Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-greatest-British-managers.html#ixzz2psxq8Kqa Got me thinking as to why he isn't the best manager ever: Paisley 3 European cups in 9 years versus Fergies 2 in 27 years. Even Clough's 2 European titles stand up against Fergies. Paisley won the league 6 times in 9 years or every 1.5 years. Ferguson's stats are over every 2 years. Shankley & Paisley left a boot room, a succession plan that didn't disappear until over a decade after Paisley's retirement. Ferguson left Utd David Moyes and an aging team. Indeed, his last major signing (RVP) wasn't one for the future, it was more a last hoorah to establish his legacy. Ferguson was successful and was a winner, no doubt, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he is the best manager of all time.....Unless you count longevity as a stat. We measure strikers in goals per game, defenders by goals conceded, midfielders by assists and passes completed. Using simple stats, it is clear that one manager stands out amongst the crowd of (very good) managers. Arise 'sir' Bob
do you know even though he deserved it i am glad in a way he hasn't been given a title as everyone can see its a a farce, but the biggest farce is half the people now days who have been made sirs, so i prefer to remember bob as an ordinary man and down to earth nice bloke who didn't need false knighthoods to make him special.
sorry but no. coe to me on lets park the bias and recognise that anyone from the outside will see that ferguson did it himself from scratch and nobody can say paisely did that even though he total rebuilt our side in the middle of it. Ferguson handed off a team and a staff that utd chose to a) over train b) replace all staff. best thing shanks did was retain his back room staff, and that passed down.. all utds was thrown out with the new man. longevity is a stat btw.. to do it over 20 years and build several different winning sides is huge... ferguson is best. paisley for me follows as i the early 80s he rebuilt his side and won euro cup again.
oh but i will say this... the guy putting matt busby 2nd is way too much bias from him. busby shouldn't be second... period. great manager but no way. and as for don revie over clough.. joke.
We can agree to disagree Paisley's record in his 9 years versus any 9 year period for AF is far superior.
well that cannot be denied. A fabulous 9 years no question. "Sir" Bob did a great job, signed dalglish and never put a foot really wrong. he also had a huge rival in clough for a while. ferguson has seen off all comers and delivered a huge amount of titles... i guess I would put Paisley no 2 without question and cannot believe busby is even top 3. I think the majority non associated with either club would vote that way.
A particularly useless piece of filling by Powell. Not one claim is substantiated by comparative data and therefore his tables are useless. Having said that, all such comparators are doomed to failure as there is no possible way of ranking the relative values of the factors that influenced/effected the managerial performances.
You're probably right. Most people have forgotten Paisley and his 20 trophies in 9 years and for that reason, they'd put Fergie at the top. I wouldn't. Not out of bias, AF was a relentless winner and a great manager. But I believe that his last team was on it's last legs....built to serve his own ego with very little planning for the future. Truly great leaders leave something in place. Moyes is Fergies choice of successor, there is no doubt about that....and the team he left. Champions, yes, but aging ones with cracks visible to all and only champions because of Fergie himself. Paisley left a team and structure to ensure a decade of success. My top 3 are Paisley, Fergie & Clough in that order.
I agree with this It is hard to compare the then and now. Paisley's record is magnificent and for the length of his reign, never bettered, all home grown. fergie has had the best players in the world to choose from, like Mourinho, so at times despite the home grown spine, utd's team could easily be a world XI - who's going to challenge that successfully. Paisley won on a level playing field.
I think we can certianly agree ferguson left a team that was weak... not sure about last legs but.. well ferdinand and vidic.. clevelry and carrick as the spine? not good. jones smalling, evans are not replacements that are even close to as good. Aging in parts (at the back for sure) but it does have rvp and rooney (though ferguson did his damnest to get rooney out) I think utd's "decline" is more about too many changes at the top and back room including chief executive and not enough movement in the market last summer. they needed to buy more than felliandonkey.. 2 more players last summer and a proper back room transition and we'd not be saying it.
But you led the great 11, back in Rome in '77 Difficult to compare eras but Paisley has those three European cups, that's unbeaten.
Read this? http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2014/jan/08/david-moyes-alex-ferguson-manchester-united
i'd not necessarily disagree with a word of that. utd have the money to buy their way back... the thing is as an lfc fan for all of our "bad times" i know utd fans were the first to boast about they actually spent less than us.. in other words we wasted all our cash playing that buying game. the reality of utd is i can out o nthe fingers of one hand the "top top" players who moved there but city and chelsea have a huge amount of those. yaya, aguero and the like. UTd bought on the up or lesser names under ferguson. they never imported stars so... can they draw them?
Moyes biggest mistake was the clean sweep of backroom staff - who does that? Arrogant imo - he needed to find his feet first, then start wholesale changes if he felt it necessary after a breaking in period. One thing for sure, he won't be on any 'greatest managers' list [except maybe at Everton].
Thing is, Liverpool fans often debate who was the better of Shanks and Paisley. Shanks built the club up and got us on the map so to speak. Paisley built on that platform to get a success record second to none. Although neither really match up in a direct comparison, Fergie did both those roles in one sitting.
Generally agree with that but we do the same and always have done to the same extent. What I mean by that is we both still buy the occasional star. Torres and Suarez weren't exactly unknowns despite having room for improvement. Same can be said for Rio, RvN, A.Cole,even Rooney! They spent big when needed to but rarely took something on at that level that was high risk. Veron is the exception. Fergie's main flops come from the next bracket down; the medium price range that is a little riskier - Anderson, Nani, Kleberson, etc
fergie had the luxury of time to do it though, not many managers, if any, have been given that. Also. although Shankly built the platform, there was no guarantee that Paisley would succeed, he did it by his own skill and talent as an excellent manager in his own right. He benefitted from the stable foundation but the results he got were all his own work.
