Jose Mourinho is so overrated

[curtis290]

Every club he has been at has won Silverware. Not exactly overrated. His tactics are criticized by Spanish journalists, but he is a wonderful manager. Mourinho had to put up with Abramovich's buys at Chelski(Schevchenko, Ballack), in a similar way to Ancelotti, who is expected to play Torres because of his price tag. Chelsea will never win the Champions League until Abramovich stops interfering in their transfers.

Mourinho is a world-class manager. And I hate Real Madrid, Inter, Chelsea with a passion.

Along with having to put up with Abramovic's buys he was able to use that money to build a fantasy team (and it's not like he used Sheva). I think many other managers would have had success at Chelsea.

@The point you make about how Madrid play so defensively against Barca - The Madrid fans generally accept now that that's how you play against Barcelona. What other style of play is more effective against Barca than the one Mourinho adopts? Mourinho operated more offensively in the 5-0 defeat earlier in the season, look what happened there. Jose thought with the players at his disposal he could match Barca but that wasn't the case, we are talking about arguably the best team ever. You can attack Barca and win, sure. Hercules did it earlier in the season and Real Betis also beat them in the Copa del Rey (Barca did rest some of their stars though). If you play attacking vs the current Barca you will probably beat them 1/10 times, the other 9 resulting in what happened to Madrid earlier in the season.

I would love it if Madrid came out tonight and just go at Barca, Jose said he will do it but I doubt he will. We will see how Jose intends to play when we see the line up, and if Pepe is starting in the Alonso role.

Other than that, you have some good points in the OP but completely dismiss and 'forget' about some of his other achievements (Some mentioned above). Jose isn't the best ever, that would be overrating him, but he's certaintly one of the best at the moment.

But the thing is that Madrid has the firepower to go toe to toe with Barca. They didn't last season, but they didn't sit back in a shell. Sure, they lost, but not by too much, and with the new players they have this season I don't see why they can't go out and play in a similar style. They tried to and got beat 5-0, but to me that only shows Jose's ineptitude: he can't win if he's not playing boring, hypertactical, super-defensive football. Their last match they only had 20% possession. Sure they played better, but they didn't play like Galacticos, they played like Chelsea or Inter would. That's everything Valdano stands against and he must be furious. This team wasn't put together to play defense and grind out results, it was put together to entertain, to be one of the teams that people would like back on in history and want to watch, just like the first set of galacticos. Instead they're playing Mourinho ball. It wouldn't surprise me too much if they did the double, and their fans would be happy, but it would be a shame that they did it selling out on their principles. If I were a R. Madrid fan I'd hate having Jose as the manager. I'd way rather have Pellegrini, Del Bosque, Van Gaal, etc.

Like JDY says, you try and play attacking against Barca, and you will be mauled. I have seen it this season. Barca's big wins(4 goals plus) were all against attacking sides. You need to play defensive against them, even Pep Guardiola says Barca are useless without the ball.

If Barca is useless without the ball than why not shoot for more than 20% possession? I don't think you'll get mauled if you play offensively against them, Real Madrid's team is more talented and they should be able to do that. They tried it last season and they lost but it was relatively close, if Pellegrini had this set of players I bet he could get a draw at the Bernabeu with 45% possession and a lot of good, entertaining play. Real Madrid was the better team on Sunday but in the words of Valdano, it was "**** on a stick." It's very rare that you see them play so ugly and defensively, and it's totally against what Real Madrid is about.

But the invincible season was a remarkable and magnificent achievement. But then so is a 9 year home unbeaten record? I would argue it's a greater achievement for Mourinho, than an invincible season is for Wenger; since Mourinho is the only constant throughout those 9 years. Wenger certainly did an excellent job, but he had the same excellent team for the whole time.

And I don't think Wenger would ever go to Inter, spend big and win some trophies. It's not his style, and is far too stubborn to do it.

I think part of his popularity is due to himself. He's the self styled special one. Like Cantona, incredibly arrogant - but then he backs it up time and time again, and people love him for it. Not the greatest, not yet maybe. I think he wants the United job to finish his legacy as a manager, he's travelled and done it all, many times. Surely the last step is to take over the mantle of the greatest manager and carry on his legacy. Also, I think he's the only manager with the ego required to actually take over from SAF.

Overrated? Possibly. Brilliant? Absolutely.

Not denying his 9 year record but again all of those clubs were the best teams in their leagues and I think it's a more overrated statistic than people think. I bet his away record is much less impressive than SAF's was during the past 9 seasons. Inter was never anything special in Serie A while Jose was there (as everyone will point out, they won trophies, but they were by far the best team, and the first season they played exactly like they did under Mancini and in the second season they were poor and won the trophy on the last day) and they didn't lose at home. I bet Mancini did the same in a season or two. Point is you can go undefeated at home without it being a special season.

On to Wenger, if we're going to talk about consistency, I'd like to see Jose be as consistent as Arsenal on that type of budget. Also, of course Wenger wouldn't want to go to a team like Inter, he'd rather play good football.

And yes, he might be the best successor to SAF because the man to fill that guys' shoes will need to have an incredible ego. But can he deliver long-term success on a tight budget? I don't know. And I definitely don't think he's in the same league as SAF, not until he builds a team and can continuously win trophies for a couple decades.

Porto's budget didnt dwarf that of the others. I dont understand the media fawning over him (much like i dont understand the media fawning over Pep), but you do no justice, he is a great manager. Firstly i dont care what team you are, to go unbeaten at home for 9 years is unbelieveable, you cannot play that down. What he did with Porto was fantastic, with chelsea, he took a good team and made them fearsome, made them great. At Inter he took hold of a very good side and took them to a new level.

The media fawning is what ****** me off and it's down to Jose. He's good-looking and very controversial so the media loves him. They've created this whole storm around him so he has a great reputation and I think it's a crucial part of his success. As for Pep, I'd say it's more the media fawning over Barca than anything else, I think most people simply think he's lucky. On that note, Pep's achievements when you look at them alone are just as good as Jose's. The guy is only 40 and he won a treble in his first season as manager, and he set a record for points last year and will do it again this year. He might do a double or treble this year. If anything, we should be praising him more than Mourinho. Now, most people say it's just Barca and not Pep, and I agree 100%, but why then do people never mention this about Mourinho? Both of them take all-star teams and do well with them, but the popular perception is that Pep is simply lucky and Jose is a genius. It's not like Jose is on the pitch. I think they are both overrated and win trophies at great teams, but Jose is hailed as the greatest manager of all time, which is really irritating.

Porto had the biggest or second biggest budget in Portugal, and the big 3 have way bigger budgets than the rest of the league. With Chelsea, he took a good team and bought a bunch of great player. At Inter he took a good team, brought in some new players, and they finally achieved their potential in the Champions League. I don't think he took them to a new level since his first season he didn't improve on Mancini at all, and in his second season, despite all of their superstar signings they struggled a lot in Serie A. They won the Champions League but they were definitely in the top 3 in the world in terms of talent, and I think they were the most talented team.

Staying at a club long term isnt a standalone measure of success. Yes he doesn't stay around every long, but most coaches move in 3-4 seasons, even Pep has been reduced from a sprightly coach to a haggard figure, and he talks more and more about new challenges. What he has achieved is remarkable and he is a great coach

But trophies isn't a standalone measure of success either, and I think building a club for the long-term and consistently being successful (SAF, Wenger) is more impressive than coming in to a great club, buying a bunch of well-established players, winning, and then leaving when the squad is old and there are no young players.

Mourinho is a result getter - if he is give £150mil to buy himself a fantasy squad. I'd like to have seen how he'd have done managing an modestly financed average team instead of moneybags Chelski when he came here.

He started the ball rolling at Porto, but that was a weak league - eversince then he's certainly loaded the dice in his favour by making sure he's had loadsamoney to splurge or that he was inheriting a 'worldy' squad..

My thoughts EXACTLY. And add boring football to that.

Lets see how tonight goes should we and the champs league before we start comparing this years madrid and last years....

This year's Madrid has had a whole year to gel and they've added in some great players. It's a way better team but they've performed worse in the league, and a lot of that is down to Mourinho's idiotic decision to let Guti and Raul go.

First of all how can you call it Ranieris team, He signed Drogba, Essien, Cavalho, made Lampard and Terry into better players, signed Cole, Ferriera and changed the system to get the best out of Joe Cole and Robben early on.

Yeah, he signed a bunch of world class players for a bunch of money and then won the Prem with them while ManU and Arsenal were rebuilding. What a genius.

Roman signed Jose only a handful of players, Ballack and Shevas.... yeah so it was Joses team.

I meant it was Roman's money that enabled him to create such a fantasy.

And you pick one european run to signal Avram doing better. They where mid table after 7 games.... Hardly an horrible start, with only one loss. Avram bottled the league run in, League cup and the Champs league all in one season, he did a good job but better then Jose, Never

And everyone else picks one European run (03-04) to signal that Jose is the best of all time. Avram Grant had the best record in the Prem from the time he took over and he got them farther in the CL than Jose ever did. Again he didn't bottle the CL, that was Terry and Anelka. But you've totally ignored my point. All I've done is shown that an incompetent inexperienced manager got the SAME EXACT results as Jose did. If Avram Grant did more or less what Jose did, than how can Jose be such a genius? If Leonardo, of all people, can win in Serie A with Inter why is Jose a genius for doing so? If you look at the performance of Inter in Serie A under Mancini, Mourinho, and Leonardo, there is hardly a difference, except Jose's team was the most talented (Leonardo's has had tons of injuries). The only difference between the three is Jose had a good CL run, which was to be expected from the world's best squad (who thought Barca could repeat, that's never been done before).

firstly if you're going to take the **** out of a club get it right, it would be Chelsov, not Chelski, Chelski would make it Polish....
Porto in a weak league, didnt he win the CL with a team from a "weak league"? each side he goes to he finds a way to take them to another level, Porto, Chelsea, Inter

With a lot of money (Chelsea) and no thought for the long-term (Inter).

Before he came to Chelsea, they were a mess, a bit of a laughing stock. A club flush with cash run by a tinkerer and owned by a mad bad billionaire. That said, can't REALLY argue with the rest of your points.

They weren't a mess, they were a good team on the brink of being a very good one, and Jose comes in and buys a bunch of great players and wins with them. Avram Grant did great managing the same team, and the same group of aging players still won them the double last season. That's my main point but no one has really acknowledged it.

You cannot call Inter 'lucky' in the transfer market. That is just extremely good business and transfer acumen by Mourinho. Before Mourinho, they had a decent squad, but I assure you it wasn't world class. This is the team when he took over:

I'm counting at least 10 world class players there. And yes, I accept this method is subjective, but still. You cannot call Mourinho lucky for being extremely good in the transfer market.

Yeah but you can't deny how lucky he was to be in that transfer market. Real Madrid was getting rid of great players so he got Sneijder for cheap. Barca had to get rid of Eto'o and Ibra was the only player they felt could replace him, so they got hosed on that deal. But the players Jose brought in were all very well-established...he didn't discover anyone new, and he spent a lot on a huge flop the first season (Quaresma). This was the only time Mourinho ever was "good" in the transfer market (in that he did it on a budget) and it was the juiciest summer transfer window in recent memory. Anyway, Jose took a great team, couldn't do anything with it, and then got really lucky with these cheap great players available in a transfer window, and Inter becomes the most talented squad in the world. They struggle in Serie A and win the Champions League (with the help of an Icelandic volcano). And all of the sudden he's a genius? You didn't mention the fact that when Jose left, Inter had the OLDEST squad in all of Europe and were not deep enough to deal with an injury crisis, which hit in the post world cup year. Now they're in a mess and they will have to rebuild their team.

That's nothing compared to SAF and Wenger, who constantly have great finds in the transfer market. When has Mourinho unearthed a Hernandez? Usually he just spends a **** ton of money on a player everyone knows is good.

And there is no way you can say that they played badly. What they did was something Mourinho is the best in the world at bar none; grind out victories. They were one of the best defensive teams I have seen, perhaps even ever. On top of that, they were tactically flexible and always retained enough thrust and attacking prowess to cause opponents trouble, even if they were in ultra-defensive mode. What you call scraping victories over lower teams was what both I and Mourinho call winning with as little effort as possible.

They were a great team, by far the best in Serie A, and they barely won the title (on the last day) and consistently played poorly. That's the thing with Jose. He'll take over by far the best team, be inconsistent throughout the year, and play negative Mourinho ball and win the Champions League. That's why Real Madrid couldn't win the league this year, he can't play Mourinho style week in and week out, which is why they did worse in the league this season than last season (even though their squad is much better).

Chelsea had changed. Just because the players were the same doesn't mean they play the same, act the same as they did when he managed them all those years ago. Players develop, after all.

But he put together a fantasy football team at Chelsea with an unlimited budget and won a couple Prem titles while Arsenal and ManU were rebuilding. Other managers (Avram Grant) were able to get more or less the same results, so why is Jose a genius for doing so?

Who's to say a big, strong, physical team is the sure-fire way to beat Barca? Sure, we think that now, but only after Mourinho beat them like that. It's funny you should mention the ref 'helping' Barca in the first leg; in the second, Inter had to play without Motta for the majority of it after the ref sent him off extremely cheaply. Saying United would've beat them is subjective, and your opinion is against anyone else's. There's a reason they played Bayern in the final; Bayern beat United. They were the better team.

Because it's obvious. If you want to go back farther, it was the USA's victory of Spain in the Confederations Cup, or any other victory against technically gifted possession based teams. They way to beat them is with good defense, physicality, and organization. That's what Italian teams do best. There's one other thing that really helps though, and that's fitness and athleticism (beating them on the counter). That's one thing that ManU has which Inter doesn't, which is why if the final is ManU vs. Barca, even though Barca is the better team and has been much better throughout the year, ManU will certainly win. If it's ManU vs. Real Madrid? I don't know what will happen. Real Madrid should win because they're more talented, but ManU stacks up well against them and R. Madrid has the tendency to choke, so I give the slight edge to ManU.

Also, Bayern was not a better team than ManU, they were just better on that day. Although that was a very good Bayern team.

Can't argue that he left an ageing team. It's true. But it is also what you get for employing Mourinho, and he makes no apologies for it. Nor can I argue against his record in Spain so far, but remember he is playing against one of the best teams in all history for the title. One thing you don't mention is Benzema's renaissance into an extremely potent striker.

Benzema was an extremely potent striker in France and everyone wanted to buy him. He was pushed out of the team by Higuain and Raul. Benzema has also underperformed a great deal this season and should score more with the amazing service he gets. So I don't think we can credit Jose too much.

Doubt it is Mourinho's ego that made him sell Guti/Raul. He's not averse to keeping vets in a team. Look at Zanetti, Cordoba, Stankovic, Materazzi and Cambiasso. Also, you think his ego is annoying, I think it is rather hilarious. It livens the place up a little, no doubt about it.

Real is a different team though and Raul and Guti are much, much more vocal leaders than any of the ones you listed. The only important leader out of the ones you mentioned is Zanetti (Cordona and Materazzi don't play so much, and Cambiasso and Stankovic aren't that old and I don't see Cambiasso as much of a leader type), and even he has the reputation of being the quiet, lead by example guy. But the point is whatever his reasons were for selling Guti and Raul, it was a horrible, horrible decision, and I think with those two players they could have won the title. You'd take back the points lost when Xabi Alonso wasn't playing (the recent examples being the defeats to Osasuna and Gijon) and all of the points dropped when Benzema/Adebayor was underperforming or when they needed another goal-scorer (which was often). They could have much more easily gone with two strikers up top (since for the first half of the season they had only one natural striker), and of course what would have happened if Benzema got hurt too? I digress, but the point is I knew it was a horrible decision before the season started and it cost them a lot in the league.

Mourinho makes no apologies for how his team plays, because it has served him well and won him trophies. If you go out and try to play football against Barca, you lose. Simple as. They will utterly destroy you. What he did was the right tactic, and it showed that the gap between the two clubs is closing. Say what you want about Mourinho's football, whine about how negative it is, but there is no doubt it is damned effective.

Addressed this earlier, this team is good enough to play football against Barca, and with the right coach they could win. Mourinho is one dimensional and only knows how to play Mourinhoball. Other coaches are more flexible and if the fans/team call for a different strategy, they can do so. I don't think Mourinho could do what Wenger does, for example, win and play attractive football at the same time.

You start questioning what he's done, now. What I never understood was how a legacy was somehow worth more than winning it with multiple different clubs, but that's for a different time. Could Ferguson have done what Mourinho has, win major European trophies in three different countries and with a different team each time? Rebuild more or less each year, and every other year win a major trophy? Could Wenger have done it?

We don't know. What iffing is completely and utterly pointless.

Well yeah but why then does Jose get more credit than those two for doing what other managers probably could have done? I bet there are a lot of different managers out there who if given the same opportunities (Chelsea with unlimited funds, Inter during that transfer market, Real Madrid Galacticos 2.0) could have gotten similar results. Some have (Avram Grant, for example, Pellegrini got more points with a much worse team, and in Serie A Mancini's Inter performed the same even though they weren't as talented as the Inter in Jose's second year, even Leonardo's Inter has been good this season with all of the injuries and the treble hangoever), and for the record, I bet SAF and Wenger definitely could. I'm not denying that Jose is a good manager, but I do think he gets too much credit, and people act as if he could do what SAF and Wenger do, which he hasn't proven.

The what if game is exactly what ****** me off though. Mourinho is great at his specialty (taking over the best team with the biggest budget and making sure they win), but how is this any better than doing what some other managers do: whether that's taking a small, not very talented team on a tight budget to the Prem/keeping them up (Holloway, Allardyce, Hodgson, etc.), consistent success on a tiny budget and playing attractive football (Wenger), consistent success with one club for over two decades, never faltering (SAF). Or how about winning 5 titles with 5 teams in four leagues (excluding his most recent job, which he just started in February), while only one of them had a large budget? Taking over a team that finished at the bottom of the table to consecutive fourth placed finishes? Know who I'm talking about? Americo Gallego. You probably haven't heard of him because the media likes to focus on its darlings like Jose without giving credit to the many other great managers out there, who did things I bet Jose could not.

Heck other than SAF and Wenger I still don't think Mourinho is the best among the "big" managers. I'd give that to Hiddink, whose achievements IMO are more impressive than Jose (unlike Jose he always takes over the most difficult jobs), yet the media doesn't give him half as much praise.

How you can think Mourinho is overrated is really beyond me. Porto will proberly never win the CL in our lifetime again and if that isent enough so many of your points are flawed. When he joined Chelsea the players he bought in were not the best in Europe at that time with the exception of maybe Carvalho and Ferreira who had just won the CL with Jose the previous season. At the time he spent 24million on Drogba, 5million on Kezman, 10million on Tiago and an undisclosed fee for Nuno Morais. How many of them players were sensational in that first season for Chelsea??

Because people think he's the best manager of all time, which he hasn't proven. Mourinho spent a ton of money on proven talent, I don't what your point is. I bet many other managers could have had very similar success if they took over the season that Mourinho did. Any decent manager with a big ego can do great things if he inherits a good team with an unlimited budget.

Then after winning Chelsea's first league title for 50years and giving Chelsea fans success they never thought they would ever see he went to Inter Milan. After his first season he realised they relied too much on Ibrahimovic and he never done it in the big games so because he is such a great coach he saw this and managed to get 40odd million for him plus Eto'o. And with that money he bought players like Lucio and Sneijder and built a squad that won the treble.

I'd say Abramovic won Chelsea that success and Jose was lucky to be the man in charge. He won a couple titles with a Chelsea team anyone could have won with, which is how Avram Grant did so well. At Inter he comes in to a great team, doesn't improve on it at all (everyone talked about how overrated Jose was the season before last). Then there is one of the juiciest transfer markets in history and he puts together an all-star team. All of the players he brought in were world class, everyone knew how great that Inter team would be. They struggled in Serie A despite having no competition and win on the last day, but they won in the Champions League (due in no small part to Iceland's volcano). They Inter team was incredibly stacked, I don't think it makes him an all-time great to have won with it.

Honestly mate what more do you what from him. Maybe he plays a brand of football you dont like but its effective simple as that.

I don't want anything more from him, I just think he's a great opportunist who only takes over at jobs anyone could do well with. If he doesn't win at least one trophy this season with Real Madrid, than the season will have been an utter failure and I think it would greatly damage his credibility as a manager. I mean, this R. Madrid team is arguably the most talented team in history and they haven't been all that special in the league this season. If they do win a trophy though everyone will talk about how much of a genius Mourinho is. I'm sorry but winning with the teams he wins with doesn't make you a genius (the exception being the 03-04 CL run).

Jose need not go to stoke, blackpool to prove what a talented manager he is. He is among the best so he is chosen by the best of the clubs. Simples. Never ever will fat Sam get a chance to manage bigger club as he is not good enough. To compare or to ask jose to prove with the clubs Sam and Holloway managed is ridiculous.

When did I say he had to. I'm only pointing out that it's unfair to give Mourinho all of the credit and never give Allardyce or Holloway any credit (which is exactly what happens). I'm not asking him to take over a relegation threatened team, I just think that if he really wants to establish himself as the greatest ever he should take over a difficult job for once. He won't though, I bet you this guy never ever manages a team other than the best team in the league with the biggest budget (except for the Portuguese national team at the end of his career).

You are just downplaying every achievements of Jose, hence i said you are underrating him. Like Jacko said, Chelsea were in bit of a mess when he came. He brought solidity to the team. They were grinding the results week in week out.

If you don't think he is overrated than you think he's the best manager of all time, because that's what the popular perception is. I'm just point out that I think that's ****...how does that make me underrate him?

All I'm doing is pointing out that every team he has managed at (other than Porto in the Champions League) has been head and shoulders above their competition. He wins some trophies with these teams and everyone acts like he's a genius. But the fact is if he didn't win at any of these clubs it would be an utter failure and he wouldn't be meeting expectations. When Avram Grant lost the league on the last day (despite having the best record in the Prem during his tenure) and lost the CL in the final due to Terry and Anelka bottling it (and when did Mourinho make a final BTW?), Grant was fired and no one thought he was a genius. When Mourinho's Inter team was the same as it was last under Mancini, winning Serie A and crashing in the first round of the Champions League, he was criticized heavily. And this Real Madrid team, despite being arguably the best in history, has really underperformed in the league this season, and some in the Spanish press have criticized him.

At Inter he did extraordinary job. Those players were offered for all clubs, it is a master stroke to jump in first and sign them. And also what you are forgetting is Jose achieved with a team that didn't fully gel. Many players played their first season with Inter still they played like a team. Cheers to Jose.

I'd say that was Moratti just as much as Jose, and the point is he brought in a bunch of world class talent. They were very poor in Serie A, and despite having no competitors, only won on the last day.

Did you see how Materazzi cried when Jose left? There is something in Jose, he creates superb atmosphere in the dressing room which makes the players to do what ever he asks for. Eto'o virtually played as Left back in the champions league, i dont think he will do it for anyone else.

A lot of people cry when they win the CL.

Jose is one of the best Manager. But not Best of all time. He has all the time in the world to become one of the best ever if not THE BEST.

As I've said over and over again, he's one of the best out there, he's just overrated. He only takes relatively easy jobs. If he takes over at ManU, that will be a hard job in the sense that it's difficult to fill in after SAF, but he has such a big ego and that won't be an issue. Other than that, he'll be taking over at the club with the best players and the biggest budget (I'm assuming he'd move once the FFP rules came into place).



Obviously I think he's a great manager but if he really wanted to prove he was great than he'd take over at Liverpool and win them the Prem on a relatively normal budget. If he did that I'd think he was as great as anyone. I doubt that will happen though, I think Jose will continue his record of only managing the best team in the league with the largest budget. Sure he's good at that, it's his specialty, but why does that make him better than Holloway or Allardyce?

 

[Alex]

Curtis, the length of your posts are unreal. They make my eyes water.

 

[curtis290]

Last year inter were the most talented team in the world but now there an ageing squad who were always going to struggle? So how do you explain this? Jose left and 3 months pasted and Inter go from best to ageing, the team was the same for Benitez as Jose

Already explained this. Because Mourinho left Inter as the oldest squad in all of Europe, without depth and enough good young players. The next season they have the problem of a treble hangover and the lack of rest in a world cup year meant there was an injury crisis. Thanks to Jose, they didn't have the depth to deal with it. Benitez isn't the greatest manager in the world anyway and he was fired. They bring in Leonardo, who has been proven to be a ****** manager, and he wins with this squad.

Anyways...i didn't read all that because it's just too much now and im not in the mood of reading garbage like the title is. The title says it all....the writer is either a barca fan or then he doesn't know anything about Football and how big influence Managers have to the team they manage.

OK, just insult your opponent, good strategy. And I take it you're not a Madrid fan?

Mourinho is the best coach in the world and it's not his fault that Barcelona is only getting better and have played together for long. I hate Barca all my heart but they are the best.

Real Madrid has the best squad in the world (arguably the best of all time) and most of it has been together for a little while now. If they don't win any trophies this year, it will be an absolute embarassment and an utter failure. Winning one trophy (especially if it's only the Copa del Rey) is BARELY meeting expectations.

Mourinho has taken us to the Copa final and CL Semis. It doesn't matter how many points we get in the league...the position is all that matters and we will finish second this season.

He has a much better team than Pellegrini did and Pellegrini's Madrid was much better. They finished with more points and actually fought the title until the last day. Mourinho's struggled all year and got beat 5-0 by Barca. If Pellegrini was there he'd have held on to Guti and Raul and they probably would have taken the league, even though RM isn't the right fit for a manager like him.

He builds squad with money? Yes...nowdays, you know why? Because the owners trust him and give him money to spend.

He's very good with an all-star fantasy team and an unlimited budget. I bet there are plenty of managers out there who could have done the same. The only two scenarios where that has happened this decade are Chelsea and Real Madrid, and he's been the manager at both. He also was the manager at Inter, a great team with a big budget. He's very good at taking the right jobs, I'll give him that.

But why does that make him better than Holloway or Allardyce? Or Pellegrini? Or Americo Gallego? Or Ramon Diaz? Do tell.

If you dont remember...Porto won the Cl with Mourinho in the charge..you know why? Because he brought the best from his players! They wern't favourites. He succeeds everywhere and im sure he bring success to Real and after this he will bring more success to england.

It was a great success and his best achievement. But this is the only time he won something when he didn't have the best team in the competition. How does that make him the greatest manager of all time?

---------- Post added at 08:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:44 AM ----------

Curtis, the length of your posts are unreal. They make my eyes water.

Yeah, mine too sometimes. My arms are killing me though!

I feel like I should get some sort of award. Maybe the longest poster award or something.

 

[Jack Fulham]

I think we should introduce a word limit on posts.

 

[CJACKO11]

You say any manager could have won the title and brung success to Chelsea but you are massivly wrong arnt you.

Claudio Ranieri spent 120 million in 2003 and Chelsea won nothing.

Jose Mourinho spent 91 million in his first season and won the PremierLeague and the League Cup.

And when Mourinho got sacked Avram Grant took over a squad that was considered the best in the league and yes he got us to a Champions League final but we still won nothing? And then Scolari took over with the near on the same squad and lasted only half the season.

It wasent until Hiddink came in that Chelsea started to get their confidence back and started to forget about Mourinho and leave that ghost behind. He isent the best manager ever because he isent even the best manager in the world at the moment. But he has so many years ahead of him and there is no reason why he cant become the best manager ever.

 

[Madridista CR7]

Mourinho is the best..simply as that. You probly rate Pepe more right? Well if you do.....what has he achieved with teams with low budget? Nothing..he has only coached the best team in the world and never tried a real challenge.

Barca has the best starting 11. And they have played together for a long time... Madrid only have better squad depth. Something Barca is lacking.

 

[Vanjagl]

You keep talking Real have best squad in the world. I can guarantee you that Barca have better player on every position. Real have only better Gk. Next thing, how do you rate Guardiola?

 

[sunilvk7]

Would love to see what are your views on Pep. He has the best team in the world, compared to greats of football yet never seen you writing 99^99 words post on how he is overrated.

Like a cule you are just downplaying his achievements. You might say you are not Barca supporter, but your posts shows you are one..

 

[GodCubed]

They weren't a mess, they were a good team on the brink of being a very good one, and Jose comes in and buys a bunch of great players and wins with them. Avram Grant did great managing the same team, and the same group of aging players still won them the double last season. That's my main point but no one has really acknowledged it.

So if they were a good team on the brink of being a very good one, why didn't Ranieri push them over that brink? Because he wasn't good enough. Mourinho was. Mourinho proved the difference between a good team and a very good one. With the second part, essentially what you're saying is that Grant won with a team Mourinho built and moulded... I don't see how this is an argument against Mourinho?

Yeah but you can't deny how lucky he was to be in that transfer market. Real Madrid was getting rid of great players so he got Sneijder for cheap. Barca had to get rid of Eto'o and Ibra was the only player they felt could replace him, so they got hosed on that deal. But the players Jose brought in were all very well-established...he didn't discover anyone new, and he spent a lot on a huge flop the first season (Quaresma). This was the only time Mourinho ever was "good" in the transfer market (in that he did it on a budget) and it was the juiciest summer transfer window in recent memory. Anyway, Jose took a great team, couldn't do anything with it, and then got really lucky with these cheap great players available in a transfer window, and Inter becomes the most talented squad in the world. They struggle in Serie A and win the Champions League (with the help of an Icelandic volcano). And all of the sudden he's a genius? You didn't mention the fact that when Jose left, Inter had the OLDEST squad in all of Europe and were not deep enough to deal with an injury crisis, which hit in the post world cup year. Now they're in a mess and they will have to rebuild their team.

I just answered this. You can only be lucky in the transfer market if you're intelligent enough to see and make the deal. Okay, so Mourinho isn't the world's best youth developer. So what? Every manager has some weakness. Why are you using one aspect of Mourinho's management to desperately try and prove he isn't much good? You're wrong about this being the only time he's ever been good in the transfer market: his Porto team, for example, was a masterpiece of intelligent buying. Nuno Valente, Benni McCarthy, Maniche, Costinha. All were cheap buys that transformed a team. Besides that, look at what he did for developing young players at Porto; a young Ricardo Carvalho became truly world class. Deco was transformed from a bit-part player to a rampaging playmaker. Paulo Ferreira became one of the most exciting young fullbacks in Europe. I'd say taking formerly mediocre players and turning them spectacular is even more impressive than having to buy young talent.

That's nothing compared to SAF and Wenger, who constantly have great finds in the transfer market. When has Mourinho unearthed a Hernandez? Usually he just spends a **** ton of money on a player everyone knows is good.

Yes, and when has Wenger last won a trophy?

They were a great team, by far the best in Serie A, and they barely won the title (on the last day) and consistently played poorly. That's the thing with Jose. He'll take over by far the best team, be inconsistent throughout the year, and play negative Mourinho ball and win the Champions League. That's why Real Madrid couldn't win the league this year, he can't play Mourinho style week in and week out, which is why they did worse in the league this season than last season (even though their squad is much better).

So what you're saying is he gets results. Once more, I fail to see why this should be a problem if he wins, which he does.

But he put together a fantasy football team at Chelsea with an unlimited budget and won a couple Prem titles while Arsenal and ManU were rebuilding. Other managers (Avram Grant) were able to get more or less the same results, so why is Jose a genius for doing so?

Because Jose built the team, Jose made the team. More to the point, Grant used Mourinho's team to get those results. Not to mention, Scolari couldn't handle the team after Mourinho (a point you're happy to gloss over) and although Grant could handle it, he just didn't get the end result Mourinho did. Once again I find myself referring to what I've been saying all along: criticise his style all you want, but he gets results, and that is both what counts and what will be remembered.

Because it's obvious. If you want to go back farther, it was the USA's victory of Spain in the Confederations Cup, or any other victory against technically gifted possession based teams. They way to beat them is with good defense, physicality, and organization. That's what Italian teams do best. There's one other thing that really helps though, and that's fitness and athleticism (beating them on the counter). That's one thing that ManU has which Inter doesn't, which is why if the final is ManU vs. Barca, even though Barca is the better team and has been much better throughout the year, ManU will certainly win. If it's ManU vs. Real Madrid? I don't know what will happen. Real Madrid should win because they're more talented, but ManU stacks up well against them and R. Madrid has the tendency to choke, so I give the slight edge to ManU.

Sure, it's obvious now, but then? The USA's victory was seen as a one-off, a huge surprise that wouldn't happen normally.

Frankly, I find it hard to heed the words of any person who says that United will "definitely" beat Barca if they meet them. We can all remember what happened when they last met, after all.

Also, Bayern was not a better team than ManU, they were just better on that day. Although that was a very good Bayern team.

Uh... you mean overall, on both days, they were worse than United? Maybe United choked? If they did, how can you call them a better team? Maybe Van Gaal outthought Ferguson? If so, that's rather a plus point for Mourinho against Ferguson.

Benzema was an extremely potent striker in France and everyone wanted to buy him. He was pushed out of the team by Higuain and Raul. Benzema has also underperformed a great deal this season and should score more with the amazing service he gets. So I don't think we can credit Jose too much.

So he was pushed out of the team by an older, better striker than him. He's hardly underperformed this season, IIRC he has a record of a goal every other game which is pretty good. Problem is with Real's strikers is Ronaldo's selfishness, but that's for another time. I think we can credit Jose a whole lot, considering Pellegrini conclusively failed to get him firing.

Real is a different team though and Raul and Guti are much, much more vocal leaders than any of the ones you listed. The only important leader out of the ones you mentioned is Zanetti (Cordona and Materazzi don't play so much, and Cambiasso and Stankovic aren't that old and I don't see Cambiasso as much of a leader type), and even he has the reputation of being the quiet, lead by example guy. But the point is whatever his reasons were for selling Guti and Raul, it was a horrible, horrible decision, and I think with those two players they could have won the title. You'd take back the points lost when Xabi Alonso wasn't playing (the recent examples being the defeats to Osasuna and Gijon) and all of the points dropped when Benzema/Adebayor was underperforming or when they needed another goal-scorer (which was often). They could have much more easily gone with two strikers up top (since for the first half of the season they had only one natural striker), and of course what would have happened if Benzema got hurt too? I digress, but the point is I knew it was a horrible decision before the season started and it cost them a lot in the league.

What? Did you just call Guti and Raul more vocal than Javier Zanetti? I fail to see how you can possibly call Raul and Guti fiery, vocal leaders and Zanetti small and quiet. That's not even taking into account Cambiasso, who is a truly fearsome leader by all accounts.

Meh, you think this, you think that. Mourinho thinks otherwise. We'll never know, but somehow I doubt it changed the league outcome much anyway.

Addressed this earlier, this team is good enough to play football against Barca, and with the right coach they could win. Mourinho is one dimensional and only knows how to play Mourinhoball. Other coaches are more flexible and if the fans/team call for a different strategy, they can do so. I don't think Mourinho could do what Wenger does, for example, win and play attractive football at the same time.

No, it isn't. I'm afraid Madrid just aren't good enough to play Barca at their own game and win, because nobody is. Man for man, Barca are the best team on the planet by a huge margin. Can you really see Sami Khedira facing off against Xavi in a technical, flowing game and winning? Ricardo Carvalho outclassing Gerard Pique? Angel Di Maria against David Villa? Come off it. In an open match, Barca win most of the time. It's the same problem people had against Sacchi's Milan and Michel's Ajax; you just couldn't outplay them.

Maybe Mourinho couldn't do what Wenger does, but once more, who cares? He wins. Wenger hasn't for five years now.

Well yeah but why then does Jose get more credit than those two for doing what other managers probably could have done? I bet there are a lot of different managers out there who if given the same opportunities blaarggghhh lots and lots of text blarrgh

Because the world isn't ****** fair, get over it. Jose gets credit because he's damned good, and one of the best managers in the world right now. At the end of the day, football is a results business, and he gets them like clockwork.

What you're annoyed with here is the media, who fawn over Jose and people read it and believe it. So you're ****** with the media and you want them to be fairer, look at things rationally, and don't just go for the most charismatic and interesting man.

Fat ******* chance. I see no reason why you keep up this ridiculous vendetta against Mourinho. He's an excellent manager, one of the best in the world because he gets results.

 

[ajt09]

So if they were a good team on the brink of being a very good one, why didn't Ranieri push them over that brink? Because he wasn't good enough. Mourinho was. Mourinho proved the difference between a good team and a very good one. With the second part, essentially what you're saying is that Grant won with a team Mourinho built and moulded... I don't see how this is an argument against Mourinho?



I just answered this. You can only be lucky in the transfer market if you're intelligent enough to see and make the deal. Okay, so Mourinho isn't the world's best youth developer. So what? Every manager has some weakness. Why are you using one aspect of Mourinho's management to desperately try and prove he isn't much good? You're wrong about this being the only time he's ever been good in the transfer market: his Porto team, for example, was a masterpiece of intelligent buying. Nuno Valente, Benni McCarthy, Maniche, Costinha. All were cheap buys that transformed a team. Besides that, look at what he did for developing young players at Porto; a young Ricardo Carvalho became truly world class. Deco was transformed from a bit-part player to a rampaging playmaker. Paulo Ferreira became one of the most exciting young fullbacks in Europe. I'd say taking formerly mediocre players and turning them spectacular is even more impressive than having to buy young talent.



Yes, and when has Wenger last won a trophy?




So what you're saying is he gets results. Once more, I fail to see why this should be a problem if he wins, which he does.



Because Jose built the team, Jose made the team. More to the point, Grant used Mourinho's team to get those results. Not to mention, Scolari couldn't handle the team after Mourinho (a point you're happy to gloss over) and although Grant could handle it, he just didn't get the end result Mourinho did. Once again I find myself referring to what I've been saying all along: criticise his style all you want, but he gets results, and that is both what counts and what will be remembered.



Sure, it's obvious now, but then? The USA's victory was seen as a one-off, a huge surprise that wouldn't happen normally.

Frankly, I find it hard to heed the words of any person who says that United will "definitely" beat Barca if they meet them. We can all remember what happened when they last met, after all.



Uh... you mean overall, on both days, they were worse than United? Maybe United choked? If they did, how can you call them a better team? Maybe Van Gaal outthought Ferguson? If so, that's rather a plus point for Mourinho against Ferguson.



So he was pushed out of the team by an older, better striker than him. He's hardly underperformed this season, IIRC he has a record of a goal every other game which is pretty good. Problem is with Real's strikers is Ronaldo's selfishness, but that's for another time. I think we can credit Jose a whole lot, considering Pellegrini conclusively failed to get him firing.



What? Did you just call Guti and Raul more vocal than Javier Zanetti? I fail to see how you can possibly call Raul and Guti fiery, vocal leaders and Zanetti small and quiet. That's not even taking into account Cambiasso, who is a truly fearsome leader by all accounts.

Meh, you think this, you think that. Mourinho thinks otherwise. We'll never know, but somehow I doubt it changed the league outcome much anyway.



No, it isn't. I'm afraid Madrid just aren't good enough to play Barca at their own game and win, because nobody is. Man for man, Barca are the best team on the planet by a huge margin. Can you really see Sami Khedira facing off against Xavi in a technical, flowing game and winning? Ricardo Carvalho outclassing Gerard Pique? Angel Di Maria against David Villa? Come off it. In an open match, Barca win most of the time. It's the same problem people had against Sacchi's Milan and Michel's Ajax; you just couldn't outplay them.

Maybe Mourinho couldn't do what Wenger does, but once more, who cares? He wins. Wenger hasn't for five years now.



Because the world isn't ****** fair, get over it. Jose gets credit because he's damned good, and one of the best managers in the world right now. At the end of the day, football is a results business, and he gets them like clockwork.

What you're annoyed with here is the media, who fawn over Jose and people read it and believe it. So you're ****** with the media and you want them to be fairer, look at things rationally, and don't just go for the most charismatic and interesting man.

Fat ******* chance. I see no reason why you keep up this ridiculous vendetta against Mourinho. He's an excellent manager, one of the best in the world because he gets results.

Ah, the voice of reason. There's just no justifiable reason for Joses criticism. Not only was he a breath of fresh air in the prem, but he also had a certain aura around him. EVERYONE knows SAF is a tremondous manager, but in the future Jose will be pretty dam close. Cut the guy some slack. If he went to Man City, he'd sort the squad out top to bottom, sort out petulant children like Balo, and turn them into an exceptional unit. Why? Because he is that dam good.

 

[mekitozito]

In the past decade, those are the only two teams with a shot at winning the title.

Sporting Clube de Portugal won 2 titles?

 

[Joel`]

Not denying his 9 year record but again all of those clubs were the best teams in their leagues and I think it's a more overrated statistic than people think. I bet his away record is much less impressive than SAF's was during the past 9 seasons. Inter was never anything special in Serie A while Jose was there (as everyone will point out, they won trophies, but they were by far the best team, and the first season they played exactly like they did under Mancini and in the second season they were poor and won the trophy on the last day) and they didn't lose at home. I bet Mancini did the same in a season or two. Point is you can go undefeated at home without it being a special season.

How is it a basis for an argument that he had the best teams? Arsenal had an amazing team, and got the invincible season. Why can Wenger be applauded for that, for having a great team - and then Jose criticised for having a great team? You can have the most talented squad in the world, but without the right manager there it's irrelevant. Madrid went what, 7 years without going past the last 16 of the CL? For the amount they spend and the talent they have, that's inexcusable. And you cannot tell me that this years squad is that much greater than previous years.

On to Wenger, if we're going to talk about consistency, I'd like to see Jose be as consistent as Arsenal on that type of budget. Also, of course Wenger wouldn't want to go to a team like Inter, he'd rather play good football.

Jose does play good football, when he wants to. What about the 8-0 thrashings of some teams this year? He's a masterful tactician and knows what needs to be done to get results. He went too offensive against Barca and they annihilated them. Who cares if they had 20% possession last game, surely that's better than being embarrassed. And you say that Madrid should be able to go toe to toe offensively with Barca. No, no they shouldn't at all. If Ferguson or Wenger were at Madrid they'd play very similarly. Wenger and Ferguson, who you repeatedly idolise as being the greater, both have and will sit back and soak up the pressure against Barcelona. Ferguson isn't stupid or naive enough to think he can just go toe to toe with any team, he tinkers his tactic constantly to ensure the result before anything else. Just look at the FA cup quarter final, we're happy to sit back and soak up against Arsenal because it works, and gets the result. So why exactly are you criticising Jose for this, and then applauding managers who will happily do the same as him? Even Wenger, for even a man as stubborn as him, sat back at the Nou Camp and allowed them to dominate possession.

And yes, he might be the best successor to SAF because the man to fill that guys' shoes will need to have an incredible ego. But can he deliver long-term success on a tight budget? I don't know. And I definitely don't think he's in the same league as SAF, not until he builds a team and can continuously win trophies for a couple decades.

Even if he doesn't stay for the long term (though he may decide he's travelled enough and wants to finish his legacy with United!), at least he'll stabilise the ship and build upon Fergie's generation to allow a new, more long term manager to take over.

And what he did at Chelsea was a great achievement. He made them what they are now, you can't just buy a team - look at Manchester City. It needs a manager of the highest quality to mould a team like that together. I do believe that Chelsea are where they are now due to Mourinho's work.

 

[sunilvk7]

Ah, the voice of reason. There's just no justifiable reason for Joses criticism. Not only was he a breath of fresh air in the prem, but he also had a certain aura around him. EVERYONE knows SAF is a tremondous manager, but in the future Jose will be pretty dam close. Cut the guy some slack. If he went to Man City, he'd sort the squad out top to bottom, sort out petulant children like Balo, and turn them into an exceptional unit. Why? Because he is that dam good.

Exactly. Agreed with everything except Balo part. He is a gone case. Even Jose was not able to handle him when both were at Inter. He told something like "If Balotelli had two heads he'd be twice as stupid.".

Jose has a big ego and he is an excellent manipulator. He makes controversial statements in the media to protect his players and divert the attention.

What he did with Inter was remarkable and he was much needed catalyst for Premier league. Loved his interviews a lot even though he had very good healthy rivalry with SAF.

 

[Madridista CR7]

Exactly. Agreed with everything except Balo part. He is a gone case. Even Jose was not able to handle him when both were at Inter. He told something like "If Balotelli had two heads he'd be twice as stupid.".

Jose has a big ego and he is an excellent manipulator. He makes controversial statements in the media to protect his players and divert the attention.

What he did with Inter was remarkable and he was much needed catalyst for Premier league. Loved his interviews a lot even though he had very good healthy rivalry with SAF.

Thats absolutely spot on mate. It's a hilarious comment. But Balotelli is not an hopeless case. Mourinho liked him but not his attitude. When he won the CL he hugged Balo. I hope he proves me and us all wrong soon. Balo needs time.

But your right about Mourinho being a guy who can manage his players (and media). He gets the best of his team and he is arrogant but in a good way. And his english accent is funny...and his personality is just awesome!

I can't understand why someone would think he is overrated or not like him. He has got everything.

 

[curtis290]

You say any manager could have won the title and brung success to Chelsea but you are massivly wrong arnt you.

Claudio Ranieri spent 120 million in 2003 and Chelsea won nothing.

Jose Mourinho spent 91 million in his first season and won the PremierLeague and the League Cup.

And when Mourinho got sacked Avram Grant took over a squad that was considered the best in the league and yes he got us to a Champions League final but we still won nothing? And then Scolari took over with the near on the same squad and lasted only half the season.

It wasent until Hiddink came in that Chelsea started to get their confidence back and started to forget about Mourinho and leave that ghost behind. He isent the best manager ever because he isent even the best manager in the world at the moment. But he has so many years ahead of him and there is no reason why he cant become the best manager ever.

OK, so Mourinho is better than Ranieri, I agree. He managed a team that was built by a ridiculous amount of money and took it to the next level by spending a ridiculous amount of money. As I've said before, anything less than CL and PL victories would have been a failure considering the amount of money spent on that Chelsea squad. Which is why when Avram Grant did as well as Mourinho ever did, he was canned for not winning the trophy (even though he was very, very unlucky not to win the final, but at least he went farther than Jose did).

Mourinho is the best..simply as that. You probly rate Pepe more right? Well if you do.....what has he achieved with teams with low budget? Nothing..he has only coached the best team in the world and never tried a real challenge.

Barca has the best starting 11. And they have played together for a long time... Madrid only have better squad depth. Something Barca is lacking.

Since when was I making this a Pep vs. Mourinho comparison? Since Pep is so young and he's only coached at Barca, I don't think anyone knows how good he is. As I said before, he is perfect for Barca and no one in the world could get the results he is getting with them. However, if Pep went to Real Madrid, or ManCity, or ManU, or Arsenal, or AC Milan, would he do well? I have no idea. But you know what? Even though he's as accomplished as any manager ever has been this early into his career, do you see me going around calling him the Special One? Saying he will be the best of all time? Of course not. I can't even remember ever praising Pep on here before. For all we know he could be a great manager. But I won't praise him that much until he has PROVEN himself to be a great manager by doing something other than managing a super-talented team. Even though Mourinho in recent years has only managed the best teams and gotten results he probably should have, everyone acts like he's God's gift to mankind.

You keep talking Real have best squad in the world. I can guarantee you that Barca have better player on every position. Real have only better Gk. Next thing, how do you rate Guardiola?

I'd disagree with that. Real Madrid's squad is deeper and their starting XI is just as talented, if not more talented, as Barca's. They've been playing together for a while now too. Is Barca better coached? I don't know: they certainly have the right coach for them though.

Would love to see what are your views on Pep. He has the best team in the world, compared to greats of football yet never seen you writing 99^99 words post on how he is overrated.

And do you ever see me writing 99^99 posts on how good Pep is? If you've read anything I've written on Barca, it says very little about Pep. As far as Pep goes, I discussed him in an earlier post, which you didn't read obviously, and in this post. As I said he is the perfect manager for Barca, but he hasn't proven himself to be a great manager yet since he hasn't gone anywhere else. For all we know he could be a great manager, or for all we know he might be unable to succeed anywhere else. But that's why I don't call him the Special One or say he has the potential to be the greatest manager ever. That's why I don't praise him like crazy even though he arguably has had the best opening three years of any manager's career ever. He's in charge of a great team, so he's expected to get these results. The same goes for Mourinho. But everyone loves Mourinho and every time he gets an expected trophy everyone thinks he's a genius.

Like a cule you are just downplaying his achievements. You might say you are not Barca supporter, but your posts shows you are one..

Oh for Christ's sake, the fact that you think I think this because he's R. Madrid's coach is sad. I've thought he was overrated basically since Avram Grant's success with Chelsea. As I've said many times, I'm not a Barca supporter. I'm not from Catalonia or even from Spain, and since I have no connection to these places I'm not going to be a glory-hunter and call them my team. I already have teams, Independiente and the US National Team.

So if they were a good team on the brink of being a very good one, why didn't Ranieri push them over that brink? Because he wasn't good enough. Mourinho was. Mourinho proved the difference between a good team and a very good one. With the second part, essentially what you're saying is that Grant won with a team Mourinho built and moulded... I don't see how this is an argument against Mourinho?

Mourinho took a good team that Ranieri couldn't push over the brink and then he spent a **** ton of money and did it. Cool. As far as Grant goes, I said Grant stepped in to a very tough situation mid season and he did better than Jose ever did with someone else's team. My point is that this Chelsea team could have been managed by anyone because it was so good. So why should Mourinho get endless accolades for doing what Avram Grant could do?

I just answered this. You can only be lucky in the transfer market if you're intelligent enough to see and make the deal. Okay, so Mourinho isn't the world's best youth developer. So what? Every manager has some weakness. Why are you using one aspect of Mourinho's management to desperately try and prove he isn't much good? You're wrong about this being the only time he's ever been good in the transfer market: his Porto team, for example, was a masterpiece of intelligent buying. Nuno Valente, Benni McCarthy, Maniche, Costinha. All were cheap buys that transformed a team. Besides that, look at what he did for developing young players at Porto; a young Ricardo Carvalho became truly world class. Deco was transformed from a bit-part player to a rampaging playmaker. Paulo Ferreira became one of the most exciting young fullbacks in Europe. I'd say taking formerly mediocre players and turning them spectacular is even more impressive than having to buy young talent.

This is what is bothering me by the replies. When did I ever say Mourinho isn't "much good?" I said he's a great manager I just don't think he's the best manager of all time like everyone else thinks. And why is everyone only picking out one aspect of Mourinho's management (trophies) and ignoring everything else? Ignoring the fact that he wins trophies at places he is supposed to win trophies? And I'd hope that if anyone called him a great manager he'd be responsible for devoping a few good players. And yes, he was good during Inter's transfer window, but it was a great window and the buys were no brainers. If he couldn't win a couple of trophies with that Inter squad than he wouldn't be a good manager. He almost lost the Scudetto but won it on the last day.

Yes, and when has Wenger last won a trophy?

And when was the last time Wenger managed the best team in the league? It's been about the same amount of time. Not for Jose though, only manages the best team in the league. And when was the last time Mourinho went undefeated? Took a club from being a mid-tier team to a top team (without hundreds of millions being spent in the process)? When was the last time he made a PROFIT in the transfer window? For more than one year in a row? For eight years in a row? When was the last time he consistently achieved success for many years in a row on a tight budget? When was the last time he built a club for long-term success? And when was the last time his team played exciting football? This year's RM team was his first, but it's pretty hard not to play attractive football with this bunch. Yet he manages to do that sometimes.

So what you're saying is he gets results. Once more, I fail to see why this should be a problem if he wins, which he does.

He gets the results his teams are supposed to get. How does that make him the best manager of all time?

Because Jose built the team, Jose made the team. More to the point, Grant used Mourinho's team to get those results. Not to mention, Scolari couldn't handle the team after Mourinho (a point you're happy to gloss over) and although Grant could handle it, he just didn't get the end result Mourinho did. Once again I find myself referring to what I've been saying all along: criticise his style all you want, but he gets results, and that is both what counts and what will be remembered.

The foundation was built by a ridiculous amount of spending by Rainieri, and then Jose comes in and spends even more. The team was so talented that Avram Grant did even better than Jose ever did with it. Yet Jose is such a genius for winning those two PL titles. As far as Scolari goes, he was a horrible pick for the job. He hadn't ever managed a European club team. He hadn't even managed a club team in 8 seasons. Just because one manager was able to **** up with that squad doesn't mean that Jose is a genius.

Sure, it's obvious now, but then? The USA's victory was seen as a one-off, a huge surprise that wouldn't happen normally.

But we always knew that we stack up well against a team like Spain. It's common sense that to beat a Spanish team you do it with good defense, organization, physicality, athleticism, fitness, and determination.

Frankly, I find it hard to heed the words of any person who says that United will "definitely" beat Barca if they meet them. We can all remember what happened when they last met, after all.

If they meet in the final, it will happen. Mark my words. And when it does happen, I better get some credit considering how much of an upset many people would consider that.

Uh... you mean overall, on both days, they were worse than United? Maybe United choked? If they did, how can you call them a better team? Maybe Van Gaal outthought Ferguson? If so, that's rather a plus point for Mourinho against Ferguson.

How is that a plus point? Because for once SAF didn't take them to the CL final? ManU choked for once, so what? All I'm saying is that ManU would have beaten them as they did meet in the final. Anyway, who cares, that incredibly talented Inter team won the CL like they were supposed to so many times. Rafa Benitez won a Champions League with a less-talented team and everyone seems to think he's a **** manager.

So he was pushed out of the team by an older, better striker than him. He's hardly underperformed this season, IIRC he has a record of a goal every other game which is pretty good. Problem is with Real's strikers is Ronaldo's selfishness, but that's for another time. I think we can credit Jose a whole lot, considering Pellegrini conclusively failed to get him firing.

But you were the one to credit Jose for making Benzema play like everyone expected him to play...he didn't play one season, because Raul and Higuain were so good, then the next season the coach stupidly gets rid of Raul and Higuain is hurt so Benzema plays OK (played like **** for awhile, and I still don't think he's very good considering the service he gets), sort of like how he played at Lyon...how do we credit Jose a whole lot? My initial point was mainly that Jose made a huge mistake in getting rid of Raul.

What? Did you just call Guti and Raul more vocal than Javier Zanetti? I fail to see how you can possibly call Raul and Guti fiery, vocal leaders and Zanetti small and quiet. That's not even taking into account Cambiasso, who is a truly fearsome leader by all accounts.

Oh come on. Ask any Inter fan. Zanetti is famous for being soft-spoken. Guti is very vocal, Raul is more quiet but when he says something, it goes. He has as much sway as anyone and in the past has clashed with managers before, which is probably why Jose got rid of him. Jose's ego and Raul probably would have clashed. Big mistake, since Raul would have been crucial for RM this season. As far as Cambiasso goes, I don't think we know how exactly the Inter dressing room works, but Cambiasso is not considered that type of leader in Argentina I can tell you that. That's why even though he's better than Mascherano, Mascherano is the one that plays all of the time and wears the captain's armband.

Meh, you think this, you think that. Mourinho thinks otherwise. We'll never know, but somehow I doubt it changed the league outcome much anyway.

But it's so obvious how crucial those players would have been. RM desperately needed another striker, which is why they had to get Adebayor on loan. You're biased if you think that it was a good idea for RM to go into this season with two strikers, one of whom didn't play that much the year before. Mourinho decides to get rid of one, so when one is hurt and one underperforms, he's screwed. It was a huge mistake. The same goes for Guti...two out of RM's three losses happened when Xabi Alonso didn't play. That's not a coincidence, and it's something that a lot of Spaniards have noticed. Guti was the ideal backup for XA, and had he played in those games, Real Madrid would have looked completely different.

No, it isn't. I'm afraid Madrid just aren't good enough to play Barca at their own game and win, because nobody is. Man for man, Barca are the best team on the planet by a huge margin. Can you really see Sami Khedira facing off against Xavi in a technical, flowing game and winning? Ricardo Carvalho outclassing Gerard Pique? Angel Di Maria against David Villa? Come off it. In an open match, Barca win most of the time. It's the same problem people had against Sacchi's Milan and Michel's Ajax; you just couldn't outplay them.

First of all, no team can be outplayed, I don't buy that one bit. Second, RM tried to play them open last season, even though that team wasn't nearly as good as this one. At least they competed. Considering how stacked this team is (they are more talented than Barca IMO), they should be able to go toe to toe with RM. With Del Bosque I bet they could have, but with Mourinho, we get this 20% possession sit back and defend football. Sure it worked somewhat in the last game, but that's not how the galacticos are supposed to play.

Maybe Mourinho couldn't do what Wenger does, but once more, who cares? He wins. Wenger hasn't for five years now.

Because if Mourinho can't do something other managers do, why should he be hailed as the greatest ever? Also, Mancini has won more titles than Wenger has in the past few years, does that mean Mancini is a better manager? It's silly to only look at trophies, as I've stated over and over again. Mourinho always takes the jobs where he knows he'll win...good for him, but I don't see why we have to call him the greatest ever for winning trophies with great teams. Pep doesn't get that kind of praise because we know how good this Barca team is. It's the same for Mourinho's current team and his two previous ones: they were the best in the world.

Because the world isn't ****** fair, get over it. Jose gets credit because he's damned good, and one of the best managers in the world right now. At the end of the day, football is a results business, and he gets them like clockwork.

What you're annoyed with here is the media, who fawn over Jose and people read it and believe it. So you're ****** with the media and you want them to be fairer, look at things rationally, and don't just go for the most charismatic and interesting man.

Fat ******* chance. I see no reason why you keep up this ridiculous vendetta against Mourinho. He's an excellent manager, one of the best in the world because he gets results.

Oh, because I don't think he's the greatest manager ever yet I suddenly have a vendetta against him? Ridiculous. As for your other sentences, you pretty much agreed with me, so I don't see why you're so angry at my posts. I am going for the media/public with this, but I'm discussing the issue, because it would be stupid to just attack the media in general (there'd be too much to talk about). As far as "going for Jose" I don't think that matters. I doubt Jose cares if some guy is writing about him on a forum. That's why I don't mind slagging him.

As far as "getting results" goes, so did Rafa Benitez, and he did that with worse teams than Mourinho. In fact he usually beat Mourinho. But everyone thinks Benitez is a terrible manager. Go figure.

Ah, the voice of reason. There's just no justifiable reason for Joses criticism. Not only was he a breath of fresh air in the prem, but he also had a certain aura around him. EVERYONE knows SAF is a tremondous manager, but in the future Jose will be pretty dam close. Cut the guy some slack. If he went to Man City, he'd sort the squad out top to bottom, sort out petulant children like Balo, and turn them into an exceptional unit. Why? Because he is that dam good.

There are reasons for Jose's criticism right now, mainly his sale of Guti and Raul, the negative football, and the annoying media comments (not that I care too much, but hearing him make the conspiracy theories about the refs giving Barca the title and being anti-RM are stupid). I do agree though he'd be a great fit for ManCity, which is what I said in the OP. That's his specialty, dealing with egos on an unlimited budget. Most importantly, why should I give him some slack? The guy is hailed by everyone as the greatest manager ever, and all of the sudden I'm being unfair in saying that those claims are untrue and that he's overrated?

Sporting Clube de Portugal won 2 titles?

During Jose's two full seasons at Porto SCP didn't finish in the top two, and one of those seasons they struggled a lot. The point is that there have been many managers who have won trophies in Portugal that aren't necessarily great managers because the league is very unbalanced. Sort of like the SPL. If you win a trophy with Celtic or Rangers it's not a giant deal.

---------- Post added at 11:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:02 AM ----------

How is it a basis for an argument that he had the best teams? Arsenal had an amazing team, and got the invincible season. Why can Wenger be applauded for that, for having a great team - and then Jose criticised for having a great team? You can have the most talented squad in the world, but without the right manager there it's irrelevant. Madrid went what, 7 years without going past the last 16 of the CL? For the amount they spend and the talent they have, that's inexcusable. And you cannot tell me that this years squad is that much greater than previous years.

I do agree with you to a certain extent, I was only countering Jose's success with the invincibles. But the difference is the Invincibles were built on a budget, while Chelsea was built by a Russian oligarch. An important thing to remember is that beginning in 02 Arsenal starting turning a big profit on transfers, which is even before the Invincibles happened.

As for Madrid, they've been poor since Zidane retired, and yes, they've underperformed. In the last couple of years in the galactico era, the club management was stupid and they got rid of manager after manager, which helps explain why they underperformed. After the galacticos, that team was built on a budget, and the Madrid team from 06-09 was nothing special in terms of talent (but the pressure was still there), so it doesn't surprise me too much they choked. And yes, this year's team is much, much better than any of those teams, including last year's team. The galacticos have now had a lot of time to gel, and some very important reinforcements were brought in this season. As I've said over and over again, if RM somehow fails to win a trophy this season, it would be very disappointing.

Jose does play good football, when he wants to. What about the 8-0 thrashings of some teams this year? He's a masterful tactician and knows what needs to be done to get results. He went too offensive against Barca and they annihilated them. Who cares if they had 20% possession last game, surely that's better than being embarrassed. And you say that Madrid should be able to go toe to toe offensively with Barca. No, no they shouldn't at all. If Ferguson or Wenger were at Madrid they'd play very similarly. Wenger and Ferguson, who you repeatedly idolise as being the greater, both have and will sit back and soak up the pressure against Barcelona. Ferguson isn't stupid or naive enough to think he can just go toe to toe with any team, he tinkers his tactic constantly to ensure the result before anything else. Just look at the FA cup quarter final, we're happy to sit back and soak up against Arsenal because it works, and gets the result. So why exactly are you criticising Jose for this, and then applauding managers who will happily do the same as him? Even Wenger, for even a man as stubborn as him, sat back at the Nou Camp and allowed them to dominate possession.

Jose plays good football maybe if his team is Real Madrid against a much worse team, but an 8-0 victory doesn't make them a really entertaining team. He got annihilated in the first match, that much is true, but Pellegrini never bent over and played defense like that for 90 minutes. This team is good enough to play offensively against Barca, I'm just not sure if Mourinho is the guy to do it. As far as Wenger and Ferguson go, I don't think so. Wenger went out and played offensively 3 out of the 4 games against Barca, and he won two. The last game was disappointing from him, but they were a man down and suffered from a lack of confidence (that CC loss really did their heads in this season, and I think that's why they ****** up chasing for the title so much). As far as Ferguson goes, that's because ManU is that type of team. They will defend well and beat you on the counter, especially if it's a possession team like Arsenal. That's how they play. But neither Wenger nor Ferguson manage RM, and if they did manage the galacticos and the expectation was good football, they'd give it to them. Maybe the first season they'd lose once or twice to Barca but I bet either of them would get a trophy or two out of this RM team (and this year, that means beating Barca).

Even if he doesn't stay for the long term (though he may decide he's travelled enough and wants to finish his legacy with United!), at least he'll stabilise the ship and build upon Fergie's generation to allow a new, more long term manager to take over.

The reason he wouldn't stay long-term is because I don't know if he could get that kind of success and do what Wenger and SAF do. I don't know if he'd stablize the ship, he probably would win you some trophies and leave you in debt with an aging squad and lack of debt. The next managers would have to pick up the pieces.

And what he did at Chelsea was a great achievement. He made them what they are now, you can't just buy a team - look at Manchester City. It needs a manager of the highest quality to mould a team like that together. I do believe that Chelsea are where they are now due to Mourinho's work.

It is true that this is his strength, and I'm not saying he's not a good manager. But why is managing a Chelsea/RM/ManCity better than getting success at smaller clubs with smaller budgets? The key, of course, for the Chelsea's and ManCity's and RM's of the world is to let some other manager try and build the team. He'll probably fail, but at least he'll have laid down a foundation of good players. Then you step in and spend even more money and hopefully you won't be able to **** that up. That's what he did at Chelsea and Real Madrid, and if he goes to ManCity, that will have been the case too.

Exactly. Agreed with everything except Balo part. He is a gone case. Even Jose was not able to handle him when both were at Inter. He told something like "If Balotelli had two heads he'd be twice as stupid.".

Jose has a big ego and he is an excellent manipulator. He makes controversial statements in the media to protect his players and divert the attention.

What he did with Inter was remarkable and he was much needed catalyst for Premier league. Loved his interviews a lot even though he had very good healthy rivalry with SAF.

What he did with Inter wasn't remarkable. The first season all everyone would talk about was how overrated he was because he did exactly what Mancini did. Then poof, a bunch of world class players show up and Inter has the best team in the world. They struggle a lot in Serie A, so much so that even though they didn't have any real competitors, they didn't win the title until the last day. True they won the CL, but winning the CL with that squad wasn't a big surprise, and they had some help from the Icelandic volcano.

Thats absolutely spot on mate. It's a hilarious comment. But Balotelli is not an hopeless case. Mourinho liked him but not his attitude. When he won the CL he hugged Balo. I hope he proves me and us all wrong soon. Balo needs time.

But your right about Mourinho being a guy who can manage his players (and media). He gets the best of his team and he is arrogant but in a good way. And his english accent is funny...and his personality is just awesome!

I can't understand why someone would think he is overrated or not like him. He has got everything.

Because if everyone thinks he's the best manager in history when he isn't, than he's overrated. A lot of people think he's overrated. I used to kind of like him because he was entertaining and would say funny ****, but last year he just started to get on my nerves. And I can't stand his ego, it's like he thinks he's the one on the pitch winning things. There's that famous quote about a good manager only being able to improve his team 10% while a bad manager can make his team worse by 50%. I don't doubt that Jose can make his team 10% better, but he/the world thinks he's the greatest thing since sliced bread because he goes to the best clubs and wins what he's expected to more or less. Of course if he goes to Liverpool and wins a Premiership on a reasonable budget, it would totally change my view of him. But I doubt he would ever take over at a club that wasn't the best already, at a club where being a manager would truly be a challenge. That's why Guus Hiddink is a badass.

 

[GodCubed]

Mourinho took a good team that Ranieri couldn't push over the brink and then he spent a **** ton of money and did it. Cool. As far as Grant goes, I said Grant stepped in to a very tough situation mid season and he did better than Jose ever did with someone else's team. My point is that this Chelsea team could have been managed by anyone because it was so good. So why should Mourinho get endless accolades for doing what Avram Grant could do?

Yeah. Ranieri had the money to spend, and he didn't exactly spend it wisely (or much at all). Grant didn't do better than Mourinho, what are you talking about? Jose won 6 trophies with Chelsea, Grant won 0.

This is what is bothering me by the replies. When did I ever say Mourinho isn't "much good?" I said he's a great manager I just don't think he's the best manager of all time like everyone else thinks. And why is everyone only picking out one aspect of Mourinho's management (trophies) and ignoring everything else? Ignoring the fact that he wins trophies at places he is supposed to win trophies? And I'd hope that if anyone called him a great manager he'd be responsible for devoping a few good players. And yes, he was good during Inter's transfer window, but it was a great window and the buys were no brainers. If he couldn't win a couple of trophies with that Inter squad than he wouldn't be a good manager. He almost lost the Scudetto but won it on the last day.

Fine, you didn't say Mourinho isn't much good, but on no occasion did ANYONE here say that Mourinho was "the best manager of all time". Nobody else thinks that apart from a select few morons who don't even come on here.

Everyone's picking out the success aspect of Jose's career because football is a ****** results business. You play to win, and Jose is one of the best winners in world football. So what, he was supposed to win the Champions League at Porto? The reason he got all these jobs where he is expected to win is because he did, and does, just that. I just named you a few players he was responsible for developing, not to mention the many Chelsea players he improved immeasurably. Saying he 'almost lost' is stupid. He won. The rest is irrelevant.

And when was the last time Wenger managed the best team in the league? It's been about the same amount of time. Not for Jose though, only manages the best team in the league. And when was the last time Mourinho went undefeated? Took a club from being a mid-tier team to a top team (without hundreds of millions being spent in the process)? When was the last time he made a PROFIT in the transfer window? For more than one year in a row? For eight years in a row? When was the last time he consistently achieved success for many years in a row on a tight budget? When was the last time he built a club for long-term success? And when was the last time his team played exciting football? This year's RM team was his first, but it's pretty hard not to play attractive football with this bunch. Yet he manages to do that sometimes.

So in other words, Wenger had the best team in the league, had the chance to continue it, and mucked up? At least when Jose leaves a club, they're the best in the league still. Jose doesn't manage the best team in the league as many people have said: Chelsea weren't, Porto weren't (third at the time he took over). Took a club from mid to top? How about Leiria? A little-known and obscure club in a league dominated by the Big Three, and he took them to third.

When you say consistently achieving success, do you mean consistently not winning for five years? As said earlier, it isn't his modus operandi to build for the future. He isn't here to build legacies, he's here to win immediately. Again, exciting football doesn't matter.

He gets the results his teams are supposed to get. How does that make him the best manager of all time?

Again, nobody called him the best manager of all time. And he gets the results his teams are supposed to get because it was clear from early on that he was a particularly good manager. Do you think he'd get the chances at Chelsea and Inter and even Porto if he hadn't proved himself? He's earned the right to manage big teams by being **** good. We can't hold that against him. Nobody's going to turn down a big club to go to a small one.

The foundation was built by a ridiculous amount of spending by Rainieri, and then Jose comes in and spends even more. The team was so talented that Avram Grant did even better than Jose ever did with it. Yet Jose is such a genius for winning those two PL titles. As far as Scolari goes, he was a horrible pick for the job. He hadn't ever managed a European club team. He hadn't even managed a club team in 8 seasons. Just because one manager was able to **** up with that squad doesn't mean that Jose is a genius.

As I said before, Grant didn't do better than Jose, stop ****** deluding yourself. The people Ranieri bought - Veron, Glen Johnson, Wayne Bridge, Alexey Smertin, Adrian Mutu, Hernan Crespo, Scott Parker - were hardly the spine of a team, and indeed most were sold when Jose took over. Nobody thinks Mourinho is a genius for winning the silverware with Chelsea, we think he's a genius for sustained success over his entire career so far.

But we always knew that we stack up well against a team like Spain. It's common sense that to beat a Spanish team you do it with good defense, organization, physicality, athleticism, fitness, and determination.

Yay for blanket statements.

If they meet in the final, it will happen. Mark my words. And when it does happen, I better get some credit considering how much of an upset many people would consider that.

Why? A much better (there is no denying it) United team lost to what was probably a worse or comparable Barca team to this one now the last time they met in a Champions League final. Besides, I wasn't even trying to disagree with what you said, I was just saying it was phenomenally stupid to say that it will happen.

How is that a plus point? Because for once SAF didn't take them to the CL final? ManU choked for once, so what? All I'm saying is that ManU would have beaten them as they did meet in the final. Anyway, who cares, that incredibly talented Inter team won the CL like they were supposed to so many times. Rafa Benitez won a Champions League with a less-talented team and everyone seems to think he's a **** manager.

No, because Mourinho beat a manager who beat Ferguson. All I'm saying is that you can't make wild assumptions like that. That incredibly talented Inter team won the CL, which they hadn't in about 55 years, for all their dominance in Serie A lately.

Again, you're generalising everyone. I think Benitez is a very talented manager, and so do a whole load of Liverpool fans for one.

But you were the one to credit Jose for making Benzema play like everyone expected him to play...he didn't play one season, because Raul and Higuain were so good, then the next season the coach stupidly gets rid of Raul and Higuain is hurt so Benzema plays OK (played like **** for awhile, and I still don't think he's very good considering the service he gets), sort of like how he played at Lyon...how do we credit Jose a whole lot? My initial point was mainly that Jose made a huge mistake in getting rid of Raul.

Benzema played extremely well. He was on absolute fire for a while. Your arguments against Raul are subjective, nobody can prove anything, so there's little point speculating. He might've made a masterstroke, who knows?

Oh come on. Ask any Inter fan. Zanetti is famous for being soft-spoken. Guti is very vocal, Raul is more quiet but when he says something, it goes. He has as much sway as anyone and in the past has clashed with managers before, which is probably why Jose got rid of him. Jose's ego and Raul probably would have clashed. Big mistake, since Raul would have been crucial for RM this season. As far as Cambiasso goes, I don't think we know how exactly the Inter dressing room works, but Cambiasso is not considered that type of leader in Argentina I can tell you that. That's why even though he's better than Mascherano, Mascherano is the one that plays all of the time and wears the captain's armband.

Guti and Raul would've hardly played, besides all this speculating. I doubt a team which has the likes of Carvalho, Alonso, Casillas and so on need too many more leaders anyway, and I find it hard to believe the absence of two bit-part players cost them a league title in which they were utterly outclassed by a better team.

But it's so obvious how crucial those players would have been. RM desperately needed another striker, which is why they had to get Adebayor on loan. You're biased if you think that it was a good idea for RM to go into this season with two strikers, one of whom didn't play that much the year before. Mourinho decides to get rid of one, so when one is hurt and one underperforms, he's screwed. It was a huge mistake. The same goes for Guti...two out of RM's three losses happened when Xabi Alonso didn't play. That's not a coincidence, and it's something that a lot of Spaniards have noticed. Guti was the ideal backup for XA, and had he played in those games, Real Madrid would have looked completely different.

Mmm, so obvious that two 32 year olds would've been vital to Madrid's chances. They wouldn't have played. You yourself said Madrid got Adebayor, so what's the trouble? How am I biased? I support Aston Villa and care little for the result of La Liga. As I said, Mourinho thinks otherwise, and that's the only thing that really matters. Fact is, he doesn't/didn't have Raul or Guti, so we don't know how it would've worked.

First of all, no team can be outplayed, I don't buy that one bit. Second, RM tried to play them open last season, even though that team wasn't nearly as good as this one. At least they competed. Considering how stacked this team is (they are more talented than Barca IMO), they should be able to go toe to toe with RM. With Del Bosque I bet they could have, but with Mourinho, we get this 20% possession sit back and defend football. Sure it worked somewhat in the last game, but that's not how the galacticos are supposed to play.

Eh? No team can be outplayed? Of course a team can be ****** outplayed, it happen at all levels of football. It is amusing to me you pointed out how RM tried to play them open last season. You mean last season, when they lost twice, both times utterly conclusively.

My point stands: every time someone has tried to play this Barcelona team at their own game they have eventually failed. Arsenal came the closest, but still lost in the end. They're just too good at what they do. Mourinho's tactics against Barca are proven to work (see Inter) and frankly he should stick by them.

You seem to care a lot about how a team 'should' be rather than how effective it is. I care much more for the latter. For example, my team Aston Villa were far better in the preceding three seasons to this one by playing a truly awful hoofball. We came 5th three times. M'sieur Houllier comes in, tries to play nice, attractive football, and we plummet into the relegation zone. I pick effectiveness and results over aesthetics any day.

Oh, and to say this RM team is more talented than Barca's is... well, wrong. IMO, of course.

Because if Mourinho can't do something other managers do, why should he be hailed as the greatest ever? Also, Mancini has won more titles than Wenger has in the past few years, does that mean Mancini is a better manager? It's silly to only look at trophies, as I've stated over and over again. Mourinho always takes the jobs where he knows he'll win...good for him, but I don't see why we have to call him the greatest ever for winning trophies with great teams. Pep doesn't get that kind of praise because we know how good this Barca team is. It's the same for Mourinho's current team and his two previous ones: they were the best in the world.

He's. Not. Hailed. As. The. Greatest. Ever. By. Anyone. Sane.

Compare Mancini and Wenger's overall records. Who wins? Wenger. Thus, Wenger is better.

Mourinho takes the jobs which he is offered. He is offered these jobs because he's one of the best. Your argument is ridiculous, especially when you consider Guardiola gets a **** of a lot of praise. And for the last time, there is no way on Earth that Mourinho's previous two teams were the best in the world when he took them over. He MADE them the best in the world.

Oh, because I don't think he's the greatest manager ever yet I suddenly have a vendetta against him? Ridiculous. As for your other sentences, you pretty much agreed with me, so I don't see why you're so angry at my posts. I am going for the media/public with this, but I'm discussing the issue, because it would be stupid to just attack the media in general (there'd be too much to talk about). As far as "going for Jose" I don't think that matters. I doubt Jose cares if some guy is writing about him on a forum. That's why I don't mind slagging him.

As far as "getting results" goes, so did Rafa Benitez, and he did that with worse teams than Mourinho. In fact he usually beat Mourinho. But everyone thinks Benitez is a terrible manager. Go figure.

No, I think you have a vendetta against him because you started a thread like this and continued to rail against all reason. I'm angry at you because you're being stupid in the way you put forward your arguments, by just drawing on your opinions and generalising wildly.

The point I was making is that you are, for some reason, trying to argue against he media (and therefore the majority of the public) that fawn over Mourinho, which is utterly ridiculous.

Oh, and I think Benitez is a brilliant manager. Go figure.

P.S Good to see you're a fan of Hiddink. Wasn't his football style with South Korea and Australia lovely?

 

[ajt09]

So when does the word count limit come into effect for posts

 

[GodCubed]

So when does the word count limit come into effect for posts

Not quickly enough, it would seem.

 

[I Hate Fish]

When he achieves at a team with a shoe-string budget, I'll maybe just call him a good manager. Love his mind games and interviews though. :wub:

 

[Joel`]

Why would Wenger and Ferguson automatically play a certain way because they're managing 'galacticos'. They have their style, they play it. You can't criticise Mourinho because of a divorce between the ownership and control of the football team. He gets results, who are you to say the galacticos are to play this way, do things this way. They are MOURINHO'S team, and he's going to get results the way he deems fit. The board hired him, did they not? If they weren't aware of his style of football, and wanted something else, then they are ******* awful employer's for not researching someone they'll pay millions. What a ridiculous argument, clutching at straws here, you really are.

So, you're excusing poor performances because they get rid of manager after manager. And then the very same year they employ Mourinho, they get to the semi-finals, yet this isn't anything to do with him? It's suddenly all about the team? Then why couldn't the past galacticos do it by themselves, since you have suddenly made the manager an irrelevant part of this Real Madrid equation!

Also, I and many others would consider Barcelona to have a by far superior team. A **** sight many of Barca's players would make the World first XI, so by definition, they are the true galacticos. Their team will frankly play anyone off the park if they go and attack, Wenger realised this in their last 16 match and adapted his tactics for both legs. Ferguson realises this, every manager that plays against them realise this. But then you keep going on, and on about the differences between the sides to excuse other managers that you have put on a pedestal in order to discriminate Jose's abilities. Surely you're smart enough to realise you simply cannot applaud Wenger when he goes defensive against Barca and then criticise Mourinho for the very same thing. It's idiotic. Madrid have got stronger since Pellegrini, but so have Barca too.

You obviously have some sort of vendetta against Mourinho or the media image of him, and are taking it out here. You can cite criticisms against him, like you can any manager, but they are in no way reasons to question his ability though. Very different concepts, he proves himself time and time again, and there's a reason almost any top club would love him at the helm.