Jose Mourinho is so overrated

[curtis290]

No one who has actually intelligently argued with you has said that he's the best in the world, I don't think.

You say that Mourinho is a bad manager because he played defensively against Barcelona, and then call Ferguson the best manager - who played defensively against Barcelona. That's hypocritical. Just because "Mourinho is in charge of the galacticos" is irrelevant. He's been in charge for 9 months, not his whole career. And there is not set way a team plays, they hired him, and he'll play however he **** well likes. Lets say Ferguson retired, and we hired Biesla. Is Biesla a poor manager because he doesn't play the same way as Ferguson did? No, because it's now Biesla's team.

Edit: in response to your first sentence, several people in the thread have claimed he's the best in the world, the most recent being at the top of this page, 6. That's what gets me mad. IMO, SAF and Wenger and even Hiddink have all proven themselves in ways Mourinho hasn't (yet, he still may do that, he may be the greatest of all time, I just don't know yet because he hasn't shown me. that's why I think some of his praise is unjustified and that he's overrated).

First of all, if you're right, than I'm inconsistent, not hypocritical. Hypocrisy has to do with my words and beliefs contradicting my actions in real life, not the consistency of my argumentation. If I were a football manager and spent my team into debt, didn't bring up any good young players, and played ugly football, than I'd be the biggest hypocrit on the forum. But I'm not, so all you can attack me for is being inconsistent.

Second, I NEVER called Mourinho a bad manager. In my eyes, though, he has lost a few points because he plays boring football. Playing attractive football is part of my criteria for what I think makes a good manager, though I realize it's the one out of the four that's very subjective. As far as SAF goes, yeah, I don't think he usually has ManU playing that attractive football, and he certainly would never risk results for entertainment, but he's still a great manager because he fits the other 4 criteria so well.

Now, coaching at RM is a very unique job. That's why I don't think your Ferguson/Bielsa comparison is valid, because ManU doesn't expect you to play a certain way. Real Madrid does. IMO, part of the job description is playing attractive football. That's what Perez and Valdano are about, and they're the ones responsible for this whole project. It's clear that Mourinho has some obligation to do this. This year's RM team has certainly been more offensive than Mourinho's teams in the past, and look at how offensive he went out in the first leg. There is no way Mourinho would ever do that of his own volition. I think Mourinho has proven that he only knows one way to win. When he played offensively against Barca, they were absolutely humiliated. Taking into context Real Madrid's previous season, Real Madrid's performance in the league has been satisfactory.

But let's not confuse my criticism for Mourinho at Real Madrid for why I'm rooting against him. I criticize him for the poor performance in the league, the idiotic decision to sell Guti and Raul, his inability to win playing offensively (I think that's inflexibility), and for not getting the team to play like Galacticos. As far as the attractive football stuff goes (which is what got people foaming at the mouth), part of that is a criticism, but mostly it was just me expressing my discontent with what happened. I said I was disappointed with RM playing catenaccio, and that it made me root against them (I was rooting for them last season). That is different from my criticism of Mourinho and I don't see why I should get in trouble for expressing which team I'm going to root for.

So, are you saying that Mourinho is overrated because of how he plays with Madrid? That's retarded. Has he suddenly become a bad manager between managing Inter and Madrid? Of course not. If we ignore Madrid though and focus on the past, then you're saying he's just poor for playing defensively. But Ferguson also plays defensively, and he's apparently the greatest. That is why you're being horrifically hypocritical, don't like any manager playing defensive ever? Fine. But you can't praise other managers that do the exact same.

No, I decided Mourinho was overrated before he came to Real Madrid (of course, as I said before, he could prove me wrong, maybe he's the best in the world, I just don't think he has shown it to me yet). I do have some criticisms for him during his time at Real Madrid, the ones I listed above. As far as the Fergie point goes, I think I answered that in my response above. Obviously there are plenty of great defensive managers in history. I never once claimed you have to play attractive football to be a good manager (and if you think playing unattractive football is the only reason I think Jose is overrated, than you haven't listened to me), that's only one part of being a good manager. But they probably fit my other criteria very well if they were true greats.

What you're doing is conveying your anger towards the man for ruining a team you conceive should be playing the beautiful game. That isn't bad management, that's your dislike. BIG difference. You said it yourself, you were angry at Wenger for playing defensively against Barcelona. Wenger hasn't become bad for that game, has he? No. Nor has Mourinho.

Perhaps, but I do think that in playing ugly football, Mourinho is not fulfilling his job description (and he has shown this season that he he can only win by playing defensively). But again, the ugly football was not the focus of my criticisms towards Mourinho at Real Madrid OR the reasons that I think he's overrated. I already listed my criticisms for him at Real Madrid, and I listed the reasons I think he's overrated (according to my criteria, he's not even in the top 3 managers in the world right now, much less the best). I think people are picking out a small part of my posts they don't like and lambasting me for it.

On the subject of Mourinho "only getting defensive for that one game," he won't be defensive for that one game. He was the last game, and he will be just as defensive the next two games. He'll only play defensively against Barca, even though he's coaching the galacticos I don't think he has the flexibility nor the courage to attack Barca (while other managers try). Wenger at least tried several times, and he only sold out on his principles once.

As far as Wenger goes, it was just one game, and he has gone out and played offensively against great teams and won (beat Barca twice in two seasons), but I did **** me off, and I did lose respect for him. I admire Wenger so much because he sticks to his principles, even though it costs him trophies as well as results. That one game though he sold out on his principles and just went for the result. I guess I don't blame him too much, he needed it really badly after the CC loss, but still it was disappointing from him. Because following your principles isn't about doing it 99% of the time, it's about doing it 100% of the time. Because 99% of the time it might be fairly easy, and 1% of the time it's very difficult. It's when you stay true to yourself during that 1% that it shows your true character. That's what I believe in real life, and I believe in it to a certain extent in football. But I'm way off track.

---------- Post added at 01:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:21 PM ----------

I actually have to agree with the majority of what you are saying Curtis. Mourinho is a top class manager, but I think he is overrated to an extent. He isn't the best manager in the world, but he is probably the best at handling the media and taking the pressure off his players. He is very good tactically, and a very good 'cup' manager in as much as he knows how to win big games.

For me, the greatest managers ever have always taken risks and stuck to their principles. The likes of Chapman and Michels were tactical innovators, while Clough had his teams play a more attractive brand of football to the rest of the league. Managers are not only remembered for what they have won, but for how they have won them.

I've no doubt that Mourinho will go on to win many more trophies and be remembered as one of the best ever football managers. He has a long and fruitful future ahead, but for me there are a number of better managers currently out there. The men that leave a legacy, the SAF's and Wengers, are the true greats

Great post my friend! I'd like it but I'm out of likes. +100 I couldn't agree with you more.

 

[Joel`]

Valdano knew how he would play football. He still hired him in this knowledge. By definition, it is not in the job description, and he's under no contractual obligation to do so. You can't criticise him for this, it's Madrid's fault and problem. Isn't Valdano also the man that sold Makelele because he only made sidewards passes? That's certainly a man I trust on footballing tactics right there!

And Mourinho has gone defensive for Barcelona games. Barca also outplayed Arsenal at the Emirates for much, but they got tired and were caught on the counter. And the Barca he played against years a go was a whole other beast. This team 7 or 8 of them would walk into the first XI. Wenger did it this year, Mourinho has done it. If United play them, Fergie will do it. Any manager with half a brain will do it, if they want a chance at winning.

Mourinho has brought success to every team he's managed, and that's an outstanding accomplishment whichever way you look at it.

Also, Hypocrisy isn't to do with saying one thing and doing another. It's a self-contradiction.

 

[curtis290]

Valdano knew how he would play football. He still hired him in this knowledge. By definition, it is not in the job description, and he's under no contractual obligation to do so. You can't criticise him for this, it's Madrid's fault and problem. Isn't Valdano also the man that sold Makelele because he only made sidewards passes? That's certainly a man I trust on footballing tactics right there!

First of all, I think it was Perez that hired him considering Valdano's comments about Mourinho in the past. I do agree that it's not an issue of contracts. However, you do have to do what your boss tells you, and I wasn't saying this was simply about contractual obligations. It's about principles and values. Much different. I do agree with you about Makelele though, that was a terrible decision. The original Galacticos needed that one specialist destroyer DM who isn't entertaining to watch but allows the spectacle to happen, that makes it effective. Makelele, Guti, Figo, and Zidane was the greatest midfield in history. Three of them were magnificent to watch, and the other one did the dirty work, but he did it very well and enabled the other three and the team as a whole to be effective. That's why it's unfair to criticize me for only valuing style. Clearly substance matters too. A balance is needed. But I certainly don't buy into the belief that the result is all that matters. Call me crazy, but there are a lot of people out there that would agree with me, including Valdano (love him or hate him), a lot of Spaniards, especially Madridistas, most football fans in Argentina and Brazil (maybe some other countries too, like Holland), and Arsene Wenger.

And Mourinho has gone defensive for Barcelona games. Barca also outplayed Arsenal at the Emirates for much, but they got tired and were caught on the counter. And the Barca he played against years a go was a whole other beast. This team 7 or 8 of them would walk into the first XI. Wenger did it this year, Mourinho has done it. If United play them, Fergie will do it. Any manager with half a brain will do it, if they want a chance at winning.

I do agree that Barca outplayed Arsenal. However, at least Arsenal was trying to play offensive. It wasn't that Barca got tired, they actually went defensive (of all things) and took off a forward and put on Keita. That's when Arsenal scored. When I saw that, I said "serves them right," because Barca got lame and tactical and defensive, and Arsenal went and scored on them. I'd have rather seen them stick with the 4-3-3 and try to score again. Also, other teams have gone out and played football against Barca in the past few seasons, and they have won or gotten close I've seen them drop results to teams like Atletico Madrid, Valencia, Villarreal, Sevilla, if I remember correctly, and in those games those teams played offensively against them. None of those teams were galacticos, but they at least tried to play good football. Mourinho didn't, so I'll root against him.

Mourinho has brought success to every team he's managed, and that's an outstanding accomplishment whichever way you look at it.

But IMO he has only won one trophy in his entire life where his team wasn't the most talented in the competition, and that's the 03-04 Champions League run he had. Maybe, just maybe, 09-10 Barca was more talented than 09-10 Inter, but they were **** close. This season, Real Madrid is more talented than Barca, IMO, and they're deeper. Which is what will advance them to the final. Adriano is out, as is Abidal, so Barca doesn't have a LB. Their wing backs are crucial to their success, and this will cost them. It's going to be a **** shame, this Barca team is so much more likeable than this Real Madrid team. And this is coming from a neutral who rooted for Real Madrid last season (was undecided when they played Barca, but I wanted to see them get trophies).

Also, Hypocrisy isn't to do with saying one thing and doing another. It's a self-contradiction.

Here's the definition from dictionary.com:
a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

and:

a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

For me, hypocrisy is not practicing what you preach, and I believe it's a Greek term (hypokrosys, which means play acting) put into popular parlance by Jesus' reference to the hypocrites in his teachings. He talked about the hypocrites who would say one thing and not follow up on their principles. I could be wrong though. But the point is, I think you're accusing me of being inconsistent, but not hypocritical. I don't feel that I've been inconsistent, I saw your and Alex's arguments and I thought I explained myself. If you have seen other places where I'm inconsistent, please point it out, because I'd rather be wrong than inconsistent. But I don't think I'm a hypocrite because I don't manage a football club, and I don't root for a team in a manner that contradicts my ideas.

If you disagree with me on whether or not Mourinho should play attractive football for RM, that's one discussion, and I do realize I'm defending a difficult position.

If you disagree with me on my criticisms of Mourinho's tenure at RM (mainly poor performance in the league, stupid sales of Guti and Raul that cost him the title, the inability to play offensive football in big games, etc.) that's another discussion.

If you disagree with my criteria on what makes a great manager (especially the first 4), than that's another discussion.

And if you think that Mourinho is as good as SAF, Wenger, or Hiddink according to my criteria, than that's another discussion.

For all of you, let me know which discussion you're referring to when you post.

 

[ajt09]

Look, without being podantic, or offensive to anybody, and just to sum up, I think we can all say that Jose is nowhere near as good as Fergie right now, for obvious reasons. But he is an great manager, with a tremondous amount of ability, and has an excellent chance of pushing Fergie to being as good. In this debate, no one is right, no one is wrong. It's open to opinion. Jose has a lot of years to prove what he can do, and I can say he has an excellent chance of getting close to any manager who is world class, wether or not it SAF or anyone. But to be critical of him by saying he is overrated now, is wrong. As I said, he has a long way to go. Give hime time. And I am convinced, he will prove many, many doubters wrong. So for arguments sake-he isn't "world class" yet. But he will be. And you can quote me on that.

 

[*Paul*]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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).

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.

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.

The what if game is exactly what ****** me off though.


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.

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.

God, break your posts down.

Firstly, I would like to point out a win is a win, no matter how you win. And if you ask your beloved Jorge Valdano if he would rather play nice football and not win or just win with so-called 'ugly' football, although José's isn't ugly at all, his teams are great to watch on the counter.

Also, when has Wenger been consistent with success? He won the title with the 'Invincibles' squad, who were top class, as you said Jose won with Inter, and has hardly matched it ever since.

Fergie is not totally perfect either, in 2002 or 2003 he was nearly sacked, but luckily managed to retain his job.

 

[ajt09]

God, break your posts down.

Firstly, I would like to point out a win is a win, no matter how you win. And if you ask your beloved Jorge Valdano if he would rather play nice football and not win or just win with so-called 'ugly' football, although José's isn't ugly at all, his teams are great to watch on the counter.

Also, when has Wenger been consistent with success? He won the title with the 'Invincibles' squad, who were top class, as you said Jose won with Inter, and has hardly matched it ever since.

Fergie is not totally perfect either, in 2002 or 2003 he was nearly sacked, but luckily managed to retain his job.

That's a thought worth bearing. If Fergie had of been sacked if "that" season he won nothing, what would have happened to Man Utd?

 

[sunilvk7]

Sure, go for it. I'm sure you'll find plenty of people who agree with you, especially ManU and Chelsea supporters.

You are going nowhere with your assumptions.

Barca and the Spanish national team, like Jose, probably get too much hype. But it's for a good reason. People like watching them play. They're a breath of fresh air. Not only are they very successful, they play a great brand of football. Jose gets too much hype probably because he's arrogant and people think that's cool.

Speak for yourself. I like to watch Chile more than Barca or Spain. For you they play great brand of football. Not for all. I know many who thinks Barca and Spain are very boring to watch. They are overrated when someone says they are Historic team or the best team ever.

On the other hand though you can't really deny that they are an historic team. Teams that set records are historic by default. I'm not trying to claim Barca is the best team ever (they might be, I have no idea which team is), but I have seen you claim several times that Barca's record doesn't mean anything and that they're somehow not an historic team because La Liga has about as much quality as a sunday league. I don't think that's a serious argument.

I can deny. I dont call Celtic and Rangers team historic if they win with record number of points. La Liga is not much different.

 

[curtis290]

God, break your posts down.

Firstly, I would like to point out a win is a win, no matter how you win. And if you ask your beloved Jorge Valdano if he would rather play nice football and not win or just win with so-called 'ugly' football, although José's isn't ugly at all, his teams are great to watch on the counter.

Also, when has Wenger been consistent with success? He won the title with the 'Invincibles' squad, who were top class, as you said Jose won with Inter, and has hardly matched it ever since.

Fergie is not totally perfect either, in 2002 or 2003 he was nearly sacked, but luckily managed to retain his job.

Read my last post, I thought it broke down my posts pretty well.

Fergie had some ups and downs because he stuck with one club. It's very difficult to maintain success at the same club because you have to constantly bring up good young players and balance your finances. That's why Fergie is so great, ManU has only had a couple of rough seasons during his entire career.

Wenger has made 16 straight Champions League appearances, while for many of those years he was making a large profit on transfers, and he always has Arsenal competing in all competitions. That is consistent success.

I bet Valdano would rather have a manager try and play offensively and see where it takes them, but Perez wanted trophies immediately so they went with Mourinho. Which is why I'm rooting against them now. But as I said in the post, my criticism of Jose playing too defensively doesn't really have to do with why I think he's an overrated manager (other than maybe the fact that I don't think he can win playing offensively).

You are going nowhere with your assumptions.

What, so you think you're the only one that thinks they're overrated? Maybe that should clue you in to something.

Speak for yourself. I like to watch Chile more than Barca or Spain. For you they play great brand of football. Not for all. I know many who thinks Barca and Spain are very boring to watch. They are overrated when someone says they are Historic team or the best team ever.

I love watching Chile too. Spain was great in the 08 Euro, at the 2010 World Cup, the other teams were so defensive against them it made the games boring. That's not Spain's fault. Yes, you've made it very clear that you hate Barca but just remember that most neutrals, including myself, love watching them play. And any team that sets a record is historic.

I can deny. I dont call Celtic and Rangers team historic if they win with record number of points. La Liga is not much different.

Honestly I don't know why I bother responding to your ignorant trolls. You have such a vendetta against Barca and La Liga it's not even funny. The La Liga=SPL comments are just downright childish and you won't find serious people who agree with you. The Arsenal Invincibles team is still remembered today, even though they did that when the Prem wasn't in the top 2 leagues in the world (maybe not even top 3) and they never won a Champions League. This Barca team won the treble (soundly beating the ManU team everyone thought was the best team of all time), and then a couple of years later they set a record point total in the second best league in the world. La Liga has been home to some of the all-time great teams. Real Madrid has won more European Championships than any other club. Barca has had some great teams over the years, especially the one that beat ManU in the 09 final. Yet none of those teams every did as well as this season's Barca. They set a record point total in the second best league in the world, and the fact that you compare it to a league that isn't even in the top 10 shows how biased you are. If you set a record point total in one of the top 3 or 4 leagues in the world, that is historic. There is no way around it. Maybe you can call me a hater for thinking Jose is overrated, but I'm definitely not as biased as your are and at least I don't resort to trolling.

 

[sunilvk7]

What, so you think you're the only one that thinks they're overrated? Maybe that should clue you in to something.

No, there are many others who think they are overrated apart from Chelsea and ManUtd fans.

I love watching Chile too. Spain was great in the 08 Euro, at the 2010 World Cup, the other teams were so defensive against them it made the games boring. That's not Spain's fault. Yes, you've made it very clear that you hate Barca but just remember that most neutrals, including myself, love watching them play. And any team that sets a record is historic.

Its funny how everytime you make baseless assumptions. Most Neutrals like them watching? Please go and have a check in Milan, Inter forums and what they think of Barca's football. Many think it is boring. So you are just assuming that everyone likes Barca as you do which is clearly wrong.

Honestly I don't know why I bother responding to your ignorant trolls. You have such a vendetta against Barca and La Liga it's not even funny. The La Liga=SPL comments are just downright childish and you won't find serious people who agree with you

Still you responded. And you think there are serious people who agrees with you when you say Jose is overrated? And how you got your knickers in twist when few on internet said he is the best ever..

The Arsenal Invincibles team is still remembered today, even though they did that when the Prem wasn't in the top 2 leagues in the world (maybe not even top 3) and they never won a Champions League. This Barca team won the treble (soundly beating the ManU team everyone thought was the best team of all time), and then a couple of years later they set a record point total in the second best league in the world.

That was not the best ManUtd team ever. 07-08 was close, and our 1999 was class full of World class players. Second best team in the world where other than 2 teams no team had a sniff at title.

La Liga has been home to some of the all-time great teams. Real Madrid has won more European Championships than any other club.

Contradiction. I remember you saying Historic match up means nothing as only present counts. Madrid won 5 trophies when no team bothered to enter the competition. Milan are the best in Europe when it comes to Champions league.

Barca has had some great teams over the years, especially the one that beat ManU in the 09 final. Yet none of those teams every did as well as this season's Barca. They set a record point total in the second best league in the world, and the fact that you compare it to a league that isn't even in the top 10 shows how biased you are.

Shows how **** 18 other teams in the league and how they play to Barca's strengths without any tactics and variations.

If you set a record point total in one of the top 3 or 4 leagues in the world, that is historic. There is no way around it. Maybe you can call me a hater for thinking Jose is overrated, but I'm definitely not as biased as your are and at least I don't resort to trolling.

Trolling? I'm not. La Liga is just Sunny SPL is how many think (At least Mancs, yes little biased). Or in other words Rich man's SPL.

I haven't seen anyone calling Chelsea as historic team when they had record point tally in Jose's era..
Even before the start of La Liga only 2 teams have chance of winning La Liga.

Team that just can't win European away game wins left right center in the league. That says a lot..

 

[ScyllaJoe]

Didn't he win the Champions League with Porto and Inter? That takes some doing in my opinion. Also he has been able to nullify Barcelona for long periods in the last two games so tactically he gets things right. His players also seem to love him so for me not overrated at all.

 

[Athe~]

Trolling? I'm not. La Liga is just Sunny SPL is how many think (At least Mancs, yes little biased). Or in other words Rich man's SPL.

I haven't seen anyone calling Chelsea as historic team when they had record point tally in Jose's era..
Even before the start of La Liga only 2 teams have chance of winning La Liga.

Team that just can't win European away game wins left right center in the league. That says a lot..

On what basis is La Liga a "Rich SPL"? In that it's a 2 horse race? Then I've got news for you - aside from the Bundesliga and maybe Ligue 1 (Although Lyon enjoyed a lengthy spell of dominance), pretty much every decent or half decent european league is dominated at will by a select few.

Let's start from 1992 - the year the Premier League was 'created'. I will only point out champions, there have been pushes by other teams that in the end were unsuccessful.

These are the current top 6 leagues according to UEFA (Not ordered by coefficient).

1. Bundesliga
Since the 1992-93 season, the following teams have won the Bundesliga:

1. FC Kaiserslautern (1)
Borussia Dortmund (3)
FC Bayern München (10)
SV Werder Bremen (2)
VfB Stuttgart (1)
VfL Wolfsburg (1)

La Liga

Atlético Madrid (1)
Barcelona (8)
Deportivo de La Coruña (1)
Real Madrid (VI)
Valencia (2)

Ligue 1

Auxerre (1)
Bordeaux (2)
Lens (1)
Lyon (7 - in a row)
Marseille (2 - They were stripped of their 92-93 title, though)
Monaco (2)
Nantes (2)
PSG (1)

Premier League

Arsenal (3)
Blackburn (1)
Chelsea (3)
Manchester United (11)

Primeira Liga

Benfica (3)
Boavista (1)
Porto (12)
Sporting CP (2)

Serie A

Internazionale (5)
Juventus (6 - They were stripped of their 04-05 title though)
Lazio (1)
Milan (5)
Roma (1)

Now, according to the facts, the Premier League and the Portuguese League are the 'less competitive' leagues (When producing winners), with only 4 teams winning in this period. Furthermore, in both cases the fourth team only won once and lost prominence quickly.

If you want to reduce the timeframe to 6 years, that is, the time since the last 'non Barça/Real' win, you'll find that in that period only Chelsea and Man U have won the league.

On the other end of the 'competitiveness' table, you have Ligue 1, who is apparently going to produce a different winner yet again (Lille), although Marseille may have something to say about that.

 

[sunilvk7]

Athe, those are irrelevant as they are history. I'm going with what Curtis said, currently only 2 teams can win La Liga.

BTW liked your post but..

 

[Athe~]

Athe, those are irrelevant as they are history. I'm going with what Curtis said, currently only 2 teams can win La Liga.

BTW liked your post but..

If you don't think that is relevant because it's history, then look at the present. How many teams can win the Prem? Let's be honest here, it's pretty much the same.

 

[sunilvk7]

If you don't think that is relevant because it's history, then look at the present. How many teams can win the Prem? Let's be honest here, it's pretty much the same.

Na, i said its irrelevant coz Curtis said we should be looking at the present not the past.

Arsenal, Chelsea, ManUtd have realistic chance of winning the league. With few more signings City will be in the mix..

 

[ChrisBird]

Na, i said its irrelevant coz Curtis said we should be looking at the present not the past.

Arsenal, Chelsea, ManUtd have realistic chance of winning the league. With few more signings City will be in the mix..

You say the past like he was talking about the 50s, he was talking about recent years which ARE relevant.

 

[sunilvk7]

You say the past like he was talking about the 50s, he was talking about recent years which ARE relevant.

You have no idea then. We were talking about few matches from 90s for which he said those are not relevant. And what Athe posted was from 90s.

 

[ChrisBird]

You have no idea then. We were talking about few matches from 90s for which he said those are not relevant. And what Athe posted was from 90s.

90s is relevant as I said they are recent times if he was talking about before the 90s then it would be irrelevant IMO.

 

[sunilvk7]

Madrid have scored 6 against Valenica at Mestalla. So much for criticizing Jose for his tactics and philosophy.

He knows when to play attacking and when to play on counter..

 

[Alex]

Valencia 1-6 Madrid.

What boring, unattractive & defensive football he plays :S

Oh, this is a Madrid without Ronaldo, Pepe, Alonso, Marcelo & Ozil.

 

[fuelledbypassion]

He's obviously a terrible manager. He's been playing the wrong players, their 'reserves' are better!