get it done. And he’s been our most successful manager since Ramsey.

I’m not a fan, but he’s gotten England further in tournaments than nearly any other England manager in the last 50 years.
Click to expand...

purely because of the squad at his dispoal, you or I could achieve the same, this is why it is so frustrating that he is in charge, we should have beaten Italy in the final.
 
sparx99 said:
Portugals squad wasn’t better. It was close but I think England had the better squad overall.
Click to expand...

At the time Portugal had a better squad and they were seen as favorites both in 2004 and 2006 by the neutrals.

People really overrate those England teams because of big names, but at the time players like Gerard, Lampard, Rooney, John Terry, Rio Ferdinand and Ashley Cole were still young and not the finished product they were in their prime. These players hit their prime after Eriksson left. Yes they were already good, but they weren't as good as players that other teams had. For example Deco was a better midfielder than any Englishman in that period and won 2 CLs during that time.

Meanwhile the likes of Beckham and Owen were already in decline. Then there was the goalkeeper problem and lack of wingers. It simply wasn't a well-balanced team and is only rated so highly now because of newer football fans who recognize the star players as legends of Premier League, but don't know the context.

The core of the 2004 Portugal squad were the Porto players who just won the CL and had a lot of experience playing with each other. Add Figo and C. Ronaldo on the wings and it was a great and well-balanced team.
 
LA BOMBA said:
At the time Portugal had a better squad and they were seen as favorites both in 2004 and 2006 by the neutrals.

People really overrate those England teams because of big names, but at the time players like Gerard, Lampard, Rooney, John Terry, Rio Ferdinand and Ashley Cole were still young and not the finished product they were in their prime. These players hit their prime after Eriksson left. Meanwhile the likes of Beckham and Owen were already in decline. Then there was the goalkeeper problem and lack of wingers. It simply wasn't a well-balanced team and is only rated so highly now because of newer football fans who recognize the star players as legends of Premier League, but don't know the context.

The core of the 2004 Portugal squad were the Porto players who just won the CL and had a lot of experience playing with each other. Add Figo and C. Ronaldo on the wings and it was a great and well-balanced team.
Click to expand...
2004 was closer because the Mourinho players from Porto were at their best, 2006 England had a better squad, Deco was suspended for that match, but honestly both teams didn’t played great stuff during the tournament, it was more a question of surviving until losing.
 
SCP said:
2004 was closer because the Mourinho players from Porto were at their best, 2006 England had a better squad, Deco was suspended for that match, but honestly both teams didn’t played great stuff during the tournament, it was more a question of surviving until losing.
Click to expand...

2006 Portugal was a great team, maybe not in terms of players but there's no shame in losing to a team like that on penalties.

They were very hard to beat, France only beat them 1-0 with a penalty goal.

For example that Portugal team was better than the one that won the Euros in 2016, but was just unlucky to participate in such a stacked tournament.

People just have very harsh criteria for Eriksson for some reason. Southgate gets a pass for they way he lost to Croatia and Italy, all inferior teams than the ones Eriksson went out to, but Eriksson gets criticized for his players losing penalty shootouts against legendary teams.
 
Pintu said:
In 2002, England could have won its group ahead of Sweden and then avoided playing Brazil before the semifinal…
Click to expand...

From what I remember this was a tactical decision to avoid Senegal in the round of 16.
 
LA BOMBA said:
2006 Portugal was a great team, maybe not in terms of players but there's no shame in losing to a team like that on penalties.
Click to expand...
Problem is that compared to 2004 we had an aging Figo, we lost Jorge Andrade CB from Deportivo with serious injury, Costinha was way bellow the 2004 level and even Deco wasn’t at the same level.

Even Cristiano from 2004 played better than in 2006 and Pauleta never played well on big tournaments.

The only 2 guys who I thought played really at top level were Ricardo Carvalho and Maniche from start to finish, reaching the fourth place with that team was a small miracle by Scolari.

More inexcusable was how we lost 2 times against Greece playing at home with players on better shape, even if the best team at Euro 2004 was the Czech Republic, not Portugal or England.
 
SCP said:
More inexcusable was how we lost 2 times against Greece playing at home with players on better shape, even if the best team at Euro 2004 was the Czech Republic, not Portugal or England.
Click to expand...

Do you think that if you won the title in 2004, Portuguese football would be in much better state now?

I feel that this was your big chance to keep up with the top 5 leagues and you blew it.
 
LA BOMBA said:
Do you think that if you won the title in 2004, Portuguese football would be in much better state now?

I feel that this was your big chance to keep up with the top 5 leagues and you blew it.
Click to expand...
Don’t know because it was at the peak of Real Madrid Galaticos and the start of the Abramovich era at Chelsea when Mourinho went there.

At that time Mourinho was really a top level coach who actually turned guys from normal clubs in Portugal into Champions League level players, he elevated the level of those players.

One thing I do miss and the recent years have shown me, it’s despite the hype current level of players get by playing on top leagues, and some are good even if the NT doesn’t play how it should play, I do think it would be better to have a backbone of that team playing in portuguese clubs at European level, but that’s not how football works.

I look at some of the so called City or Guardiola players for Portugal and without all the hype they aren’t on the same level of performance as a Ricardo Carvalho, Maniche, Nani or even sometimes a Quaresma with all his individualistic flaws.

But I don’t think with the post Bosman rulling and the globalisation of the top European leagues winning 2004 at home would make our league better, as it wouldn’t make a big difference for the Dutch league in 2010.
 
Theonas said:
The ex players seem to talk very highly of Glen Hoddle. The impression seems to be that he was the most tactically fluid and innovative.
Click to expand...
Hoodie was the first thought that came to my mind. Maybe also Keegan might have been the most entertaining but would have lost vs teams like France / Netherlands etc 4-3
 
Ramsey because he, unlike the others, actually won with England.
Then it'll be Robson, Venables and then Sven.
Didn't care much for Hoddle.
 
None of them.

They actually did worse with better players. I have no idea why people think that the current squad is better than any of the squads of the past 30 years.
 
Hoddle had the balls to drop Gazza so you wouldn't see shite like Maguire, Hendo, et al anywhere near one of his squads. No coincidence that he learned his trade from Wenger. Venables was great but too loyal to players that weren't performing.
 
Venables and Robson.

Southgate is the ten hag of internationals, we are the only team I've seen at this tournament that doesn't have a system. My man Nagelsmann has Germany playing like a double winning club side.
 
Other than Ramsay , the wingless wonders , Im not sure any of the others would .

He's not relevant to this as he's not a past manager , but somebody else mentioned Clough .

He promoted derby and won the 1st div , same with Forrest , that's before you get to the European cups .

I'm not even sure he could've done it , but Clough had something , that Mourinho type confidence but from the opposite side of the scale . He cared how it looked .
 
Howard Wilkinson and Peter Taylor would get better out of that squad

Not a hard squad to manage, Southgate seems to be too stubborn and seems to not give the players any freedom to make change or take risks themselves when in play.
 
SCP said:
Problem is that compared to 2004 we had an aging Figo, we lost Jorge Andrade CB from Deportivo with serious injury, Costinha was way bellow the 2004 level and even Deco wasn’t at the same level.

Even Cristiano from 2004 played better than in 2006 and Pauleta never played well on big tournaments.

The only 2 guys who I thought played really at top level were Ricardo Carvalho and Maniche from start to finish, reaching the fourth place with that team was a small miracle by Scolari.

More inexcusable was how we lost 2 times against Greece playing at home with players on better shape, even if the best team at Euro 2004 was the Czech Republic, not Portugal or England.
Click to expand...

I remember how fans and the media alike were literally expecting the Czech Republic to go all the way that year. They cruised their group that had Germany in it while showing great mettle against Holland, tore Denmark apart in their quarters and no one gave Greece a chance. They would have been deserving winners if it wasn't for Greece spoiling the party for everyone!

On Portugal like you I thought they were better that year as opposed to 2006 -- the big team shake-up which Scolari did by dropping Paulo Ferreira, Fernando Couto and Rui Costa IIRC after their first game changed the entire complexion of that side. England had a really good side that year and would have beaten Portugal had Rooney not get injured, but their 2002 team was overall superior with an outstanding Ferdinand at the back and Ballon d'Or Owen playing a prominent role.
 
I was a bit too young to remember Venables properly but what I do know is England's 2002, 2004 and 2006 sides range from slightly superior to vastly superior compared to this one and Eriksson couldn't get any of them past the quarterfinal stage. I suppose it's safe to rule him out in this conversation.
 
frostbite said:
Venables had a great squad in 1996, much better than this one, they were playing at home, and yet they were eliminated by a mediocre Germany side.

And people believe that Venables would win in Germany with a much worse squad? Really?


https://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/histo...-england-on-penalties-to-reach-euro-96-final/
Click to expand...
Not sure about that, many of this team failed to qualify for the previous WC and only just scraped into the previous Euros as well in an easy group. We were awful under Taylor and the mood was negative.

People love to overrate players of yesteryear:
Seaman; Southgate, Adams (c), Pearce; Ince; Anderton, Platt, Gascoigne, McManaman; Shearer, Sheringham

Being honest that's not an amazing squad, we've just done the classic English thing of over hyping the current team and then doing a 180 and thinking their all crap. What that squad does have though is less of a muddled selection which is on Southgate.
 
frostbite said:
Venables had a great squad in 1996, much better than this one, they were playing at home, and yet they were eliminated by a mediocre Germany side.
Click to expand...
That's because the players were nervous to the point where one of them shat on the pitch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.