That's a good point. For me Ancelotti is the most guaranteed success in all of world football as our manager candidates go.Ray78 said:NQCitizen said:I think Serie A is a hard thing to judge Ancelotti on as it wasn't exactly a level playing field at the time. Even then he won 2 CL titles in his spell at Milan.city91 said:Firstly, it's impossible to blame a manager for a player leaving if it is to a club where there is more money on the table and/or a better chance of winning things.
Secondly, every discussion that people have about Pep is also flawed. There is the same rhetoric about him walking into the perfect squad and easing to success. The fact is that Pep managed Barca to the highest level any club has got to in this generation. They were a trophy gathering machine who were unplayable.
Thirdly, do you believe that Ancelotti's domestic record is good enough?
Ancelotti would have been the perfect replacement for Mancini as he would have been bringing a squad together, adding a few players and competing for trophies. However, we are not at that stage anymore. We need a rebuild and a style to adapt that rebuild to. When there are managers like Klopp and Pep (maybe next year) on the market you do not risk your chances of getting them by going for Carlo IMO.
Outside of that Carlo has won a double in 2 seasons in England, a ligue 1 in 2 in France and a Champions League in a full season in Spain.
What's more he is proven at coming into the biggest clubs and delivering instant success with not a huge level of change.
I rate Pep, Carlo and Mourinho as possibly the 3 best managers in the world today all things considered. I'm surprised to see so many people putting him below that tier.
It's a personal preference for me on character, adaptability and playing style I prefer Carlo to Pep. But I do like Klopp over Pep too for the potential.
If we were going for potential then Vieira would get my vote but even that has flaws.
NQCitizen said:That's a good point. For me Ancelotti is the most guaranteed success in all of world football as our manager candidates go.Ray78 said:NQCitizen said:I think Serie A is a hard thing to judge Ancelotti on as it wasn't exactly a level playing field at the time. Even then he won 2 CL titles in his spell at Milan.
Outside of that Carlo has won a double in 2 seasons in England, a ligue 1 in 2 in France and a Champions League in a full season in Spain.
What's more he is proven at coming into the biggest clubs and delivering instant success with not a huge level of change.
I rate Pep, Carlo and Mourinho as possibly the 3 best managers in the world today all things considered. I'm surprised to see so many people putting him below that tier.
It's a personal preference for me on character, adaptability and playing style I prefer Carlo to Pep. But I do like Klopp over Pep too for the potential.
If we were going for potential then Vieira would get my vote but even that has flaws.
He'd turn up and win something with minimal disruption.
Klopp and Pep may well win more but it'd take an overhaul and the risk of it not working either short term or full stop.
NQCitizen said:That's a good point. For me Ancelotti is the most guaranteed success in all of world football as our manager candidates go.Ray78 said:NQCitizen said:I think Serie A is a hard thing to judge Ancelotti on as it wasn't exactly a level playing field at the time. Even then he won 2 CL titles in his spell at Milan.
Outside of that Carlo has won a double in 2 seasons in England, a ligue 1 in 2 in France and a Champions League in a full season in Spain.
What's more he is proven at coming into the biggest clubs and delivering instant success with not a huge level of change.
I rate Pep, Carlo and Mourinho as possibly the 3 best managers in the world today all things considered. I'm surprised to see so many people putting him below that tier.
It's a personal preference for me on character, adaptability and playing style I prefer Carlo to Pep. But I do like Klopp over Pep too for the potential.
If we were going for potential then Vieira would get my vote but even that has flaws.
He'd turn up and win something with minimal disruption.
Klopp and Pep may well win more but it'd take an overhaul and the risk of it not working either short term or full stop.
kupest said:Pep an easy 1st for me followed by Ancelotti and Klopp a close 3rd.
Hopefully we can get over the line in the last 6 games and nail 2/3rd or even 4th.
Whatever happens will be a really exciting summer.
Danny Higginbotham: Forget Jurgen Klopp – City must promote Patrick Vieira to get a flexible coach for their young talent
The big managerial story of the week was Jürgen Klopp's announcement that he will be available for a new job next season – and his comment about having to take "whatever a free half-year is called" after leaving Borussia Dortmund this summer hardly seemed heartfelt. He is obviously ready for a new challenge immediately. But it's typical of the way we overlook young managers in this country that he was so quickly being linked with Manchester City when they have a ready-made successor to Manuel Pellegrini in Patrick Vieira.
People will say that Vieira constitutes a risk and that he’s only managed the club’s elite development squad for a few years. But that’s exactly the same level of experience that Pep Guardiola had managing Barcelona B from 2007 to 2008 when he stepped up to succeed Frank Rijkaard as Barça coach. Vieira has assembled the best Under-21 side that I’ve seen this season. They’ve got players like young midfielder Brandon Barker – a real asset. Vieira knows them and the club inside out, so there will be a far better prospect of them getting through into the first team, which is the holy grail for City and their new Academy facility. If City – or any other Premier League side – were to move for Klopp, it would just be another story of him bringing more players in, with fewer of the club’s young players getting a chance. How many top-flight clubs do we see developing young players? After Southampton, I’m struggling.
For more evidence of the value of appointing someone young from within, who has an instinctive understanding of his club, just look at Swansea City and Garry Monk. No one gave Monk a prayer when, at the age of just 34, he succeeded Michael Laudrup in February last year. But I would argue that he is a strong candidate for manager of the season. Swansea have already equalled their record points tally for the Premier League and they have six games to go. Monk lives and breathes that club and they’re reaping the benefits.
His success proves a broader point, in my opinion: that it does not matter what your age is when you step into a managerial job. In fact, I would argue that younger managers are very often better equipped to deal with the tactical challenges of the modern game than older ones. It’s no coincidence that the average age of the managers who have taken their clubs to the quarter-finals of the Champions League is only 46, with three of them – Atletico Madrid’s Diego Simeone, Barcelona’s Luis Enrique and Bayern Munich’s Pep Guardiola – all aged 44. Only Carlo Ancelotti (55) is over 50.
These young managers and others I’ve observed while co-commentating on Serie A, the Bundesliga and Portugal’s Primeira Liga this season, have generally shown greater tactical flexibility than the older managers, who are perhaps more set in their systems and ways. That’s human nature: the older you become, the more reluctant you often are to change.
Klopp will leave Borussia Dortmund at the end of the season Klopp will leave Borussia Dortmund at the end of the season Compare Simone to City’s Pellegrini, for example. Both play 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 but Pellegrini uses a rigid 1990s version, with the added weakness that his midfielders do not track back. (That’s why United overwhelmed City last Sunday, in the way we predicted they would, on these pages.) Simeone uses a flexible 4-4-2, which becomes a counter-attacking set-up away from home. Atletico have flourished as a result.
There is no way that City’s squad is inferior to Atletico’s but the difference in performance in Europe has been overwhelming in the past two seasons. It’s purely the tactical deficit which has caused the failure of British sides in Europe, proof to my mind that the young European managers, with their greater flexibility, sometimes using three or even four systems in a single game, are just operating more effectively. I think things would have been different for Liverpool in Europe if they’d come across the system built around three at the back a bit earlier. Jose Mourinho and Arsène Wenger were simply outsmarted.
The Premier League managers have a very different age profile, with 14 of the 20 aged 50 or over and the three youngest – Monk, plus Mauricio Pochettino and Sean Dyche, both 43 – all nearing the end of the season with their reputations enhanced. (The average age of the 20 is just shy of 52.)
Vieira is currently City's youth team manager Vieira is currently City's youth team manager Of course, there are exceptions to the rule. Both Mourinho (52 and actually one of the older men now) and Louis van Gaal (63) are flexible and open to change. And there was obviously Sir Alex Ferguson, one of the most modern-minded managers of them all, who would play a different formation away in Europe than at home, and was obsessive about keeping on top of all the latest scientific and tactical developments. But it’s about time we started looking to the generation of former players who have huge awareness of the way their clubs work. We need John Terry to be a future Chelsea manager, Jamie Carragher at Liverpool, Ryan Giggs or Gary Neville running Manchester United. And City could start with Vieira at the helm next season, rather than Pellegrini – who has failed – or Klopp – who will want time and money to build another side.
The thing is how likely is that?ONTHERUNWITHTHAKSIN said:NQCitizen said:That's a good point. For me Ancelotti is the most guaranteed success in all of world football as our manager candidates go.Ray78 said:If we were going for potential then Vieira would get my vote but even that has flaws.
He'd turn up and win something with minimal disruption.
Klopp and Pep may well win more but it'd take an overhaul and the risk of it not working either short term or full stop.
Problem is we need an overhaul regardless of the manager.
sam-caddick said:Decent read from Danny Higginbotham in the Independent tonight.
Danny Higginbotham: Forget Jurgen Klopp – City must promote Patrick Vieira to get a flexible coach for their young talent
The big managerial story of the week was Jürgen Klopp's announcement that he will be available for a new job next season – and his comment about having to take "whatever a free half-year is called" after leaving Borussia Dortmund this summer hardly seemed heartfelt. He is obviously ready for a new challenge immediately. But it's typical of the way we overlook young managers in this country that he was so quickly being linked with Manchester City when they have a ready-made successor to Manuel Pellegrini in Patrick Vieira.
People will say that Vieira constitutes a risk and that he’s only managed the club’s elite development squad for a few years. But that’s exactly the same level of experience that Pep Guardiola had managing Barcelona B from 2007 to 2008 when he stepped up to succeed Frank Rijkaard as Barça coach. Vieira has assembled the best Under-21 side that I’ve seen this season. They’ve got players like young midfielder Brandon Barker – a real asset. Vieira knows them and the club inside out, so there will be a far better prospect of them getting through into the first team, which is the holy grail for City and their new Academy facility. If City – or any other Premier League side – were to move for Klopp, it would just be another story of him bringing more players in, with fewer of the club’s young players getting a chance. How many top-flight clubs do we see developing young players? After Southampton, I’m struggling.
For more evidence of the value of appointing someone young from within, who has an instinctive understanding of his club, just look at Swansea City and Garry Monk. No one gave Monk a prayer when, at the age of just 34, he succeeded Michael Laudrup in February last year. But I would argue that he is a strong candidate for manager of the season. Swansea have already equalled their record points tally for the Premier League and they have six games to go. Monk lives and breathes that club and they’re reaping the benefits.
His success proves a broader point, in my opinion: that it does not matter what your age is when you step into a managerial job. In fact, I would argue that younger managers are very often better equipped to deal with the tactical challenges of the modern game than older ones. It’s no coincidence that the average age of the managers who have taken their clubs to the quarter-finals of the Champions League is only 46, with three of them – Atletico Madrid’s Diego Simeone, Barcelona’s Luis Enrique and Bayern Munich’s Pep Guardiola – all aged 44. Only Carlo Ancelotti (55) is over 50.
These young managers and others I’ve observed while co-commentating on Serie A, the Bundesliga and Portugal’s Primeira Liga this season, have generally shown greater tactical flexibility than the older managers, who are perhaps more set in their systems and ways. That’s human nature: the older you become, the more reluctant you often are to change.
Klopp will leave Borussia Dortmund at the end of the season Klopp will leave Borussia Dortmund at the end of the season Compare Simone to City’s Pellegrini, for example. Both play 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 but Pellegrini uses a rigid 1990s version, with the added weakness that his midfielders do not track back. (That’s why United overwhelmed City last Sunday, in the way we predicted they would, on these pages.) Simeone uses a flexible 4-4-2, which becomes a counter-attacking set-up away from home. Atletico have flourished as a result.
There is no way that City’s squad is inferior to Atletico’s but the difference in performance in Europe has been overwhelming in the past two seasons. It’s purely the tactical deficit which has caused the failure of British sides in Europe, proof to my mind that the young European managers, with their greater flexibility, sometimes using three or even four systems in a single game, are just operating more effectively. I think things would have been different for Liverpool in Europe if they’d come across the system built around three at the back a bit earlier. Jose Mourinho and Arsène Wenger were simply outsmarted.
The Premier League managers have a very different age profile, with 14 of the 20 aged 50 or over and the three youngest – Monk, plus Mauricio Pochettino and Sean Dyche, both 43 – all nearing the end of the season with their reputations enhanced. (The average age of the 20 is just shy of 52.)
Vieira is currently City's youth team manager Vieira is currently City's youth team manager Of course, there are exceptions to the rule. Both Mourinho (52 and actually one of the older men now) and Louis van Gaal (63) are flexible and open to change. And there was obviously Sir Alex Ferguson, one of the most modern-minded managers of them all, who would play a different formation away in Europe than at home, and was obsessive about keeping on top of all the latest scientific and tactical developments. But it’s about time we started looking to the generation of former players who have huge awareness of the way their clubs work. We need John Terry to be a future Chelsea manager, Jamie Carragher at Liverpool, Ryan Giggs or Gary Neville running Manchester United. And City could start with Vieira at the helm next season, rather than Pellegrini – who has failed – or Klopp – who will want time and money to build another side.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...le-coach-for-their-young-talent-10186076.html
Exeter Blue I am here said:sam-caddick said:Decent read from Danny Higginbotham in the Independent tonight.
Danny Higginbotham: Forget Jurgen Klopp – City must promote Patrick Vieira to get a flexible coach for their young talent
The big managerial story of the week was Jürgen Klopp's announcement that he will be available for a new job next season – and his comment about having to take "whatever a free half-year is called" after leaving Borussia Dortmund this summer hardly seemed heartfelt. He is obviously ready for a new challenge immediately. But it's typical of the way we overlook young managers in this country that he was so quickly being linked with Manchester City when they have a ready-made successor to Manuel Pellegrini in Patrick Vieira.
People will say that Vieira constitutes a risk and that he’s only managed the club’s elite development squad for a few years. But that’s exactly the same level of experience that Pep Guardiola had managing Barcelona B from 2007 to 2008 when he stepped up to succeed Frank Rijkaard as Barça coach. Vieira has assembled the best Under-21 side that I’ve seen this season. They’ve got players like young midfielder Brandon Barker – a real asset. Vieira knows them and the club inside out, so there will be a far better prospect of them getting through into the first team, which is the holy grail for City and their new Academy facility. If City – or any other Premier League side – were to move for Klopp, it would just be another story of him bringing more players in, with fewer of the club’s young players getting a chance. How many top-flight clubs do we see developing young players? After Southampton, I’m struggling.
For more evidence of the value of appointing someone young from within, who has an instinctive understanding of his club, just look at Swansea City and Garry Monk. No one gave Monk a prayer when, at the age of just 34, he succeeded Michael Laudrup in February last year. But I would argue that he is a strong candidate for manager of the season. Swansea have already equalled their record points tally for the Premier League and they have six games to go. Monk lives and breathes that club and they’re reaping the benefits.
His success proves a broader point, in my opinion: that it does not matter what your age is when you step into a managerial job. In fact, I would argue that younger managers are very often better equipped to deal with the tactical challenges of the modern game than older ones. It’s no coincidence that the average age of the managers who have taken their clubs to the quarter-finals of the Champions League is only 46, with three of them – Atletico Madrid’s Diego Simeone, Barcelona’s Luis Enrique and Bayern Munich’s Pep Guardiola – all aged 44. Only Carlo Ancelotti (55) is over 50.
These young managers and others I’ve observed while co-commentating on Serie A, the Bundesliga and Portugal’s Primeira Liga this season, have generally shown greater tactical flexibility than the older managers, who are perhaps more set in their systems and ways. That’s human nature: the older you become, the more reluctant you often are to change.
Klopp will leave Borussia Dortmund at the end of the season Klopp will leave Borussia Dortmund at the end of the season Compare Simone to City’s Pellegrini, for example. Both play 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 but Pellegrini uses a rigid 1990s version, with the added weakness that his midfielders do not track back. (That’s why United overwhelmed City last Sunday, in the way we predicted they would, on these pages.) Simeone uses a flexible 4-4-2, which becomes a counter-attacking set-up away from home. Atletico have flourished as a result.
There is no way that City’s squad is inferior to Atletico’s but the difference in performance in Europe has been overwhelming in the past two seasons. It’s purely the tactical deficit which has caused the failure of British sides in Europe, proof to my mind that the young European managers, with their greater flexibility, sometimes using three or even four systems in a single game, are just operating more effectively. I think things would have been different for Liverpool in Europe if they’d come across the system built around three at the back a bit earlier. Jose Mourinho and Arsène Wenger were simply outsmarted.
The Premier League managers have a very different age profile, with 14 of the 20 aged 50 or over and the three youngest – Monk, plus Mauricio Pochettino and Sean Dyche, both 43 – all nearing the end of the season with their reputations enhanced. (The average age of the 20 is just shy of 52.)
Vieira is currently City's youth team manager Vieira is currently City's youth team manager Of course, there are exceptions to the rule. Both Mourinho (52 and actually one of the older men now) and Louis van Gaal (63) are flexible and open to change. And there was obviously Sir Alex Ferguson, one of the most modern-minded managers of them all, who would play a different formation away in Europe than at home, and was obsessive about keeping on top of all the latest scientific and tactical developments. But it’s about time we started looking to the generation of former players who have huge awareness of the way their clubs work. We need John Terry to be a future Chelsea manager, Jamie Carragher at Liverpool, Ryan Giggs or Gary Neville running Manchester United. And City could start with Vieira at the helm next season, rather than Pellegrini – who has failed – or Klopp – who will want time and money to build another side.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...le-coach-for-their-young-talent-10186076.html
Highly romanticised stuff. The difference between City and Barcelona, is that they can afford such a gamble and we just can't. We're in a far more competitive league, and our enemies are installed at UEFA and FIFA with a mandate to nobble us. If we gamble on the untried Vieira and it backfires, we could find ourselves in the wilderness for years at the very time when we're trying to raise our profile and build a global fanbase. If it comes down to Klopp vs Vieira then it would take a very brave man or a fool to choose the latter. Heck, I'd probably take Klopp over Guardiola! Vieira might one day turn out to be a great manager, but I'm not convinced this is the time
Chippy_boy said:Exeter Blue I am here said:sam-caddick said:Decent read from Danny Higginbotham in the Independent tonight.
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...le-coach-for-their-young-talent-10186076.html
Highly romanticised stuff. The difference between City and Barcelona, is that they can afford such a gamble and we just can't. We're in a far more competitive league, and our enemies are installed at UEFA and FIFA with a mandate to nobble us. If we gamble on the untried Vieira and it backfires, we could find ourselves in the wilderness for years at the very time when we're trying to raise our profile and build a global fanbase. If it comes down to Klopp vs Vieira then it would take a very brave man or a fool to choose the latter. Heck, I'd probably take Klopp over Guardiola! Vieira might one day turn out to be a great manager, but I'm not convinced this is the time
Indeed.
In fact you could imagine it being written by someone who secretly wanted us to fail. Appointing Paddy at this point would be a ridiculous idea, much though we all like and respect the bloke.