Mourinho is a great manager there's no denying that. Just bcos you manage a rich club with top players doesnt mean it's easy to win trophies. BUT Mourhino is a cheque book manager. To say otherwise is just bare faced bullshit. That doesnt make him **** ffs, it's just his M.O. If he went to Liverpool he'd get them top 4 every season and win domestic trophies but he couldnt win titles or CL struggling to attract the top talent he has at Chelsea.
I'll give you mourinho has an mo... He is a wonder in play 3 years win title merchant. He's not a developer But I reckon he could win titles with lfc but it's not fair to just then say he's just a cheque book manager as frankly he'd have to have a chequebook with huge funds to do it in 3 or 5 years The thing is you can accuse mourinho of it but van gaal just lashed how much at utds problems?? You cannot manage without one and expect to win
everymanager provided with 100mil will spend 100mil. the only exception would be wenger but no he's realised he has to as well. theres not one single manager i know who if you offered a 100mil kitty would not try to get the very best ofr it. Its a moot point for me... the real point i feel is mourinho picks his clubs well. he used his porto job to get the Chelsea one and from there inter in a great position and then real. he's not had a small job since his first one or two cos he's been in demand! so sue him! poor him... many would love his problems... It's like saying oh anchelotti is a bad manager cos when has he had a bad team to rebuild!
That's why I suggested in the first place Pellegrini being the worst. He got an amazing squad of winners and almost limitless funds for transfers and wages, and was within a couple of offside decisions being given wrongly in his favour of being beaten to the title by a Liverpool squad not expected to make top 4. That's worse than Mancini winning it on goal difference since they did actually earn that goal difference with entertaining football.
not really though cos it was his first year not 3rd and he took a little while to convince his team of stars that working as a team was good. they were on two huge long winning runs and were totally awesome at home. they'd have gotten 95 points if bette ron the road in the first 3 months. I don't think that squad is all that amazing though... grinding yes, powerful yes, but not amazing. but i rate cheslea current team much higher now costa and fabregas are there.
Why hasn't Pellegrini improved his squad like Mourinho did? What have Man City got for the £183m Pellegrini spent? Fernandinho is decent. Demichelis is value for £3.5m. None of the £75m he spent on strikers come anywhere near Mancini's Aguero, and barely improve on Dzeko.
FFP....... you think mancini bought those guys really... Pelligrini had a fit aguero.. makes a huge differece, bought navas who is decent, jovetic got injured and the CBs and CMs bought were all needed compared to what was there (lescott, Nastasic, rodwell, garcia, kolo tore etc) all in all city lost 4 of the 6 games they lost in the league in the first 11 they played and all 4 were away games. after that point for the next 26 games they drew 4 times and lost only twice... sorry but that is awesome form. one of thsoe two loses was away to us in a 3-2 that they could have won... amazing day. they bought fernandinho who strengthened their midfield brilliantly and replace barry who was gone in the legs (look at his fat belly now) Navas who added real pace and width Negredo was a failure and is now on loan fine but he got 23 goals, 9 in league for them. 5 in cl! Jovetic was unlucky with injury but is a good player. again he's being replaced with bony now.. he replaced santa cruz who was in the wilderness. Dimicheleis i still don't like much but he got better as season went on and team settled. Only decent but better than lescott surely! this year fernando has added more defenisve power to CM area. They cna pair the two DCMs now, garica left. good move that Caballero is on bench not pantillimon who wanted to go.. frank lampard is in for year and has socred a couple as a bit part Managla came in too. Not great so far but a player of repute. sagna on a free So all in all... of course their squad has improved. Lots of money to toss about but ffp has kicked in and stopped it for a bit All in all..... Pelligrini is a guy who tries to attack well but has the tactics to defend. his teams get a lot of goals and the evidence is in the results.
ah.... and Chelsea have not built their team over ten years and spent the profits of lukaus etc? c'mon. a whole 5 points when they cuaght up to them and had have just "slipped up" a tiny bit. I clearly showed their form last year. they were phenomenal for most of the year once the team played the way he wanted. a good proportion of signings made have helped them and even if only as good as the last bloke like negredo v ddezko still socred a decent amount. If i'm judging pelligrini on his title win season I have to say once more it was his first season, they were always in it, jut the 4 away day bad results before they got the message and then they flew. and i'm not going to degrade our great run either as you said... a side not expect to finihs 4th.. thats irrelevant as our form put us up there to be beaten and they did do it. mancini is by far the worst manager of the lot.
Yeh you can look at it like that up to a point, and I'll even accept a manager given £100m wont turn their nose up at it. But when I call him a cheque book manager I mean he solves ALL his problems that way. He doesnt bring through the youth system unless it's to sell them on. That demonstrates a limitation in him, no matter how you look at it. I'd go as far as to say a cheque book manager doesnt have much affinity for the sport, but sees things as a means to end...to win in the quickest way possible. And his pragmatic approach to football on the pitch also typifies that...a means to an end. Btw I'm not saying he's ****. I did say earlier that simply having the best players doesnt mean it's easy to win trophies and I consider him a great manager for what he's achieved. But lets not cloud what he is.
All valid points, but his record in Portugal suggests that he can do it on a more limited budget as well. I must admit, this completely passed me by: Mourinho would prefer Liverpool 12:01AM BST 23 Apr 2004 Chelsea's new managerial target, Jose Mourinho, has expressed his reservations about taking over at the richest club in the world and admitted that a side such as Liverpool would be better for fulfilling his ambitions of working in the Premiership. The Porto coach was at the centre of a surprise approach by Chelsea's billionaire owner, Roman Abramovich, and his chief executive, Peter Kenyon, this week but has said that he feels the huge investment in the club makes it an "uncertain project". The 41-year-old is known to prefer taking on the challenge of Liverpool, where he would be seen as the man to lead them back to former glories, much like Sir Alex Ferguson when he took over at Manchester United in November 1986. Mourinho said: "Liverpool are a team that interests everyone and Chelsea does not interest me so much because it is a new project with lots of money invested in it. I think it is a project which, if the club fail to win everything, then Abramovich could retire and take the money out of the club. It's an uncertain project. "It is interesting for a coach to have the money to hire quality players but you never know if a project like this will bring success." The comments by Mourinho were made in an interview in Portugal two months ago but the coach, whose Porto side drew 0-0 with Deportivo La Coruna in the Champions League semi-final first leg on Wednesday, was reluctant to discuss his future this week. Asked about an approach from Chelsea, Mourinho said: "I'm interested in getting to the final, in winning our next league match and being Portuguese champions - then beating La Coruna. Are Chelsea interested in me?" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/2377496/Mourinho-would-prefer-Liverpool.html
I think his Porto record shows he's a winner. UEFA cup and then CL is a fantastic achievement. But in the modern game very few are judged until they manage a big club. Would Rafa be remembered if he'd stayed at Valencia?? Fergie if he'd stayed at Aberdeen? It's really when they get to the big clubs we look at how they conduct themselves and the manner of their success. Interesting article btw, not seen it before. For all his bollox he still went there though didnt he lol
Was the amount of 0's on the contract most likely. Also, which manager wouldnt like the funds to completely build their own team in their own image?
I guess we'll never know. It would presumably depend on what success they would have had, and if they could have made them a big club. Could Benitez have made Valencia a big club if he'd stayed? Maybe, but unlikely given the money that Real and Barca get. Almost certain the Fergie couldn't have made Aberdeen a big club.
