Jose for City? (merged)

[Didsbury Dave]

Re: Jose for City?

That's one take on it, Zin, and I can see why you think that.

I don't believe it personally, I don't think that's how he operates. But it's just two differing opinions based on the same set of facts.

Really? Mourinho always acts from a position of leverage. He leverages his team against the press or the fanbase as needed. He leverages players against each other. His coaching style is always to create a siege mentality and he uses his excellent understanding of psychology to do so. He also uses leverage in the press against his owners (not always successful) and he uses the leverage that other teams want him against owners as well.

He's rather ruthless. I like that by the way.

All true. He's a Machevellian character. But he's hugely career minded. He thinks several steps ahead, like a chess player. He knows City will be a major force in European football at some point soon. He wants to return to England. I think he's clever enough to have not burnt his bridges at City.

He's no fool and he knows about The Sheikh's cash.

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

Re: Jose for City?

this is the top of the naivety.

you are mancini , you have a 9 euros million year contract at Inter until june 2012 and you quit it to go "on try" 6 months at City ? as i said before , sometime you seem to be coming from mars

You said something earlier in the thread about showing respect to the club and the manager. Yet you continue to accuse posters of being naive, of coming from Mars and replying ''bollocks'' to them. Respect is a two way street Mancio. You have your opinions; fair enough. You're perfectly entitled to them. Don't go accusing posters of not showing respect when you're not showing any yourself.

'If' it is all time and place, we are certainly fucked again because i believe he will win the champs league this year for Real, which would elevate him to god like status with the gringos and make it nigh on impossible to leave.

Eh? You think Real will go further than Barca?

The same was said last year when Inter drew barca - over two legs i would back jose over any team to come out with a result, this is the genius of the man and why he is tactically the best coach in the world.

So what about if it's a barca v madrid final? something tells me they will meet before

 

[taconinja]

Re: Jose for City?

Bob, as far as I understand, and TH will probably know more, Mourinho came so close to our job before Hughes was sacked he told one of our players he was coming. But he stayed in the CL by the skin of his teeth and told City he wasn't available now but might be in the summer. City wanted him and had a situation on their hands where Hughes had lost it and was obviously out of his depth (before the Arsenal cup quarter I think), round about the Spurs defeat. They started talking to managers. Hiddink said No and went public. . Mancini said "I'll do it and will do it for 6 months to prove myself". Hughes went balistic and had to be fired. So City took Mancini on on that basis - win/win for them. Mourinho agreed to join RM in Spring. The Sheikh took the call then to stick with Mancini as he was honest and was doing OK. He was gutted to not get top 4 but stuck with him, in the full knowledge that Mourinho might not last long at RM.

I'm joining the dots all over the place but that's my take. Also explains the bad blood betwen Hughes and Mancini .

As I said I can accept Mancini taking the job on a caretaker basis and hope to prove himself. That makes sense. What does not make sense and never did was the club pretending he was a long term appointment because if he wasn't a long term appointment then removing Mancini in the summer would have looked stupid and played into the whole media take of 'impatient owners' - "oh look three and a half year contract and out in 6 months yada, yada."

It simply makes no sense especially as they had already cocked up over Hughes. Why then buy yourself additional grief? Hiring Mancini on a caretaker basis would have been win/win no matter what happened.

And again sticking with and investing in Mancini just because Mourinho may not last long at Madrid? What sort of plan is that apart from bloody stupid? Mourinho is not the only coach that can win you titles or CL finals. Ancelotti proved that with the PL/FA Cup double. Is Ancelotti a better manager than Mourinho? No. Is he more than capable of doing a job for us? Damn right he could.

The owners need to pick the guy they believe will deliver the necessary success and back him. If they do not think it is Mancini they should have got rid last summer and looked for the man they do believe in. If they do think it is Mancini then the Mourinho threads are redundant.

My understanding is that it was a six month probationary period with the option to let him go if it wasn't working out or kick in the rest of the contract if it was.

 

[DenisLawBackHeel74]

Re: Jose for City?

Really? Mourinho always acts from a position of leverage. He leverages his team against the press or the fanbase as needed. He leverages players against each other. His coaching style is always to create a siege mentality and he uses his excellent understanding of psychology to do so. He also uses leverage in the press against his owners (not always successful) and he uses the leverage that other teams want him against owners as well.

He's rather ruthless. I like that by the way.

All true. He's a Machevellian character. But he's hugely career minded. He thinks several steps ahead, like a chess player. He knows City will be a major force in European football at some point soon. He wants to return to England. I think he's clever enough to have not burnt his bridges at City.

He's no fool and he knows about The Sheikh's cash.

All very convincing reasons not to get him imo...

 

[taconinja]

Re: Jose for City?

Really? Mourinho always acts from a position of leverage. He leverages his team against the press or the fanbase as needed. He leverages players against each other. His coaching style is always to create a siege mentality and he uses his excellent understanding of psychology to do so. He also uses leverage in the press against his owners (not always successful) and he uses the leverage that other teams want him against owners as well.

He's rather ruthless. I like that by the way.

Agreed. And Real progressing to the QF will be used as part of his leverage against Real management. Which sort of contradicts your earlier point :)

No, you're forgetting who he's dealing with. No one--not the rags or Liverpool or anyone else--has the self-assured expectations that Real has. Beating Lyon isn't progress to them. It's what is supposed to happen. Getting to the quarterfinals isn't progress to them. They expect to be in the finals. Every year. And they expect to do it with flair. And their fanbase supports this and believes all this. He can't use beating Lyon as leverage because they don't care about Lyon. Lyon is no different to them than Scunthorpe. There's Real... and everyone else. Only Barca (and a few others can sometimes be included when the organization and fans feel generous) can conceivably be a threat. There's no leverage in beating Lyon or getting to the quarterfinals. That statement would be incredulous to them.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Re: Jose for City?

All true. He's a Machevellian character. But he's hugely career minded. He thinks several steps ahead, like a chess player. He knows City will be a major force in European football at some point soon. He wants to return to England. I think he's clever enough to have not burnt his bridges at City.

He's no fool and he knows about The Sheikh's cash.

All very convincing reasons not to get him imo...

Here's 19 very convincing reasons why we should...

Porto (2002–2004)
2003 Primeira Liga
2003 Taça de Portugal
2003 UEFA Cup
2003 Supertaça Cândido de Oliveira
2004 Primeira Liga
2004 UEFA Champions League

Chelsea (2004–2007)
2005 FA Premier League
2005 League Cup
2005 FA Community Shield
2006 Premier League
2007 League Cup
2007 FA Cup

Internazionale (2008–2010)
2008 Supercoppa Italiana
2009 Serie A
2010 Serie A
2010 Coppa Italia
2010 UEFA Champions League

The Treble (League, Cup and European trophy)

2002–03 with Porto: League, Cup and UEFA Cup
2009–10 with Internazionale: League, Cup and UEFA Champions League

 

[BobKowalski]

Re: Jose for City?

As I said I can accept Mancini taking the job on a caretaker basis and hope to prove himself. That makes sense. What does not make sense and never did was the club pretending he was a long term appointment because if he wasn't a long term appointment then removing Mancini in the summer would have looked stupid and played into the whole media take of 'impatient owners' - "oh look three and a half year contract and out in 6 months yada, yada."

It simply makes no sense especially as they had already cocked up over Hughes. Why then buy yourself additional grief? Hiring Mancini on a caretaker basis would have been win/win no matter what happened.

And again sticking with and investing in Mancini just because Mourinho may not last long at Madrid? What sort of plan is that apart from bloody stupid? Mourinho is not the only coach that can win you titles or CL finals. Ancelotti proved that with the PL/FA Cup double. Is Ancelotti a better manager than Mourinho? No. Is he more than capable of doing a job for us? Damn right he could.

The owners need to pick the guy they believe will deliver the necessary success and back him. If they do not think it is Mancini they should have got rid last summer and looked for the man they do believe in. If they do think it is Mancini then the Mourinho threads are redundant.

If we accept that's what happened, and I believe it did (and Mancini let it slip in the press conference too, more or less) there are two ways City could have approached it. Go public on the fact that it was a 6 month contract but the big risk there is that the players don't buy into him. Or cover it up to stop that, especially seeing as there was a real chance he could be retained if he succeeded. It doesn't take a football genius to know that if he'd been sacked after 6 months and replaced with Jose, noone would have cared about him.

With regards to City picking the right guy and sticking with him, you have to remember there are not many people with the pedigree to do our job in the whole of football. And if one of those comes available, I believe The Sheikh has to go with it and will go with it.

I'm sure Mancini's always known that he has to have serious success to stay in this job. That's why he's looking shaken now, and has taken the shackles off. It's slipping away from him fast.

This is why all this "We're 3rd FFS rome wasn't built in a day" stuff is naiave, in my opinion. I think when Mancini was kept on in the summer, The Sheikh said "you didn't get us 4th but you can keep your job, spend what you want but I want us to compete with the top teams"

Well you could argue the players didn't buy in anyway given all the unrest that ensued however I think the players and the fans would have more readily accepted an upfront caretaker deal - I mean it not as if its unheard of - especially as mid season it makes perfect sense. It may have created a lot less tension as Mancini could have come in and said 'look I'm here to help out so lets make the best of this' etc etc

To stay in the job Mancini has to have serious success. Every top manager has to. Ask Van Gaal. Or Benetiz or Ancelotti in the summer for that matter. If Mancini fails to achieve his targets then he is in trouble just as Mourinho will be in trouble at Real if he fails. That is nothing new or contrary to Mancini's previous experience where winning the title wasn't good enough to save him. I seriously doubt that this has 'shaken him' or come as news. Not that I spend hours analysing Mancini save to ponder his choice in head gear.

Truthfully there are enough managers out there who could bring serious success to City. Van Gaal will be available in the summer. Benetiz with a wage bill outside the top 4 kept Liverpool in the top 4 and a runners up spot and 2 CL finals with 1 as winners. Whats the betting Ancelotti will be available in the summer as well and this is a manger who won the double and has won 2 CL finals. Do we go for him or is it just Jose we are after?

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Re: Jose for City?

No, you're forgetting who he's dealing with. No one--not the rags or Liverpool or anyone else--has the self-assured expectations that Real has. Beating Lyon isn't progress to them. It's what is supposed to happen. Getting to the quarterfinals isn't progress to them. They expect to be in the finals. Every year. And they expect to do it with flair. And their fanbase supports this and believes all this. He can't use beating Lyon as leverage because they don't care about Lyon. Lyon is no different to them than Scunthorpe. There's Real... and everyone else. Only Barca (and a few others can sometimes be included when the organization and fans feel generous) can conceivably be a threat. There's no leverage in beating Lyon or getting to the quarterfinals. That statement would be incredulous to them.

I agree with this, which is the same point as Zin made, and I suspect TH was alluding to with his "cards to be played out" metophor: if he wins the European Cup then I don't believe he'll be going anywhere.

 

[BobKowalski]

Re: Jose for City?

Agreed. And Real progressing to the QF will be used as part of his leverage against Real management. Which sort of contradicts your earlier point :)

No, you're forgetting who he's dealing with. No one--not the rags or Liverpool or anyone else--has the self-assured expectations that Real has. Beating Lyon isn't progress to them. It's what is supposed to happen. Getting to the quarterfinals isn't progress to them. They expect to be in the finals. Every year. And they expect to do it with flair. And their fanbase supports this and believes all this. He can't use beating Lyon as leverage because they don't care about Lyon. Lyon is no different to them than Scunthorpe. There's Real... and everyone else. Only Barca (and a few others can sometimes be included when the organization and fans feel generous) can conceivably be a threat. There's no leverage in beating Lyon or getting to the quarterfinals. That statement would be incredulous to them.

I was teasing :)

Although I bet Jose will rub it in that they hadn't got this far in 6 years until they appointed him. Jose would not be able to resist having a dig.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Re: Jose for City?

Well you could argue the players didn't buy in anyway given all the unrest that ensued however I think the players and the fans would have more readily accepted an upfront caretaker deal - I mean it not as if its unheard of - especially as mid season it makes perfect sense. It may have created a lot less tension as Mancini could have come in and said 'look I'm here to help out so lets make the best of this' etc etc

Well, that's the counter argument, Bob. Hiddink did it with Chelsea and it worked.

I happen to think this was the major cock up of the Hughes sacking. The other stuff wasn't that significant. But the squad all believed he was a caretaker and he didn't get their respect and it undermined his authority. The rumour mill was alive with it.

I think that cost us fourth place.