Sportswash! - Let’s oil stare at Manchester City!

[JPJCB]

57 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

My point is plenty of good managers aren’t proven at certain things. It doesnt mean they’re not good managers. 
 

Pep isn’t proven at doing well with non world class players. That doesn’t mean he’s not good, or that he couldn’t. It just means he’s so good at getting the best out of very good football teams that he’ll probably never need to manage a team of non-world class players. 
 

I happen to think there’s every chance Pep would be an excellent manager regardless of the squad at his disposal. But I guess we’ll never know. 
 

It’s very similar to the argument that Messi isn’t the goat because he only ever played for Barcelona for most of his career who were a world class team. He doesn’t have to go and play for Stoke just to prove himself. He’s good enough that he’ll never have to do that. 
 

Plenty of managers have managed squads like the Man City and Barcelona squads and not even had a fraction of the success Pep has had

I think we’re agreeing on this. For example:

”Pep isn’t proven at doing well with non- world class players. That doesn’t mean he’s not good or he couldn’t”. I agree completely in fact in the original post you took objection to I said he was outstanding and arguably the best of our time. 
 

“I happen to think pep would be an excellent manager regardless of the squad. But I guess we’ll never know”. Again I agree- exactly as you state here, my point is that he’s unproven in those circumstances 

[DCJonah]

12 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

Anyone with that much money would have the same success

Has one manager been able to choose how they spend a billion pounds at chelsea?

 

[Zatman]

19 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I can't think of a single manager who have had all the advantages pep has had. 

Inherits world class players including the greatest of all time. 

Goes to a league where only one team wins the league before and after he was there. 

Joins a team with a decade of financial fraud to spend over a billion building his squad. 

 

He also went Bayern after they won the treble in another all time great team

[Zatman]

19 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I wonder how his legacy is viewed if Man City get punished the way they should. 

There'd be only 1 club you could then talk about having success with. 

Already at the moment, he's done nothing more impressive than what Fergie did, or Wenger or even Klopp. 

 

His legacy has already been damaged by the doping. Shocking he is allowed be involved in the game

Would you allow Lance Armstrong to run Team Sky cycling?

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, DJ_Villain said:

But we do know that Ferguson could win continental competitions with Aberdeen and be the last person to break the Old Firm…

 

1 hour ago, Zatman said:

Because breaking up the Old Firm is as good or better than the achievements you mentioned. Certainly bigger than saving Sheffield United from relegation

Still completely missing the point  

 

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

I can't think of a single manager who have had all the advantages pep has had. 

Inherits world class players including the greatest of all time. 

Goes to a league where only one team wins the league before and after he was there. 

Joins a team with a decade of financial fraud to spend over a billion building his squad. 

 

Man Utd and Chelsea have spent as much money as Man City have. 

[Stevo985]

56 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Has one manager been able to choose how they spend a billion pounds at chelsea?

 

No, because it's rare that a manager does well enough at a club of that size to keep the job that long. Pep has, in large part due to the fact that he meets the expectations that the money sets.

(and also, most of Chelsea's recent billion pound splurge was spent under Potter. He got sacked)

Edited February 14 by Stevo985

[NurembergVillan]

2 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Man Utd and Chelsea have spent as much money as Man City have. 

At least until we learn a bit more about the 115 charges of financial impropriety.

[villa89]

1 hour ago, Zatman said:

His legacy has already been damaged by the doping. Shocking he is allowed be involved in the game

Would you allow Lance Armstrong to run Team Sky cycling?

Doping is rampant in football. Has been for decades. Nobody seems to care or bother doing anything about it. Welcome to Liverpool, you now have asthma here's your box of inhalers.

Edited February 14 by villa89

[Stevo985]

1 minute ago, NurembergVillan said:

At least until we learn a bit more about the 115 charges of financial impropriety.

Nobody is defending the financial doping.

In fact nobody is saying the money doesn't make an absolutely massive difference.

It does. Of course it does. It makes the job far far easier.

 

What it doesn't do is mean that any manager could do it, or any manager could have had the success Pep has had. They couldn't. Otherwise they'd sack Pep and get Chris Wilder in for 30k a week

[DCJonah]

30 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

No, because it's rare that a manager does well enough at a club of that size to keep the job that long. Pep has, in large part due to the fact that he meets the expectations that the money sets.

(and also, most of Chelsea's recent billion pound splurge was spent under Potter. He got sacked)

I don't think Chelsea is a good example. It doesn't seem like the manager has much say in how that money is spent. 

As I say, no one has been given the wealth to build a squad that pep has. And the fact that wealth was built on cheating massively impacts his legacy IMO. 

If Man City are found guilty how will you judge pep? 

[Stevo985]

2 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I don't think Chelsea is a good example. It doesn't seem like the manager has much say in how that money is spent. 

As I say, no one has been given the wealth to build a squad that pep has. And the fact that wealth was built on cheating massively impacts his legacy IMO. 

If Man City are found guilty how will you judge pep? 

Man City were spending far more money than the rest of the league, and financially doping, before Pep arrived. 

Pellegrini and Mancini operated under those conditions and didn't have the success Pep has had. Probably Hughes as well (although I haven't seen the evidence)

 

The reason pep has had that wealth to spend is because he's been successful enough to stay in the job. If Mancini or Pellegrini had been good enough they'd have stayed as manager and had the time to spend all that money as well.

If Pep hadn't been as good they'd have moved him on and someone else would have come in and spent money for a couple of years. Like happens at clubs like Man Utd and Chelsea who spend the same amounts of money without the success.

 

Man City are guilty, imo. So it wouldn't change my opinion. The game is rigged in their favour and it's a **** disgrace.
But that doesn't suddenly mean Pep is shit. Part of the reason the game is rigged is because Man City can afford the best of everything. The best players, the best facilities, the best manager. 

Part of why it's so unfair is that they have the absolute best manager to get the absolute best out of their insane squad.

 

If Pep is so untalented then why do they bother? Why don't they just let the kit man pick the team?

[DCJonah]

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

Man City were spending far more money than the rest of the league, and financially doping, before Pep arrived. 

Pellegrini and Mancini operated under those conditions and didn't have the success Pep has had. Probably Hughes as well (although I haven't seen the evidence)

 

The reason pep has had that wealth to spend is because he's been successful enough to stay in the job. If Mancini or Pellegrini had been good enough they'd have stayed as manager and had the time to spend all that money as well.

If Pep hadn't been as good they'd have moved him on and someone else would have come in and spent money for a couple of years. Like happens at clubs like Man Utd and Chelsea who spend the same amounts of money without the success.

 

Man City are guilty, imo. So it wouldn't change my opinion. The game is rigged in their favour and it's a **** disgrace.
But that doesn't suddenly mean Pep is shit. Part of the reason the game is rigged is because Man City can afford the best of everything. The best players, the best facilities, the best manager. 

Part of why it's so unfair is that they have the absolute best manager to get the absolute best out of their insane squad.

 

If Pep is so untalented then why do they bother? Why don't they just let the kit man pick the team?

I don't think Pep is untalented. I think he's overrated and I think other managers have done more impressive things. 

For me, once city get found guilty, you can only point to his time at Barcelona as anything special. 

[Genie]

I’d love to know the full details of Haalands deal, £50m transfer fee will be the tip of the iceberg. Probably the same again in fees and bonuses, and then his wages must be astronomical if the likes of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern, Man United and PSG didn’t even try to complete. I’m thinking close to £1m a week.

The headline is £50m, but the reality will be far higher.

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, villa89 said:

Doping is rampant in football. Has been for decades. Nobody seems to care or bother doing anything about it. Welcome to Liverpool, you now have asthma here's your box of inhalers.

These examples of doping (which seem to have zero evidence around them?) always come up and I find them weird.

If you can get behind Liverpool being propped by inhalers (which wouldn't do much, tbh) or Newcastle having PEDs - presumably you think Aston Villa; at one point with the second best record in the entire Premier League since Emery joined, are also at it?  Or is it only ever other clubs?

 

 

Dismissing Guardiola's achievements is also completely laughable.  Fine to dislike him/Man City/money/whatever, but he's got an incredible coaching record.  A win% of over 72% from 900 odd games?  Aye, he's shit.

[NurembergVillan]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

Nobody is defending the financial doping.

In fact nobody is saying the money doesn't make an absolutely massive difference.

It does. Of course it does. It makes the job far far easier.

 

What it doesn't do is mean that any manager could do it, or any manager could have had the success Pep has had. They couldn't. Otherwise they'd sack Pep and get Chris Wilder in for 30k a week

I don't disagree with you. I think he's incredible at coaching elite athletes and that in itself is a unique talent.

I was just taking the opportunity to asterisk the "spending" part of the conversation.

[Zatman]

17 minutes ago, bobzy said:

These examples of doping (which seem to have zero evidence around them?) always come up and I find them weird.

If you can get behind Liverpool being propped by inhalers (which wouldn't do much, tbh) or Newcastle having PEDs - presumably you think Aston Villa; at one point with the second best record in the entire Premier League since Emery joined, are also at it?  Or is it only ever other clubs?

 

 

Dismissing Guardiola's achievements is also completely laughable.  Fine to dislike him/Man City/money/whatever, but he's got an incredible coaching record.  A win% of over 72% from 900 odd games?  Aye, he's shit.

Well Guardiola has failed a doping test so that has been proven

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

I don't think Pep is untalented. I think he's overrated and I think other managers have done more impressive things. 

For me, once city get found guilty, you can only point to his time at Barcelona as anything special. 

Yeah that's the bit I disagree on. Just because Man City get found guilty doesn't mean Pep hasn't performed well.

[villa89]

43 minutes ago, bobzy said:

These examples of doping (which seem to have zero evidence around them?) always come up and I find them weird.

  

The problem is that nobody is testing players properly or even trying to catch any dopers. You can't find evidence that you don't look for. FIFA is not a member of WADA for a reason. FIFA does in house testing during world cups and destroys all samples as soon as the tournament ends. If you are a football club not doping your players you're behind the eight ball straight away. Get all your players on a stack of supplements and get them visiting blood clinics as often as required. 

Sorry for the 

Note: I couldn't care less about Pep's doping. Spain and Italy have been doping hotspots for decades in all sports. 

 

Edited February 14 by villa89

[bobzy]

35 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Well Guardiola has failed a doping test so that has been proven

He was also cleared of all charges from memory.  And this would've been in the latter years of his career, having just moved to Italy where doping was quite rife.

 

Maybe he is a serial cheat, but I don't buy it.