Jose Sack Watch

... tell that to the Glazers

 

For me, no manager sets up his team and plays what's in front of him more than Mourinho. No other manager studies the opposition in such depth as he does, He then picks and sets up his team to counter what he perceives as the opposition's strengths and to attack their weaknesses. You may think that that's the job of any manager, but nobody I can think of does it to the degree that Maureen does.

Some might say that's reactive rather than proactive football, but it seems to work for him ( most of the time, anyway)

 

In every match???
Generally I find his teams effective and good but as a neutral would not be excited or wowed by the football they played. My original post was about the criticism of LVG not playing the type of exciting football united were known for under ferguson...and imo they will get winning football but it will not be particularly exciting.

 

Why is he Judas? You guys sacked him (twice!), surely that absolves him of the accusation of being a Judas? Did you expect him to retire cause Chelsea didn't want him?

 

I aint slagging the bloke off...he is clearly a quality manager who knows how to win but I have not found his teams entertaining to watch as a neutral apart from the first half of last season(as I said in a previous post).
I did not find his inter, RM or porto teams entertaining...I found them effective (to various degrees)
His approach is that he will concede fewer goals than the opposition. .. entertainment revolves around an approach that you will score more than the opposition. United fans were brought up this as it was how Ferguson got his teams to play.
I have no issue with his approach and wouldn't give a toss if we won titles doing what JM did with his teams...but as a neutral I don't find it entertaining

 

... think you could have summarised more succinctly ... I think what you are trying to say is that Jose Mourinho is just a **** Ranieri ? and who could possibly disagree?

 

I wouldn't pay too much attention.

This is a guy who turned on Jose after about 10 games last season, started a '**** off Jose' thread and has the cheek to throw around the term 'Judas'.

Beggars belief.

 

I think we may have found IQ87! Cunningly disguised as a Chelsea fan!..

 

I'm genuinely interested to know how his football at Real Madrid was not considered entertaining? What part of their attacking play could be considered any less entertaining than what you've seen at Spurs this season? And is it the case that his reputation precedes him - what I mean is, had a different manager, managed the Real Madrid side in exactly the same way, would he be considered as unentertaining?

Just to put it in context, Real Madrid under Capello a few years earlier were boring. A functional side heavily focused around their defence. But anyone watching that period and then Mourinho's period can see a complete difference between the two styles.

 

It's easy when you have players like Ronaldo and Kaka and your team (as inherited) is streets ahead of every team bar one. La Liga is essentially a shoot out between 2, now 3, teams. Give the ball to Ronaldo doesn't make you an attacking coach.

 

... now don't be sad Treble ... you need to separate the purely objective from the posts that have a hint of something extra ...

I can help because, as a supporter of the EPL title winners, I can look down from my lofty perch with complete objectivity (perhaps even a little disdain) at the antics and machnations of those below ...

I see the Mourinho to United dicotomy like this:-

United were right royaly spoilt under SAF - in that he brought in players like Cantona, Horsey van Horseyface, Kanchelskis, Ronaldo et al whilst also giving talented youth a chance - SAF didn't worry too much about what the opposition was going to do - he left it to the opposition to worry about what his team would do - and his team was always set up to attack first and score goals.

Jose Mourinho is a different animal - meticulous in planning with the emphasis on first neutralising any threats the opposition might pose and having done that going on to win games using the atributes of his own side. Ranieri brought Terry through and bought Lampard - Mourinho is more inclined to want to buy the finished product to fit in with his strategy. Mourinho's sides are capable of playing very attractive football at times but it is about the emphasis - don't expect open attacking end to end games (he'd hate that) - but do expect some showboating once any threat to the game's outcome is beyond doubt.

Plato

 

I wouldn't normally do this, but it's dichotomy!

 

... yes I know ... but I purposefully wrote 'dic' as the reference was to Jose Mourinho ... honest!

 

Nice swerve!...

 

... plenty of back-spin

 

I think what is frustrating sometime with Jose, is the seeming lack of belief in his own team's ability to do more than get a 0-0 or nick a 1-0 against rival teams.

Jose is not inherently a defensive coach, and we often played decent attacking football under him during his 2 spells with us.

But come up against a City, United, Spurs, Arsenal etc, he'd often play to counter the strengths of the opposition rather than play to his own team's strengths. He did this against about 6-7 teams in the league and especially away from home (though often at home as well) so it was a fairly large % of the games over the course of the season. Add this to pretty much all C.L knock out games as well. These are the games most neutrals watch, so that's the impression they are left with.

Meticulous planning, yes. Gets results often, yes. Frustrating to watch City batter us for 80 out of the 90 minutes and draw 0-0 or 1-1. Yes.

One of the best games we had under Jose is when we went to the Etihad and won 1-0 but attacked them and could have won by more. We were by far the better team that day yet we never set up that way against them or other top sides again.

It'll be interesting what he does at United. He gave us success we had never known so got away with a lot. He won't get that grace at United in the long run. They won't stand for playing defensive at home to City and Liverpool and trying to win 1-0.

 

That sounds very plausible, based on what I've seen. You were often too good to adopt the tactics Jose did. Way too cautious.

 

That City game we won 1-0,i thought we were fantastic and could of won by much more.
I think that season Jose allowed the players to play as they wanted.That was great until the Spurs game.
After that Jose played a more defensive game.For me that was the start of his downfall with our
group of players who i feel wanted to play "THEIR" game.

 

Exactly. Is it really a surprise that the likes of Fabregas, Hazard and Costa have not performed as well since those first few month in our title winning season?

 

I cant understand why Jose would do that, maybe let them try it out in a game or two, but to be persistent in doing it is strange