It wasn't all about what Shanks won, it was more about him building the foundations for future success at the club(which was his legacy to Paisley, ***an and Dalglish)
Sorry if my post mislead, wasn't trying to make any comparison, just saying the title "best" manager is subjective. Were Ferguson and Shankly to swap places would they have faired any different? Anyway, I digress. Ferguson, whether the best manager football has ever seen or not, will rightly go down as a legend and I doubt his success will ever be repeated.
hhhh .. he needed 15 years to build a foundation .. look to how much Sir Alex needed to build a successful team that easily broken the records and erased all work done by Shankly ( if we even agree on your statement at the first place to discredit all work done by Bob Paisley later on and claiming is Shankly work) so advantage Sir Alex ... Shankly not even close name another
I was brought up in Aberdeen and saw him appointed and move on shortly after I moved to England. He was fantastic at Aberdeen and brought a winning mentality and belief that Aberdeen could be the best in Europe. It's incredible to think that now and of course football has changed a lot since those days. In Aberdeen then we felt quite close to the players and Alex himself lived by my old school. I would often see him about in his old Estate car with his kids. When he went to Man Utd I really hoped that he would do well and I remember well that game against Oxford Utd when thing were not going well. Somehow I felt the anguish myself personally. On moving to London I had to find a new team to support and I have to admit pondering on Man Utd but even with Sir Alex I could not quite do it. I am so pleased for him that he has achieved so much. He is a great Manager - the very best manager, and it is certainly the end of a great era.
Shwan you're as thick as an eskimos fur coat lad, Shankly took us from the 2nd division to being champions of England within 4yrs, on becoming manager he demanded that the club rebuild the training ground and it's facilities, he also got the club owners to refurbish the club from top to bottom, he brought a winning mentality to a 2nd division club that brought us many trophies and titles thanks to the work he did and the legacy he left. Bob Paisley wouldn't have been in a position to win **** all if it wasn't for Shankly, he was Shankly's number two ya thick twat. Not once have i said he won more than Fergie, i merely stated that his lasting legacy was as important to Liverpool FC as the trophies he won.
1- don't insult bcz it is a sign of someone losing an argument 2- so what !! Brian Clough took less than that to take Nottingham from 2nd div to champions of england and then champions of Europe !! 3- i was not replying to you .. so care less of what you said before .. don't get why you talk it when i was not addressing you 4- Sir Alex managed to keep UTD successful facing 2 mega spending clubs like City and Chelsea, that was a challenge non of Liverpool managers had .. and doubt your managers would had survived it 5- alike the managers you are mentioning guys, Sir Alex had build 3 successful sides .. 6- Shankly was average at many other clubs he managed prior to Liverpool .. that is not Sir Aelx case .. Shankly is a One-trick pony
Grow the **** up Shwan. As for your point about Cloughie, his achievements at Forest were magnificent but he never left a lasting legacy for his successors to build on(Shankly did), the foundations Fergie has left at OT will be gone in no time under the wrong manager, which is why he nominated someone(Moyes)who knows and trusts that will keep things as they are throughout the club for stability and future success. Your argument over which manager has won the most is daft, real Utd supporters are more concerned with the clubs future and if Moyes is the best choice.
you grow up !! you are the one insulting not me !! i forget to add 4th & 5th & 6th points 4- Sir Alex managed to keep UTD successful facing 2 mega spending clubs like City and Chelsea, that was a challenge non of Liverpool managers had .. and doubt your managers would had survived it 5- alike the managers you are mentioning guys, Sir Alex had build 3 successful sides .. 6- Shankly was average at many other clubs he managed prior to Liverpool .. that is not Sir Aelx case .. Shankly is a One-trick pony is unbelievable you guys denying him the credit he deserve as the best manager in history of football
Who's denying Fergie credit for his suberb career at OT?, you are dissing the likes of Shankly to score brownie points instead of looking beyond trophy wins and considering all aspects. But whatever child, enjoy your spunkfest.
Ahhhhh, I understand. I apologise mate, I didn't realise you were a ****wit. Your argument over what they achieved would only back up what I said, SAF is definatley the most successful. I never said Shankly was better than SAF I clearly said, twice in fact, that it is hard to argue who is the best manager because everyone has operated under different circumstances. I don't want to start a who is better than who, it will never be resolved.
Two things have to be taken into consideration when comparisons are made. 1) The way gate receipts distribution was changed in the mid 80's 2)Sky money Before the change of 1) there was greater competition when teams like Ipswich, Derby, Notts Forest and even Everton could win the league. Now, SAF has competition from at the very most 4 teams and only because 2 of those clubs have sugar daddies as had Blackburn in the past. In other words it is impossible to compare the achievements of Shankly, Clough etc with Ferguson because of changed conditions.
It is, and aside from trophies won it's subjective and a matter of opinion. It's not in dispute though that when the greatest British managers ever are mentioned the names Ferguson, Busby, Paisley, Shankly, Clough and Stein will always be mentioned and quite rightly. I know the two I reckon are the best, without question, but it's my opinion and a pissing contest with our scouse pals would be boring.
Very true. Although as you rightly point out the rise of the sugar daddies has meant that competition is still as strong even if it is more concentrated. Also worth noting that the same thing has also happened in Europe, with the big clubs dominating gate receipts and media income. That's led to the same clubs winning their respective leagues and challenging in Europe every year so it has also made it much competitive in Europe. You forgot Herbert Chapman, but other than that I agree completely. I think the one area in which SAF will always hold the edge is his 16 domestic titles. Only Stein with 10 and I think there was a manager in the USSR who won 13 even come close to that. Mourinho has 15-20 years to win another 9 and Guardiola 25-30 years to win another 13, but other than those two I can't see anyone coming close to 16 for a long while, if ever.
waw .. a jesus that swears yes best manager is a subjective issue, every fan rate higher their managers than others and can give you tons of excuses why they couldn't match Sir Alex record .. so no point to argue about it from that angle but in terms of achievements, no one can match what Sir Alex did .. and this is the only subjective measurable tool available .. so don't blame us if we said he is the best manager in history of football ..
