Discuss Pellegrini (Pt 2)

[OB1]

Why not?

Dude,

You must know I was being sarcastic!

I hit send by accident see above!

See, I knew you knew:)

 

[BobKowalski]

Hurrah! We are saved! Being on Team Pellers rocks! #GoP

Six trophies in total I believe in his time in South America.

Well there you go. Once we relocate to Buenos Aries we will be fucking golden.

And in other breaking news it seems Moyes has also won something and a league title no less. My argument has, alas, been found to be without merit. Its a resounding win for Team Pellers.

#GoP

PS Hashtag guys, don't forget the hashtag. Not you Rafa. You're excused on this one.

 

[Anonymous]

Hurrah! We are saved! Being on Team Pellers rocks! #GoP

Six trophies in total I believe in his time in South America.

Well there you go. Once we relocate to Buenos Aries we will be fucking golden.

And in other breaking news it seems Moyes has also won something and a league title no less. My argument has, alas, been found to be without merit. Its a resounding win for Team Pellers.

#GoP

PS Hashtag guys, don't forget the hashtag. Not you Rafa. You're excused on this one.

Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

 

[Braggster]

Hurrah! We are saved! Being on Team Pellers rocks! #GoP

Six trophies in total I believe in his time in South America.

Well there you go. Once we relocate to Buenos Aries we will be fucking golden.

And in other breaking news it seems Moyes has also won something and a league title no less. My argument has, alas, been found to be without merit.

Difference between Pellegrini's record before joining City and Wenger's before joining Arsenal?

To go on about how many trophies a manager has / hasn't won is idiotic in my view (and that goes equally for Moyes), unless they've spent significant time at a dominant club. It's just such a crude [basically useless, in the case of Moyes and Pellegrini] way of assessing whether they're any good or not, I can't believe anyone seriously looks at it as a criterion (and, clearly, the big European clubs don't, in any meaningful way).

 

[supercity88]

Whenever Pellegrini has been given time at a club he has been successful. Many people regard Gollum as successful for what he did at Everton although both Martinez and Laudrup have won trophies even if they didnt match his achievements domestically. Pellegrini took less formidable sides in Villareal and Malaga to top 4 league finishes and to the semis and quarters of the champions league. There remains the question over whether he can make the step up so to speak. But look at his time at Real, he was not involved in transfers and the press immediately jumped on his back following an embarrassing Copa del Rey defeat. After they lost to Lyon (who were somewhat of a bogey team for Real) he was told to win the league or risk being sacked. He didn't win the league. But he did amass a record points haul of 96 and lost to Barca in both clasicos which ultimately cost him the league. Real only sacked him as Mourinho was available, had he not been he would have stayed.

His management style is to create effective teams and not rely on individual talent. At City he has been able to implement that blueprint this summer and I think he was a good option for the job. He has more experience in Europe and has the Real experience to draw on. He will be given more support here and do well. We could have hired Benitez or Laudrup but I think the club viewed Pellegrini as perfect to implement their immediate plan and with Vieira in charge of the youth team there will be more connection between all levels of the club and we may well see Vieira as the man who takes City forward in the future similarly to how Guardiola stepped up at Barca.

 

[BobKowalski]

Six trophies in total I believe in his time in South America.

Well there you go. Once we relocate to Buenos Aries we will be fucking golden.

And in other breaking news it seems Moyes has also won something and a league title no less. My argument has, alas, been found to be without merit.

Difference between Pellegrini's record before joining City and Wenger's before joining Arsenal?

To go on about how many trophies a manager has / hasn't won is idiotic in my view (and that goes equally for Moyes), unless they've spent significant time at a dominant club. It's just such a crude [basically useless, in the case of Moyes and Pellegrini] way of assessing whether they're any good or not, I can't believe anyone seriously looks at it as a criterion (and, clearly, the big European clubs don't, in any meaningful way).

Wenger won the French league title and the domestic cup. And it is a very useful yardstick to measure a coach's worth especially if you factor in the fact that football clubs exist to win matches and trophies. Whilst we are all happy to brace the holistic way of life, trophies, or lack of them, have a dramatic impact on a managers time at a club. Hell even we have a target of a trophy a year. Pellers think its achievable and with our squad he is correct.

That I think other coaches would have a better chance of winning those trophies based on their track record in European football is hardly outlandish. And the notion that Pellers has been somehow denied the opportunity to win trophies in the European game is absurd. The Copa Del Rey in the last 10 years has been won more times by teams other than the big two so there was opportunity and that's not even factoring in Pellers being in charge of one of the big two for a season. Unfortunately a mix up between the pianists and the violinists prevented him winning anything. Spending £200m is not apparently a guarantee of success. Who knew.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Well there you go. Once we relocate to Buenos Aries we will be fucking golden.

And in other breaking news it seems Moyes has also won something and a league title no less. My argument has, alas, been found to be without merit.

Difference between Pellegrini's record before joining City and Wenger's before joining Arsenal?

To go on about how many trophies a manager has / hasn't won is idiotic in my view (and that goes equally for Moyes), unless they've spent significant time at a dominant club. It's just such a crude [basically useless, in the case of Moyes and Pellegrini] way of assessing whether they're any good or not, I can't believe anyone seriously looks at it as a criterion (and, clearly, the big European clubs don't, in any meaningful way).

Wenger won the French league title and the domestic cup. And it is a very useful yardstick to measure a coach's worth especially if you factor in the fact that football clubs exist to win matches and trophies. Whilst we are all happy to brace the holistic way of life, trophies, or lack of them, have a dramatic impact on a managers time at a club. Hell even we have a target of a trophy a year. Pellers think its achievable and with our squad he is correct.

That I think other coaches would have a better chance of winning those trophies based on their track record in European football is hardly outlandish. And the notion that Pellers has been somehow denied the opportunity to win trophies in the European game is absurd. The Copa Del Rey in the last 10 years has been won more times by teams other than the big two so there was opportunity and that's not even factoring in Pellers being in charge of one of the big two for a season. Unfortunately a mix up between the pianists and the violinists prevented him winning anything. Spending £200m is not apparently a guarantee of success. Who knew.

well not when players you want to keep are sold and players are bought that you don't want. £80m on Torres and Shevchenko proves that.

 

[BobKowalski]

Whenever Pellegrini has been given time at a club he has been successful. Many people regard Gollum as successful for what he did at Everton although both Martinez and Laudrup have won trophies even if they didnt match his achievements domestically. Pellegrini took less formidable sides in Villareal and Malaga to top 4 league finishes and to the semis and quarters of the champions league. There remains the question over whether he can make the step up so to speak. But look at his time at Real, he was not involved in transfers and the press immediately jumped on his back following an embarrassing Copa del Rey defeat. After they lost to Lyon (who were somewhat of a bogey team for Real) he was told to win the league or risk being sacked. He didn't win the league. But he did amass a record points haul of 96 and lost to Barca in both clasicos which ultimately cost him the league. Real only sacked him as Mourinho was available, had he not been he would have stayed.

His management style is to create effective teams and not rely on individual talent. At City he has been able to implement that blueprint this summer and I think he was a good option for the job. He has more experience in Europe and has the Real experience to draw on. He will be given more support here and do well. We could have hired Benitez or Laudrup but I think the club viewed Pellegrini as perfect to implement their immediate plan and with Vieira in charge of the youth team there will be more connection between all levels of the club and we may well see Vieira as the man who takes City forward in the future similarly to how Guardiola stepped up at Barca.

I personally do not regard Moyes time at Everton as successful. In my view he failed to take opportunities to win trophies as say Martinez or even Laudrup did. I don't rate Laudrup especially but I do Martinez and would have liked to see him at City even if I could understand why F&T went for someone they knew and trusted. Pellers isn't in charge of transfers here and decisions like loaning Gareth Barry where taken before Pellers arrived. Txiki is in charge of shaping the squad and giving Pellers the tools to be successful and has done a good job in my view even if I don't agree with the Barry decision. The rest are just excuses for why Pellers didn't succeed at RM (or redefining success as 'finishing second') nor do I think he would have been kept on even if after 3 years of Jose they were looking a bit longingly at quieter times under Pellers. The CL is the be all and end all for RM and going out in the round of 16 having spent £200m meant he was toast. The history of RM alone will tell you that.

But its all a bit acedemic. That I don't rate Pellers much will not make a toss of difference to how well we do this year. Squad wise I think we are more than capable of winning the PL this year, especially when you look at our two main rivals, so that is where I think we should be aiming irrespective of who is in the managers chair.

 

[Anonymous]

Wenger won the French league title and the domestic cup. And it is a very useful yardstick to measure a coach's worth especially if you factor in the fact that football clubs exist to win matches and trophies. Whilst we are all happy to brace the holistic way of life, trophies, or lack of them, have a dramatic impact on a managers time at a club. Hell even we have a target of a trophy a year. Pellers think its achievable and with our squad he is correct.

That I think other coaches would have a better chance of winning those trophies based on their track record in European football is hardly outlandish. And the notion that Pellers has been somehow denied the opportunity to win trophies in the European game is absurd. The Copa Del Rey in the last 10 years has been won more times by teams other than the big two so there was opportunity and that's not even factoring in Pellers being in charge of one of the big two for a season. Unfortunately a mix up between the pianists and the violinists prevented him winning anything. Spending £200m is not apparently a guarantee of success. Who knew.

You've no idea of why he hasn't won the Copa Del Rey in the last decade, you only know he didn't. You have no idea of the size of squad he had at Villareal for example, or whether he prioritised qualifying for the CL over domestic cups (much like Arsenal have done for the last decade). Or indeed playing in the CL over domestic cups. You also always make reference to the money Perez spent the summer Pellegrini joined without ever acknowledging exactly that - that Perez spent the money and decided which players left and which players stayed. You pour scorn on the fact he broke Madrid's points total because he finished 2nd to Barcelona but rarely do you acknowledge it was arguably the greatest team ever he lost that title to.

When you add all this to the bizarre assertion that Pellegrini winning the top flight in Argentina with San Lorenzo is an achievement on a par with David Moyes winning the 2nd division with PNE whilst Wenger winning Ligue 1 with Monaco is an achievement which then merits a top job - well you've lost me completely.

 

[Braggster]

Wenger won the French league title and the domestic cup.

Agreed. And Pellegrini won the Argentine league (twice), the Chilean cup, the Ecuadorean league, etc etc. Now, obviously, if we're in South-American-trophies-don't-count-land, that's irrelevant. Can't imagine that's how you think, though, so I'll ask again: difference between his record and Wenger's?

And it is a very useful yardstick to measure a coach's worth especially if you factor in the fact that football clubs exist to win matches and trophies. Whilst we are all happy to brace the holistic way of life, trophies, or lack of them, have a dramatic impact on a managers time at a club. Hell even we have a target of a trophy a year. Pellers think its achievable and with our squad he is correct.

It really isn't a useful yardstick unless the club you're managing has the resources and playing staff to reasonably expect to compete for trophies. In his time in Europe that's only really been true of Pellegrini for one season. Even the enemies of the holistic surely accept that you need to be able to look at more than one season in order to judge how good a coach is..

That I think other coaches would have a better chance of winning those trophies based on their track record in European football is hardly outlandish.

No, it's not outlandish. That is definitely a reasonable conclusion. But it is outlandish to argue that Pellegrini's lack of European trophies is supportive of the argument, because, frankly, it isn't.

And the notion that Pellers has been somehow denied the opportunity to win trophies in the European game is absurd. The Copa Del Rey in the last 10 years has been won more times by teams other than the big two so there was opportunity and that's not even factoring in Pellers being in charge of one of the big two for a season. Unfortunately a mix up between the pianists and the violinists prevented him winning anything. Spending £200m is not apparently a guarantee of success. Who knew.

No, of course he's not been denied opportunities, in the sense that, yes, it's conceivable to win the Copa del Rey with Malaga or Villareal and yes, he could've won a trophy or three in his season at Real. Can't say I view his failure to do so as particularly damning, though (look at it from the opposite perspective: if he had won the Copa del Rey would you, or anyone reasonable, be saying this qualified him for the job? Of course not!).

I prefer to look at his career in the round:
-huge overachievement relative to resources at both Villareal and Malaga
-good European record with both clubs [arguably exceptional, relative to resources]
-deserved reputation for playing excellent football
-then-record points haul in his one season at Real Madrid

That's enough for me to think that he more than merits a chance at City and has ample credentials to do the job. Sure, one could've made a good case for the likes of, say, Rafa, who is also an excellent coach, so it's not like I'm saying Pellegrini was the only good option or even that he was a better choice than Rafa. But I am saying that, if you view his lack of [European] trophies as a reason not to appoint him, then that, IMO, is idiotic.