Who you rate the highest Pep, Klopp or Tuchel?

Rajiztar said:
Once again I reiterate Klopp did incredible things. But still question mark hangover his head that's sustainability. It's not bad thing because he won the league once. But he overplayed players he should have rested for games. That's his undoing in longer run. So why his teams struggled after great two seasons not even able to challenge. Because he sucked the life out of very limited number of players.

He needed to sustain the level. Greats did it in past and Klopp can't escape from that when scaling who is great though.

Pep for me now and if Klopp pipped him for title this season then i will say Klopp.

Tuchel I don't want to bring him in because his full season in pl just started.He too did great so far and I liked him much with the start we had he did a brilliant job with the schedule and top of the league won't be surprised if he wins the pl title.
Click to expand...

I’d disagree with the bolded bit. He struggled because all of his cb’s got long term injuries at the same time. And even if it was a poor season, he still got third place, five points after you in second.

And as for sucking the life out of players, I assume you’re talking about the front three? But look at his back ups last season; Jota, Origi and Shaqiri. This season’s the same, except Shaqiri’s been replaced by Minamino.
 
Klopp had got success with a much lesser budget than Pep or Tuchel.
 
As most have said, Pep for clubs with the best squads and/or unlimited budget e.g. currently City. I don't necessarily think he'd win more league titles than Klopp at City, but his teams are so incredibly consistent especially in smashing lesser teams. Also I think Pep could be better at managing (most) divas just by his name and reputation alone.
For pretty much all the other clubs, especially those "traditional" ones with a huge fanbase, Klopp. I think he excels in coaching athletic, hard-working runners and can make most of them look much, much better than they would for most other teams (e.g. Henderson, Milner, Großkreutz, Bender, I even think that Robertson/TAA/Firmino/Jota wouldn't look half as good for most other teams).
Tuchel is still not as proven as the others, but I do think that he is tactically a slight bit above Klopp and on par with Pep. He is also a very versatile coach unlike Pep, who pretty much requires the most technically gifted players for his teams.
 
Klopp far and ahead above Pep. Klopp what he did in turning Liverpool into CL & League winners would like someone taking over Spurs or Arsenal today, in fact those two probably have better players, and turning Arsenal/Spurs into CL winners within 3 years and league winners after 4.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
I can’t believe some of you are debating it, what Klopp managed at Dortmund in both the Bundesliga and CL and then at Liverpool after 30 years of no title absolutely shits all over the other pair.

It sucks giant balls he’s Liverpool’s manager but he’s absolutely the best manager in the World.
Click to expand...
Klopp's squad building and trophies may be superior to Pep's but as stand, he's simply not had enough success. He wouldn't have to have 10 league titles and 2 CLs to be comparable but 3 league titles and 1 CL is too far behind Pep even considering the resources.
 
Klopp is the best manager amongst the 3.

But Pep will achieve more success because of the team he manage.
Very likely he will build a great Newcastle United team in near future.
 
Yakuza_devils said:
Klopp is the best manager amongst the 3.

But Pep will achieve more success because of the team he manage.
Very likely he will build a great Newcastle United team in near future.
Click to expand...
Not soon. Newcastle will first go through their Robinho and Kaka /no Kaka phase before reaching the Mancini phase.
 
Daysleeper said:
Pep owned saf in CL at the end of the day
Click to expand...

Barcelona beat United because Barcelona had a better team. That doesn't translate into Guardiola '"owning" Ferguson, in any sense of the word.

On the other hand, if we were to use your logic, osing to Di Matteo when you're overwhelming favourites means Di Matteo owned Guardiola.
As did Poch, as has Klopp, and have many others.
 
Pep had messi robben and unlimited cash in every top top club.
All Liverpool had was klopp.
Him competing toe to toe with Pep is itself a feat, nevermind beating him to a title and a CL.
Who is the other dude?
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Klopp's squad building and trophies may be superior to Pep's but as stand, he's simply not had enough success. He wouldn't have to have 10 league titles and 2 CLs to be comparable but 3 league titles and 1 CL is too far behind Pep even considering the resources.
Click to expand...

Well it’s not is it? Because you’re basically suggesting that Klopp wouldn’t have a similar trophy haul had he managed Bayern and City, rather than Dortmund and Liverpool… which, quite frankly it’s utterly nuts.

Ignoring Barca, 6 titles at Bayern and City is a given. It doesn’t matter who manages either, be it Pellegrini or van Gaal, at these clubs, they win titles.
 
Last edited:
Klopp.

Should have been the United manager. We've got no choice but treat him like a leper now.
 
Definitely Klopp, he has been able to deliver the top honours and play excellent football with many times less resources than Pep. As for Tuchel, it's too early days for him to be in the conversation.
 
For me Klopp is easily the best of the 3. I think all 3 are in the same bracket though.
I never rated Tuchel that highly but am more convinced by him since he joined the PL.
 
Think Klopp is a bit overrated for Liverpool in the league. He only won 1 league title with Liverpool and had huge luck with VAR/refs.

I guess his squad building and developing of player been impressive, but once he got a world class team Pep has beaten him 3/4 years.

Two CL finals in a row is very impressive though and that comeback vs Barcelona is pretty insane. Pep has done worse in CL recently.

Tuchel got the weakest squad from these and won the CL in a very impressive way. League titles for PSG do not give him much credit though.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Well it’s not is it? Because you’re basically suggesting that Klopp wouldn’t have a similar trophy haul had he managed Bayern and City, rather than Dortmund and Liverpool… which, quite frankly it’s utterly nuts.
Click to expand...
I mean, it's not nuts given Klopp has not proven he can do it in those near-instant success environments. It's only nuts because you rate Klopp higher. For me, Klopp is great at building teams up given the time and patience to do so. Pep is great at achieving success under a high pressure where there is is expectation to win soon. I understand the argument that the former may require more from a manager than the latter but you have to consider that Pep's consistent success+quality football combination has now gone on for some 13 years. That's a big gap of success between the two. While one can presume that Klopp would replicate what Pep did at Barcelona and City (I agree that Bayern was too easy easy job) I don't think that line of thought it without flaws. Pep took over City when they finished 4th and while I'd expect a top manager to get them winning titles as their core was still good, meeting expectations all the time is not easy. Just like we can't just say that Kane is a better CF than Lewandowski because if we adjust for the difference in team mates then Kane would score 100 goals in the Bundesliga. Maybe Klopp is suited to a specific type of club and Pep another? Im just saying it's not black and white.

Personally I think that Pep due to the sheer consistency of success and great football is in the all time great category but due to his infinite luxuries falls short of the greatest (SAF baby). Klopp is not in that tier yet for me. He's closer to Conte (excellent manager) than he is to the absolute greatest. 3 league titles is too low. Doesn't win many cups in England too for some reason.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
I mean, it's not nuts given Klopp has not proven he can do it in those near-instant success environments.
Click to expand...

feck me, that's like proving you can run 100m in sub 10 seconds with a strong headwind but there's doubt you can do it with a slight tailwind :lol:

Every fecking manager wins titles at Bayern and City, even average ones that later get fired by West Ham.
 
Ladron de redcafe said:
Barcelona beat United because Barcelona had a better team. That doesn't translate into Guardiola '"owning" Ferguson, in any sense of the word.

On the other hand, if we were to use your logic, osing to Di Matteo when you're overwhelming favourites means Di Matteo owned Guardiola.
As did Poch, as has Klopp, and have many others.
Click to expand...
It most definitely does because that same Barcelona team that completely outplayed United, lost to the same United team a year earlier just before Pep arrived.
Funny how the team drastically changed when he arrived, but some of you are still trying so hard to reduce the influence he had on that team.
United didn't just lose to Barca, they were completely outplayed.

Poch never owned Pep despite beating him on few occasions, Klopp on the other hand has on few occasions just like Pep has also owned Klopp.

Talking about Klopp, the way some have chosen to re-write history is very funny. When it comes to Pep, you hear how he had generational talents when he arrived at Barcelona. But Klopp also had players like Reus, Gotze and Gundogan who were also considered huge talents. It also took him 3 years with them to win just like it took him 4years to win with Liverpool (after buying the most expensive GK and defender, as well as Fabinho).
Basically, he only takes projects where he doesn't have to hit the ground running, not high pressure projects where the team is not only expected to win but also expected to play an expansive style of football immediately.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
It most definitely does because that same Barcelona team that completely outplayed United, lost to the same United team a year earlier just before Pep arrived.
Funny how the team drastically changed when he arrived, but some of you are still trying so hard to reduce the influence he had on that team.
United didn't just lose to Barca, they were completely outplayed.

Poch never owned Pep despite beating him on few occasions, Klopp on the other hand has on few occasions just like Pep has also owned Klopp.

Talking about Klopp, the way some have chosen to re-write history is very funny. When it comes to Pep, you hear how he had generational talents when he arrived at Barcelona. But Klopp also had players like Reus, Gotze and Gundogan who were also considered huge talents. It also took him 3 years with them to win just like it took him 4years to win with Liverpool (after buying the most expensive GK and defender, as well as Fabinho).
Basically, he only takes projects where he doesn't have to hit the ground running, not high pressure projects where the team is not only expected to win but also expected to play an expansive style of football immediately.
Click to expand...
Reus, Gotze and Gundogan were good players - but not quite in the same league as the players at Barca at the time.

In addition Klopp might have taken 4 years to win with Liverpool - but what do you expect when up against City? How many years will it take us?
 
footballistic orgasm said:
Talking about Klopp, the way some have chosen to re-write history is very funny. When it comes to Pep, you hear how he had generational talents when he arrived at Barcelona. But Klopp also had players like Reus, Gotze and Gundogan who were also considered huge talents. It also took him 3 years with them to win just like it took him 4years to win with Liverpool (after buying the most expensive GK and defender, as well as Fabinho).
Basically, he only takes projects where he doesn't have to hit the ground running, not high pressure projects where the team is not only expected to win but also expected to play an expansive style of football immediately.
Click to expand...

Are you honestly placing the players he had at Dortmund even remotely close to the ones at Barcelona? :confused: Messi is literally the GOAT, and he had Xavi/Iniesta/Eto'o/Henry/Villa/Puyol/Alves/Ibra who are all all-time greats and a level above pretty much every single player Klopp had at Dortmund bar Lewa, who became world-class under him unlike all the others at Barca who were already easily among the best in their positions even before Pep arrived. Especially considering a lot of the Dortmund players didn't even get to play together since they were poached by bigger clubs (Götze, who became very average under Pep btw...) and/or constantly injured (Gündogan/Reus). Gündo/Lewa were never considered huge talents btw, they bought them for something like 5m - same price for Hummels.

They spent money, but Alisson is not the most expensive GK afaik (Kepa?), and VVD would have cost less than either one of the City CBs (Dias/Stones/Laporte) if Pool weren't trying to be sneaky and Southampton made them pay an extra 10m for it. Fabinho literally cost less than a lot of your squad players FFS... How can you try to compare City's spending to Pool's or even any other club out there with a straight face?
 
Last edited:
footballistic orgasm said:
It most definitely does because that same Barcelona team that completely outplayed United, lost to the same United team a year earlier just before Pep arrived.
Funny how the team drastically changed when he arrived, but some of you are still trying so hard to reduce the influence he had on that team.
United didn't just lose to Barca, they were completely outplayed.
Click to expand...

feck me, let’s be honest here @footballistic orgasm, we had a better side in 2008 than 2009 and still got pretty much played off the park pre-Pep, it was 180 minutes of us going for something of a smash and grab.

Were we better than 2009? for sure, but we had Hargreaves and Scholes in 2008, Tevez started too. However in 2009 we had fuxking Anderson and Giggs starting in centre mid and you wonder why we were outplayed? :lol:

In the next final we were even worse, an absolute shadow of that 2008 team. Fabio at full back, Chicarito up top, Giggs still in CM, Valencia at RW.
 
Last edited:
JDoe said:
Are you honestly placing the players he had at Dortmund even remotely close to the ones at Barcelona? :confused: Messi is literally the GOAT, and he had Xavi/Iniesta/Eto'o/Henry/Villa/Puyol/Alves/Ibra who are all all-time greats and a level above pretty much every single player Klopp had at Dortmund bar Lewa, who became world-class under him unlike all the others at Barca who were already easily among the best in their positions even before Pep arrived. Especially considering a lot of the Dortmund players didn't even get to play together since they were poached by bigger clubs (Götze, who became very average under Pep btw...) and/or constantly injured (Gündogan/Reus). Gündo/Lewa were never considered huge talents btw, they bought them for something like 5m - same price for Hummels.

They spent money, but Alisson is not the most expensive GK afaik (Kepa?), and VVD would have cost less than either one of the City CBs (Dias/Stones/Laporte) if Pool weren't trying to be sneaky and Southampton made them pay an extra 10m for it. Fabinho literally cost less than a lot of your squad players FFS... How can you try to compare City's spending to Pool's or even any other club out there with a straight face?
Click to expand...

Good post.

Don't know whether Klopp can achieve same results as Pep with same squads as different managers are good with different circumstances but comparing Klopp and Pep's spending is hilarious.
 
roonster09 said:
Good post.

Don't know whether Klopp can achieve same results as Pep with same squads as different managers are good with different circumstances but comparing Klopp and Pep's spending is hilarious.
Click to expand...

This is the 2011/12 BVB preferred first XI that went to the CL final btw:

Weidenfeller (free transfer from FCK)
Piszczek (2.5m from Hertha)
Hummels (4m from Bayern II)
Subotic (2.5m from Mainz)
Schmelzer (youth player)
Bender (1.2m from 1860 München)
Gündogan (6.5m from Nürnberg)
Götze (youth player)
Reus (17m from Gladbach)
Kuba (3.5m from Wisla)
Lewa (4.5m from Lech Posen)

Reus was a huge surprise that he actually chose Dortmund above us (Bayern), but he literally was half of that team's total transfer cost (roundabout €40m). And apart from Reus and Götze (youth player), none of those players were very highly rated talents before they came to Dortmund.
Liverpool got skinned for VVD back then. I remember most (myself included) shaking their heads when reading that they would actually pay 70m for a Southampton defender, and the reason why the fee was hugely inflated was 1. Southampton weren't amused by Pool poaching him in the summer 2. Pool just got a huge pile of cash for Coutinho and 3. it was a winter transfer. There was not a single club on earth (even the ones with unlimited oil money like City) who were willing to pay that money for him.
 
I’d love to see what klopp would be capable of given the mind boggling resources and players Pep’s been gifted at Barca, Bayern, city.

At Barca he inherited all time greats like messi, xavi, iniesta, busquets and then threw money at zlatan, David silva, fabregas, dani alves, mascherano, pique, alexis Sanchez.

At Bayern he inherited heynckes’s unstoppable squad and was given the resources to add the likes of Vidal, lewandowski, Kimmich, Thiago, coman, a peak gotze.

At city, he’s been allowed to spend several hundred million to add to what was already the most expensively assembled squad in the history of the EPL.

He‘s the most financially backed manager in the history of the game (bar perhaps mourinho), and that leaves an asterisk beside all his achievements for me.

True, the counter argument goes that not everyone could achieve what he did with that Barca side even with those players at their disposal, but that’s a false argument. The comparison being made here isn’t between pep and mediocrity like tata martino, but between pep and his competitive peers like klopp.
 
JDoe said:
This is the 2011/12 BVB preferred first XI that went to the CL final btw:

Weidenfeller (free transfer from FCK)
Piszczek (2.5m from Hertha)
Hummels (4m from Bayern II)
Subotic (2.5m from Mainz)
Schmelzer (youth player)
Bender (1.2m from 1860 München)
Gündogan (6.5m from Nürnberg)
Götze (youth player)
Reus (17m from Gladbach)
Kuba (3.5m from Wisla)
Lewa (4.5m from Lech Posen)

Reus was a huge surprise that he actually chose Dortmund above us (Bayern), but he literally was half of that team's total transfer cost (roundabout €40m). And apart from Reus and Götze (youth player), none of those players were very highly rated talents before they came to Dortmund.
Liverpool got skinned for VVD back then. I remember most (myself included) shaking their heads when reading that they would actually pay 70m for a Southampton defender, and the reason why the fee was hugely inflated was 1. Southampton weren't amused by Pool poaching him in the summer 2. Pool just got a huge pile of cash for Coutinho and 3. it was a winter transfer. There was not a single club on earth (even the ones with unlimited oil money like City) who were willing to pay that money for him.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it shouldn't be comparison at all. Klopp worked with lot smaller budget.
 
Hindsight is really a great thing though, right? All those generational talents were there at Barcelona when they didn't win anything for 2years and finished the season 19points behind Madrid.
Even funnier is the fact that you'll hear all those great players talk about the big influence Pep had in their careers and on the game. He came in at Barca, and with the same team, they played mind blowing football and won everything that first season, but hey it was just the case of the players being great right?

All the talk about him only ever succeeding with only generational talents or only buying the best and most expensive players, is only based on hindsight and bs.

There's a reason why every big team will want Pep if he were to City tomorrow. His influence in the way the game is been played is pretty clear to anyone who follows football.

As for Klopp, i personally think he's more confortable in teams that will give him plenty of time, not teams where he'll have to deliver immediately.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
Hindsight is really a great thing though, right? All those generational talents were there at Barcelona when they didn't win anything for 2years and finished the season 19points behind Madrid.
Even funnier is the fact that you'll hear all those great players talk about the big influence Pep had in their careers and on the game. He came in at Barca, and with the same team, they played mind blowing football and won everything that first season, but hey it was just the case of the players being great right?

All the talk about him only ever succeeding with only generational talents or only buying the best and most expensive players, is only based on hindsight and bs.

There's a reason why every big team will want Pep if he were to City tomorrow. His influence in the way the game is been played is pretty clear to anyone who follows football.

As for Klopp, i personally think he's more confortable in teams that will give him plenty of time, not teams where he'll have to deliver immediately.
Click to expand...

Messi is above a generational talent though. He would have been amazing even without Pep as we seen after Pep left. I think the likes of Busquets and Pique did improve a lot due to Pep.
Xavi and Iniesta improved with Pep, but they would have been great without.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
It most definitely does because that same Barcelona team that completely outplayed United, lost to the same United team a year earlier just before Pep arrived.
Funny how the team drastically changed when he arrived, but some of you are still trying so hard to reduce the influence he had on that team.
United didn't just lose to Barca, they were completely outplayed.

Poch never owned Pep despite beating him on few occasions, Klopp on the other hand has on few occasions just like Pep has also owned Klopp.

Talking about Klopp, the way some have chosen to re-write history is very funny. When it comes to Pep, you hear how he had generational talents when he arrived at Barcelona. But Klopp also had players like Reus, Gotze and Gundogan who were also considered huge talents. It also took him 3 years with them to win just like it took him 4years to win with Liverpool (after buying the most expensive GK and defender, as well as Fabinho).
Basically, he only takes projects where he doesn't have to hit the ground running, not high pressure projects where the team is not only expected to win but also expected to play an expansive style of football immediately.
Click to expand...

Messi was a better player in 2009 than he was in 2008. While a lot of it had to do with Guardiola, It also had to do with him staying injury free and evolving. The 2009 Barcelona team was a better team than the 2008 team; conversely, United regressed from 2008.

Beating United (even outplaying them) does not lend credence to your point. Barcelona beat Manchester United because they were a much better football team, with better players.

Meanwhile, Tuchel's Chelsea dominated and outplayed Guardiola's City in the 2021 UCL final despite having a weaker team. It would be much more accurate to describe that as Tuchel owning Guardiola than your description of Guardiola "owning" Ferguson.
 
I think Pep and Klopp are above Tuchel based on achievements and consistency so far. But Klopp vs Pep is so much tougher to call.
 
Paul_Scholes18 said:
Messi is above a generational talent though. He would have been amazing even without Pep as we seen after Pep left. I think the likes of Busquets and Pique did improve a lot due to Pep.
Xavi and Iniesta improved with Pep, but they would have been great without.
Click to expand...
All this is hypothetical and nothing more, the fact though is that they became the great players we all know them to be today, under Pep.
Barca was about to offload Xavi, then Pep came in and built his system around him and then had the idea to play Iniesta alongside him as as a CM (like he did with Silva and KDB) with Busquet behind and the rest was history. He maximized their potential to the fullest.

How many times have we see players with a lot of potential, end up not fully fulfilling those potentials? It's easy to say with hindsight that we always knew a player will be great.

Ladron de redcafe said:
Messi was a better player in 2009 than he was in 2008. While a lot of it had to do with Guardiola, It also had to do with him staying injury free and evolving. The 2009 Barcelona team was a better team than the 2008 team; conversely, United regressed from 2008.

Beating United (even outplaying them) does not lend credence to your point. Barcelona beat Manchester United because they were a much better football team, with better players.

Meanwhile, Tuchel's Chelsea dominated and outplayed Guardiola's City in the 2021 UCL final despite having a weaker team. It would be much more accurate to describe that as Tuchel owning Guardiola than your description of Guardiola "owning" Ferguson.
Click to expand...
And you think Messi remaining fit and also the system put in place to maximize his talent had nothing to do with Pep?

Barca beat Man Utd because they were a better team, but they were a better team because tactically they were better coached.

I don't know what final you watched, but Chelsea definitely didn't dominate City. You don't have to re-write a not so long ago history just to try to make a point. I'm really amazed that you made that comparison.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
All the talk about him only ever succeeding with only generational talents or only buying the best and most expensive players, is only based on hindsight and bs.

As for Klopp, i personally think he's more confortable in teams that will give him plenty of time, not teams where he'll have to deliver immediately.
Click to expand...

Saying Pep needs best squad to win is bs but Klopp only wants team that will give him time and doesn't have pressure to win :lol:

Either both are true or both are bs.
 
footballistic orgasm said:
All this is hypothetical and nothing more, the fact though is that they became the great players we all know them to be today, under Pep.
Barca was about to offload Xavi, then Pep came in and built his system around him and then had the idea to play Iniesta alongside him as as a CM (like he did with Silva and KDB) with Busquet behind and the rest was history. He maximized their potential to the fullest.

How many times have we see players with a lot of potential, end up not fully fulfilling those potentials? It's easy to say with hindsight that we always knew a player will be great.


And you think Messi remaining fit and also the system put in place to maximize his talent had nothing to do with Pep?

Barca beat Man Utd because they were a better team, but they were a better team because tactically they were better coached.

I don't know what final you watched, but Chelsea definitely didn't dominate City. You don't have to re-write a not so long ago history just to try to make a point. I'm really amazed that you made that comparison.
Click to expand...

Xavi and Iniesta won a lot for Spain. They did not just perform under Pep and they won even before Pep Euro 2008.

Messi is a special talent and it is not just Pep making him good.
 
roonster09 said:
Saying Pep needs best squad to win is bs but Klopp only wants team that will give him time and doesn't have pressure to win :lol:

Either both are true or both are bs.
Click to expand...
How so? They're not mutually exclusive things. Barca when Pep arrived was not the best team in Spain (hadn't won anything in 2 years and finished 19points behind Madrid) and Pep went to Dortmund where there was no pressure to win immediately, and after that went to Liverpool where he had time to build.
You can clearly see that both aren't the same thing.

Paul_Scholes18 said:
Xavi and Iniesta won a lot for Spain. They did not just perform under Pep and they won even before Pep Euro 2008.

Messi is a special talent and it is not just Pep making him good.
Click to expand...
What does the fact that they won the Euros before Pep arrived have to do with anything? Italy just won the Euros, so are you suggesting that Chiesa or Jorginho amongst others are world-class players?
Talking about Spain, you can't deny the fact that they imitated Barca's style of play a lot more from 2009 with more Barca players in the team (there were only 3 in 2008), they played differently during the Euros in 2008.

Good thing I never said it was just Pep that made Messi good right?

JJ12 said:
Nothing to do with Iniesta, Xavi, Messi being on Peps team :rolleyes:

Klopp is the best.
Click to expand...
The same team lost to United the year before. The same team also lost some other important games, so how does it work? When they win, it was thanks to the players and when they lose it was Pep's fault?

The idea to play Xavi and Iniesta (just like Silva and KDB) together through the middle had to come from somewhere right? I'm sure you believe just anyone could have come up with those ideas.

Funny how some of you are trying so hard to argue against the opinions of these great players about Pep being a great coach when they actually know better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.