Why are you online then? And why has Saffa not beaten a really good football team in Europe after 30 years of trying?
On my iphone, emails have to be checked and holidays have to be paid for! People do have holidays Mini-Chav! Surely your parents take you to the seaside occasionally?! Maybe King Ossie could chaperone you on a trip to Bognor next summer! Sir Alex has only beaten **** teams so he's lucky to have won all those trophies. Jose only beats great teams so he's unlucky to be trailing Barca by so many points again. Rafa is a great manager who is unlucky that he takes teams backwards. Funny old game but it's worked out for me!
Pray tell, which three £30m signings were those? I assume you're referring to Rio, who was suspended for the Porto match, Rooney, who we hadn't signed then, and Veron, who we'd sold to Chelsea If you had any knowledge of football, you'd know the side we put out for the second leg against Porto cost a grand total of £25 million, and contained only three players we'd bought - Howard, D-D, and RVN. And even then the mighty Maureen needed the linesman's help to win... You could ask the same question about anyone. Could Mourinho do what he has done if he took over a team in the relegation zone with a culture of heavy drinking and minimal backing from the board of directors? Or, for that matter, if he had ever taken over a team that wasn't one of the top two in their country at the time and with the highest budget? Could Paisley have done what he did if he'd inherited a Liverpool side that weren't the best in England at the time, and in a period when many other European leagues were in a period of decline? Could Michels have invented Total Football and / or had any success with the concept if he hadn't been so lucky as to have joined Ajax at the same time as Johan Cruyff? Would Guardiola have won anything if he hadn't inherited a side containing Messi, Iniesta and Xavi? All pointless questions that we'll never know the answer to. As for your last comment, has anyone ever won La Liga, Serie A and the Bundesliga three years on the spin with three different teams? And if so, how good were the sides they inherited?
I'm not sure about the last bit. Was meant to be hypatheoretical. Ill look into it though as that is some real pub ammo right there! The point I was making though us that players that don't make the transfer to other clubs, large or small, do not get the same recognition as those that do. Maradonna for example made plenty of switches and brought about a revival for the Napoli team (I think it was them) that no one saw coming. Messi gets abuse like no tomorrow because he can't perform like he does for Barca in the national team. Again nobody denies the achievements of someone who has done it all with one club but people respect those that have done it multiple times over with different variables more.
I dunno if that's right for everyone. Maradonna gets the plaudits cos he moved to Napoli, who were a bag of nails fighting relegation, then led them to two league titles and a UEFA Cup. But Ibrahimovic has also moved around a lot, and won the league with every team he's joined - he doesn't always get the plaudits cos he almost invariably joins the best team in every league. If there was a manager who had joined a load of mid table teams and led them to titles then I think they'd undoubtedly be the best manager of all time, but I don't think there is. Instead you have managers like SAF, Clough, Shankly and Michels who join clubs that are not particularly successful at the time and lead them to greatness over a period of time, or managers like Mourinho, Paisley, Guardiola and Capello who join already successful teams and take them up to another level of success. Those managers don't always succeed in the other environment - Clough bombed when he took over an already successful side at Leeds and couldn't force his own will onto the players, and Capello bombed when he took over a **** England side and didn't have the resources he needed to work with. So it's probably fair to say SAF couldn't do what Mourinho has done, in terms of getting so much success over such a short period of time, but also fair to say Mourinho couldn't do what SAF has done, in terms of ensuring long term success at a club that hasn't always given him the resources and support to match other clubs in the same division.
How can you guys not include Bill Nicholson in your lists. The 60s team he built at Spurs was one of the greatest ever, taking us from a struggling team in the late 50's (10-4 win over Everton for his first game) to one of the greatest in a few short years. Easily one of the top 5 managers of all time. Only anti spurs blinkers would keep him out.
1st double, FA Cup in successive years, Semi Final of European Cup, first European title. Yeah you're right he was ****.
Not sure he's defintiely top 10 but he's certainly close in my opinion. That was some team he put together at the time.
Oh poor fergie hasn't had the support and resources to match other clubs. Boo hoo. He's had the second or third best resources in the prem most of the time plus 20 years stability to build a truly great European cup Winning side. Wenger does not moan about lack of resources but has produced a team 03/4 better than anything Saffa produced
And with second or third best resources he has built the best team. Only English club to win the CL and PL in the same season, and he did it twice, with only the second or third best resources. You've made my argument for me, thanks!
Love him or hate him any man who has been at the helm of one of the biggest club in football for 26 years must be doing something right! Personally I have him as the best not just because of the susatined success but also because of the style of football. Maybe it's not THE best in the country but United are always entertaining to watch and at their best absolutely lethal.
There's always going to be a great degree of bias when it comes down to this. The fact is Sir Alex Ferguson completely turned United around (albeit with huge fortune outside of his control) from midtable stragglers to a dominant force in the UK. He is the reason today that United fans can even have bragging rights over Liverpool. Before then United were a subject of ridicule in Merseyside. Even Everton were more successful. Bill Nicholson built the principles of which Spurs still try (albeit fail) to live up to today, that double winning side played the most stylish football of that era. British players but with a continental style, to take a club like Spurs to those levels is a fantastic achievement which shouldn't be underestimated. Mourinho similar, before he came along we were a club with a winner's wallet but a loser's mentality. Ranieri simply couldn't shake off te jinx which has haunted this club for years, Mourinho not only made the players believe they were winners but the fans alike. Tactically he also completely revolutionised football. Up until Jose came along teams were renowned for playing a rigid 4-4-2. All the know it alls called him crazy for going with a 4-3-3 but it worked, we blew everybody off the park and but for a fluke and Calamity James having his best performance we'd have repeated the Invincibles but gone a step further. The achievements of Clough, Revie, Nicholson just because they didn't manage one of the bigger clubs shouldn't go unnoticed.
Is that a joke? I was mainly talking to CPofL KTBFFH, who is rabidly anti Spurs. However many of the posters on here don't post objectively when it comes to Spurs (as I probably don't when talking about Chelsea). Therefore they are anti Spurs. Unless you were joking, I am quite shocked at what you've said there.
This. Everyone is likely to think their own manager or managers have been amongst the best ever, and everyone will try to denigrate the achievements of managers of the clubs they hate. But then that was ultimately the whole point of this thread in the first place, wasn't it DL?
