Mancini out? (merged)

[Didsbury Dave]

We have a great squad and up to a point, we have a great manager.

We lack mentally still imo, both in terms of some of the players but also the manager.

Bob needs to take a long hard look at himself and ask himself, does he do all he can week in, week out and is there things he can change to make us better.

The answer is yes but until he does that and stops trying to blame everything but himself for failures, he wont go on to be one of the very best in the business.

There is hardly a job in world football better than ours, Clueless blew his chance and at the moment, I would wager Bob is doing the same.

8 months ago I would have said that that point is hugely important: a club with a load of cash, a load of ambition, on the up, brilliant squad, ready to dominate in England, overhauled Man United. The best job in England, one of the best - maybe even the best - in Europe.

Whilst it's still obviously a great job, I just worry that we've lost our shine a bit, we've become the Euro Flops, the underachievers. Ferguson's bitches once again. It might make it that bit harder to attract world class players in future.

Getting back to the managerial front you could also argue that it's quite an easy job for a top manager. A great but slightly unbalanced squad which just needs tweaking and organising to be a top side in Europe.

 

[OB1]

We have a great squad and up to a point, we have a great manager.

We lack mentally still imo, both in terms of some of the players but also the manager.

Bob needs to take a long hard look at himself and ask himself, does he do all he can week in, week out and is there things he can change to make us better.

The answer is yes but until he does that and stops trying to blame everything but himself for failures, he wont go on to be one of the very best in the business.

There is hardly a job in world football better than ours, Clueless blew his chance and at the moment, I would wager Bob is doing the same.

8 months ago I would have said that that point is hugely important: a club with a load of cash, a load of ambition, on the up, brilliant squad, ready to dominate in England, overhauled Man United. The best job in England, one of the best - maybe even the best - in Europe.

Whilst it's still obviously a great job, I just worry that we've lost our shine a bit, we've become the Euro Flops, the underachievers. Ferguson's bitches once again. It might make it that bit harder to attract world class players in future.

Getting back to the managerial front you could also argue that it's quite an easy job for a top manager. A great but slightly unbalanced squad which just needs tweaking and organising to be a top side in Europe.

It's a great job for a top manager.

I still retain the hope that we are playing a very clever game on the FFPR front and that plenty of transfer funds will still be available if they are needed. FFPR is a good lever for the club to use to encourage its employees to extract better value from the market.

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

So the Arsenal fans in the media who have been laughing at City's struggles in the Champions League might just shut up now.

Half the problem City have had in the CL, which is the chief stick used to beat mancini, is down to us being drawn against the cream of Europe. We should have beaten napoli, and Ajax, but both Dortmund and Bayern were better teams than us.

But surely we can agree that our squad, our group of players that go out onto the pitch are better than their group of players they put out. They may work harder and be more effective, but that's not a skill or talent issue.

Unless you can point to our squad and say its just not good enough, then you need to go a bit higher up the food chain in finding blame. I honestly can only name maybe two squads that are a better and more talented group of players: Madrid and Barcelona.

There's really one place to look if you want accountability...

I'd say Bayern , PSG, Juve and the rags are at this moment.

 

[Skashion]

I don't think the City job is that attractive anymore. Most managers want more control than Mancini has, and we're not spending anymore either. Our net spend over the past two transfer windows has been £14m and that went on Garcia, Rodwell and Sinclair - and I don't think the latter two were Mancini signings. The only way I think it would become as attractive again to top-class managers would be the promise of a big pot to spend. In which case, why not give it Mancini?

 

[FantasyIreland]

I don't think the City job is that attractive anymore. Most managers want more control than Mancini has, and we're not spending anymore either. Our net spend over the past two transfer windows has been £14m and that went on Garcia, Rodwell and Sinclair - and I don't think the latter two were Mancini signings. The only way I think it would become as attractive again to top-class managers would be the promise of a big pot to spend. In which case, why not give it Mancini?

Because he hasn't had fantastic success in the transfer market and with the millions he has managed to build an unbalanced team.I certainly wouldnt trust him with my money.

 

[blueinsa]

It would appear that as a club, we have no real desire to hire a great manager, a front for the club in the mould of a Fergie, Mou etc, rather we want a coach, happy to do just that, coach players a fit into a system.

In the same way our academy will produce world class players, we as a club could well be producing world class coaches/managers of the future.

The whole Barca ethos being taken to the next level.

Going to be a very interesting few years ahead.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I don't think the City job is that attractive anymore. Most managers want more control than Mancini has, and we're not spending anymore either. Our net spend over the past two transfer windows has been £14m and that went on Garcia, Rodwell and Sinclair - and I don't think the latter two were Mancini signings. The only way I think it would become as attractive again to top-class managers would be the promise of a big pot to spend. In which case, why not give it Mancini?

Because he hasn't had fantastic success in the transfer market and with the millions he has managed to build an unbalanced team.I certainly wouldnt trust him with my money.

Bizarre that because the summer signings were shit some are anxious to divorce Mancini from them. They are all his signings, he identified the need, was involved in the selection and approved them for the squad. The summer signings went through exactly the same system as all of his signings. He even admitted he'd been tracking Rodwell for years.

 

[r.soleofsalford]

I don't think the City job is that attractive anymore. Most managers want more control than Mancini has, and we're not spending anymore either. Our net spend over the past two transfer windows has been £14m and that went on Garcia, Rodwell and Sinclair - and I don't think the latter two were Mancini signings. The only way I think it would become as attractive again to top-class managers would be the promise of a big pot to spend. In which case, why not give it Mancini?

because he has the best squad of players i`ve ever seen at this club playing for the most part static and slow boring football





(most of the time)

 

[moomba]

I don't think the City job is that attractive anymore. Most managers want more control than Mancini has, and we're not spending anymore either. Our net spend over the past two transfer windows has been £14m and that went on Garcia, Rodwell and Sinclair - and I don't think the latter two were Mancini signings. The only way I think it would become as attractive again to top-class managers would be the promise of a big pot to spend. In which case, why not give it Mancini?

Because he hasn't had fantastic success in the transfer market and with the millions he has managed to build an unbalanced team.I certainly wouldnt trust him with my money.

Mmm, £185m nett spend for the likes of Clichy, Nastasic, Silva, Yaya, Milner, Aguero, Dzeko. Don't think he's done too badly at all. Don't think the team is unbalanced either, unless you want to play a certain way that Mancini doesn't want to play.

 

[FantasyIreland]

I don't think the City job is that attractive anymore. Most managers want more control than Mancini has, and we're not spending anymore either. Our net spend over the past two transfer windows has been £14m and that went on Garcia, Rodwell and Sinclair - and I don't think the latter two were Mancini signings. The only way I think it would become as attractive again to top-class managers would be the promise of a big pot to spend. In which case, why not give it Mancini?

Because he hasn't had fantastic success in the transfer market and with the millions he has managed to build an unbalanced team.I certainly wouldnt trust him with my money.

Mmm, £185m nett spend for the likes of Clichy, Nastasic, Silva, Yaya, Milner, Aguero, Dzeko. Don't think he's done too badly at all. Don't think the team is unbalanced either, unless you want to play a certain way that Mancini doesn't want to play.

Cherry picking,great.......

The team is unbalanced,you have just contradicted yourself.

 

[blueinsa]

Because he hasn't had fantastic success in the transfer market and with the millions he has managed to build an unbalanced team.I certainly wouldnt trust him with my money.

Mmm, £185m nett spend for the likes of Clichy, Nastasic, Silva, Yaya, Milner, Aguero, Dzeko. Don't think he's done too badly at all. Don't think the team is unbalanced either, unless you want to play a certain way that Mancini doesn't want to play.

Cherry picking,great.......

The team is unbalanced,you have just contradicted yourself.

Not much wrong with the squad imo mate that a change of direction wouldn't sort out.

 

[moomba]

Cherry picking,great.......

The team is unbalanced,you have just contradicted yourself.

Cherry picking? Just showing that for the amount we have spent in the transfer market in the last three years we have added some pretty good players to the squad.

On the whole I think our transfer business over three years has been pretty good value for money.

 

[NipHolmes]

Cherry picking,great.......

The team is unbalanced,you have just contradicted yourself.

Cherry picking? Just showing that for the amount we have spent in the transfer market in the last three years we have added some pretty good players to the squad.

On the whole I think our transfer business over three years has been pretty good value for money.

Kolarov, Nasri (when Mata was knocking around), Savic (have in mind Nasty was around too).

The team has no width, how can that be a balanced side? We played a declining RB in Maicon as a winger and we play Kolarov as a left winger because he's a bad LB.

We have too many lone striker types rather than a number 10 and a number 9.

If we play 4-3-3 then we need a quick wide attacker, Sanchez was targeted and we missed out but Nasri is a completely different player to him.

We have to make losses on outgoings to get them out. We will then inevitably pay over the odds on incomings then.

 

[blueinsa]

We could buy wingers for fun, the question is would Bob play them as wingers and would he change our style to suit?

I doubt that he would.

 

[bernabias home shirt]

I don't think the City job is that attractive anymore. Most managers want more control than Mancini has, and we're not spending anymore either. Our net spend over the past two transfer windows has been £14m and that went on Garcia, Rodwell and Sinclair - and I don't think the latter two were Mancini signings. The only way I think it would become as attractive again to top-class managers would be the promise of a big pot to spend. In which case, why not give it Mancini?

Your probably right
Thats why the likes of mourinho ever coming to us is virtually zero
Saying yes to the spanish duo is def not up his street

Be interesting what the summer brings and transfers
Got a feeling it could be like last years,not much unless we sell,and thats the way the sheikh wants to go now..

 

[Didsbury Dave]

We could buy wingers for fun, the question is would Bob play them as wingers and would he change our style to suit?

I doubt that he would.

The day I started to think "this man is wierd" was a few weeks into Mancini's reign and for two or three games on the trot he played SWP on the left wing and Petrov on the right. Two more traditional "go outside the fullback" wingers it would be harder to imagine. He'd read the theses about wrong-side wingers and couldn't see that some players are neutered playing that way. So I can't believe he'd play any wideman on his natural flank, I don't think he's ever done that.

 

[Aguero_Element]

anyone who wants mancini out is a fucking prick




probably just pissed off at your life so you wanna take it out on someone the press are trying to vindicate




glad u are stuck behinf a computer and cant really make it out in thw real world

 

[Anonymous]

Got a feeling it could be like last years,not much unless we sell,and thats the way the sheikh wants to go now..

Sounds to me like you're beginning to think Mancini is being hard done by by the club.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

anyone who wants mancini out is a fucking prick




probably just pissed off at your life so you wanna take it out on someone the press are trying to vindicate




glad u are stuck behinf a computer and cant really make it out in thw real world

The intellectual heavyweights have entered the debate...

Ignoring the text speak, bad spelling and grammar, I'm particularly amused that you don't know what "vindicate" is ;-)

What's your definition of "making it in the real world", out of interest?

 

[moomba]

Kolarov, Nasri (when Mata was knocking around), Savic (have in mind Nasty was around too).

I'm not claiming that Mancini is the only manager in the world with a 100% record in the transfer market. Just that for the £185m nett that we've spent over three years we've improved our squad out of sight.