Actually I'm a West Ham fan, not a Chelsea fan so I don't have a biased view at all, I just think Mourinho's record as a coach speaks for itself, that's why he's been ranked in the top 3 of the FIFA world coaches every year they've had it. I'm not saying Wenger isn't world class which is why I said this first
Generally speaking Mourinho has under-performed as many years than he has over-performed lately. Since Porto he has always coached the team with the highest spending in the league they are competing in. By rights, he should have won every single year. 2003 Win Porto 2004 Win Porto 2005 Win Chelsea 2006 Win Chelsea 2007 Failure 2008 Win Inter 2009 Win Inter 2010 Failure 2011 Win Real 2012 Failure On the other hand we have Wenger who has kept Arsenal in the top 4 despite a transfer budget that would indicate that just staving off relegation was a success. Yes, Arsenal's wage bill was big, but he still had to find the players; no E'to or Ibrahimovic for him! So I think saying Mourinho's record is "Speaking for itself", has to be taken in the context that, with the amount of money being spent, he was damn well expected to win, anything else apart from one of the top 2 trophies was a miserable failure. The fact that he was sacked (or left) immediately after he didn't win, sort of proves that. The owners of the club expected their 100s of millions to build a dynasty, not provide a single year of dominance. So for me, I think Wenger is the Messi and Mourinho is the Fabregas in the analogy.
Do you think Wenger would still have a job at Arsenal if he came in 2005 and performed in the same way? Because I don't. Believe me, I don't discredit Wenger, I think what he's done at Arsenal in general has been top class. Do you think what he's done over the past 8 years (making top four) is the substance of a world class coach? Arsenal are on of the biggest clubs in the world and should be winning trophies, not just making top four. I also think the fact a large portion of your fan base want Wenger to move on, speaks volumes to me. p.s. Jose won the FA Cup and League cup in 2007, how is that a failure? He also won the treble with Inter in 2010. Only year he failed in was last season with Madrid and that was the first time since 2003 without a trophy. Your point about wages is strange too, you can still find brilliant cheap players (i.e. Cazorla) for high wages. You could have a team of free transfers on 100k p/w.
The only reason Arsenal are one of the biggest clubs in the world, now, is because of Wenger. In 1999 we were not significantly bigger than a dozen other clubs all trailing Manchester United. If Chelsea and Manchester City had not benefitted from oil money, it would still be just United and Arsenal at the top. I think Mourinho is an excellent manager, don't get me wrong, but he would never have come to Arsenal to build them, or Liverpool or any other club. He will get the job done, but every trophy he has won, his team have been clear favorites to win, due to their financial muscle, just he same as every trophy he has lost. As for wages being significant, Arsenal havn't been paying the highest wages either. Love to see a comparison of Giroud and Torres' salaries!
Not disagreeing with Wenger enhancing Arsenal's stature, however does that make him exempt over the past 8 years? As for the oil money comment, that's no excuse. Arsenal are one of the richest clubs in the world and it's their own decision to buy how they do. I just don't see why longevity is the hallmark of being a great manager? Surely having to switch squads every few years and still win major honours is equally as challenging? Even with the money. I think Madrid have proven that spending billions doesn't always secure trophies, it's also the way the players are managed and the type of play that is bought. I also didn't say Arsenal pay the highest wages, twisting my words there, just saying paying low transfer fees doesn't mean you're getting a lower quality of player and you can still afford to pay them generously. Cazorla a very good example.
When Mourinho retires he will have won more major trophies that any manager in history. People remember winners.
Arsenal have some money but are an awfully long way from Chelsea or Manchester City's bottomless coffers. You are completely insane if you think Arsenal are "One of the richest clubs in the world" in terms of money to spend. This myth that Wenger and the board are sitting on a pile of gold cackling maniacally, rubbing their hands together in glee, not spending the money out of spite. As for the fact that we got Cazorla; the only reason we got him is because nobody else wanted him. Are you seriously saying that if a club like Chelsea had wanted him, that they couldn't compete with Arsenal due to lack of money? That is bollocks! We can't even pay enough to retain players we have already got, like Nasri and RVP. A player only joins Arsenal after all the richer clubs (there are about a dozen of them) have rejected the player. This is fairly usual stuff from the Chelsea and Manchester City crowd I am afraid. Given how much the two clubs spend every year to buy the titles, your teams are complete failures if they fail to win. Your clubs are cynical and soulless. I respect Mourinho as a manager because he is good tactically, but as far as player management or acquisition are concerned, he doesn't get any credit from me at all.
You're still not comprehending my argument. I have not once stated Arsenal were in a position to compete with Chelsea/City or the like in terms of transfer fees, simply that they are one of the richest clubs in the world, which they are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes'_list_of_the_most_valuable_football_clubs Missed my point on Cazorla too, you got him fairly cheap due to Malaga's money troubles and I'm fairly certain his wages won't be on the small side which backs my point that you don't necessarily have to spend big to get high paid top quality players. You could easily have paid Nasri/Fabregas the wages they wanted, but THEY wanted to leave. What usual stuff is that then? I'm answering your points, to which you've twisted every answer I've given. p.s. for the bit in bold, laughable. Check out some comments from his former players about how much they loved playing under Mourinho. Acquisition, fair enough, but Arsene even seems to be slipping up in this area now too.
I too found that bit in bold laughable, considering how many players begged him to buy them again when he'd moved clubs, I think his man management is one of his best traits, if a player isn't going to fit in and is a bit of a prima donna (Gallas, Robben 2 great examples) they're moved off quickly, this was the problem at RM with so many ego's having the ears of those sitting above JM and thinking of themselves before the team, if he'd been allowed to move a few more on he'd've done a better job imo.
I give you that, give me a cookie point, I said I believe at man management-motivation I give Mo the edge, give me a point now.
Spot on Miggins . Again, not even criticising Wenger's player management, just don't see how someone can berate Mourinho's! Strange fella aren't you?
That's exactly what the pro-Mourinho Madrid fans were saying. Madrid are unmanageable, Mourinho tried to change the structure of the club but they weren't ready for it. Had Perez not had presidential elections then he could have taken the risk and sided with Mourinho instead of the troublemaking players in the camp.
Completely subjective. Your idea of under-performing isn't necessarily general consensus. It's a matter of opinion. I believe Chelsea underachieved last year despite winning the Europa League. That may not necessarily reflect the view of somebody els and nor should it.
