Mancini

[sam-caddick]

Get to fuck. FA Cup in his first full season of English football. Title in his second. He has had a much better start than Bacon ever did domestically speaking and it took the rashered one years to suss the CL.

Mancini's had years in Europe and looks as lost as ever.

Also starting a post with "Get to fuck" makes your opinion far more valid, you should do that more often.

I have no doubt Mancini will become a good European manager, it's just going to take time.

Look at Klopp, all of a sudden he is the new football managerial messiah in Europe yet his Dortmund side came bottom of a group consisting of Arsenal, Marseille and Olympiacos winning 1, drawing 1 and losing 4 last season.

Mancini has proven himself to being a great domestic manager, just give him time in Europe.

Plus I can't see many managers being able to control the egos now developed at our club, Mancini has made some mistakes here and there but he has done a good job overall.

Most managers would not last two minutes in my opinion.

 

[Rammy Blue]

We'll see - but my gut feeling since Txiki was first mooted as DoF has been that the next manager will be more of the profile that Pep was when he got the Barca job than Mourinho. I guess that's why the De Boer/Pellegrini/Laudrup links haven't surprised or bothered me. I can see the method in what might seem a mad decision on the face of it.

In many respects Klopp is the absolute ideal but you're right it'd take something special to extricate him from his Dortmund contract. ie. he'd need to win the CL this season and we'd have to give him one hell of a pitch.

I agree mate, don't take my post the wrong way. I think it'll definitely be someone of the ilk of the 3 you name, just saying that as and when the post becomes vacant we may well get some curveballs that we didn't foresee.

One thing is for sure, I'd be astonished if we didn't at least ask for permission to speak to Klopp.

 

[LoveCity]

I have no doubt Mancini will become a good European manager, it's just going to take time.

Look at Klopp, all of a sudden he is the new football managerial messiah in Europe yet his Dortmund side came bottom of a group consisting of Arsenal, Marseille and Olympiacos winning 1, drawing 1 and losing 4 last season.

Mancini has proven himself to being a great domestic manager, just give him time in Europe.

No doubt? He's had 7 Champions League campaigns and his progression (regression is the better word) looks like this: \ (a downhill slope)

If he's going to become a good European coach why isn't he improving rather than regressing?

As for Klopp, he's had two Champions League campaigns. In the first he failed and struggled to balance Bundesliga and Champions League with Dortmund's limited squad that cost a fraction of ours to assemble (this season it's the opposite - more focus on CL, squad slipping up in pre/post-CL fixtures). He failed, he learned, he came back for round two and succeeded. Mancini is up to round eight next season, I can't see how anyone can have no doubts when the evidence is quite frightening. When you're Soriano or whoever and feel European progress is vital in the Financial Fair Play era and you look at Mancini's European form, I think there will be doubts...

 

[mancitypj]

So we have now entered the 'when not if' territory about Mancini then have we?

And its not Pep or Jose but thats OK because a change is as good as a rest, as the saying goes.

And of course the rumours of player unrest and 'him or me' statements being made are trotted out whilst we also see Silva and Yaya sign new contracts even though Mancini is still in post.

Perhaps these world class players have only signed new contracts because they know that Mancini wont be here next year?

That brings to mind Hazard's choice when he signed for 'the European champions' even though they had no confirmed manager. That worked out well didn't it.

At the best guess it would cost City £10m to sack Mancini and then take a chance on a man who has won far less than him. That leaves me feeling less than happy about going out on a limb with someone on a list that doesnt include Klopp, Mourinho, Ancelotti or Guardiola all of whom I can see the draw of.

Is that change really worth making or should some players be asked if they are as committed to City as Silva or Yaya seem to be?

Excellent post.

 

[moomba]

No doubt? He's had 7 Champions League campaigns and his progression (regression is the better word) looks like this: \ (a downhill slope)

If he's going to become a good European coach why isn't he improving rather than regressing?

I don't think it really works like that. It's not a case of slowly working your way each year from the groups to R16 to the QF to the SF to the final and then win it. There are so many variables including opponent, the squad you have, the money you spend etc.

I have no doubt that we will need to get out of the groups next season, maybe even as fa as the QF. We've been unlucky with our draws so far, but three in a row won't be tolerated. But I'm confident we will get out of the groups. Then RM will be on an upward trend and worth persevering with wouldnt you think?

As for Klopp, he's had two Champions League campaigns. In the first he failed and struggled to balance Bundesliga and Champions League with Dortmund's limited squad that cost a fraction of ours to assemble (this season it's the opposite - more focus on CL, squad slipping up in pre/post-CL fixtures). He failed, he learned, he came back for round two and succeeded. Mancini is up to round eight next season, I can't see how anyone can have no doubts when the evidence is quite frightening. When you're Soriano or whoever and feel European progress is vital in the Financial Fair Play era and you look at Mancini's European form, I think there will be doubts...

Klopp is yet to get past the stage Mancini has got to twice.

 

[Combat Carl]

I have no doubt Mancini will become a good European manager, it's just going to take time.

Look at Klopp, all of a sudden he is the new football managerial messiah in Europe yet his Dortmund side came bottom of a group consisting of Arsenal, Marseille and Olympiacos winning 1, drawing 1 and losing 4 last season.

Mancini has proven himself to being a great domestic manager, just give him time in Europe.

No doubt? He's had 7 Champions League campaigns and his progression (regression is the better word) looks like this: \ (a downhill slope)

If he's going to become a good European coach why isn't he improving rather than regressing?

As for Klopp, he's had two Champions League campaigns. In the first he failed and struggled to balance Bundesliga and Champions League with Dortmund's limited squad that cost a fraction of ours to assemble (this season it's the opposite - more focus on CL, squad slipping up in pre/post-CL fixtures). He failed, he learned, he came back for round two and succeeded. Mancini is up to round eight next season, I can't see how anyone can have no doubts when the evidence is quite frightening. When you're Soriano or whoever and feel European progress is vital in the Financial Fair Play era and you look at Mancini's European form, I think there will be doubts...

The fact that Mourinho won with Inter was a miracle and it certainly wasn't football they played. Where are they now? I don't think Mancini's record is that terrible in Europe and we are only the second club he's been involved with in the Champions League. He has to be given at least another crack at it with us.

 

[NipHolmes]

Trebles don't happen by miracle. You don't get lucky in 3 competitions.

 

[BobKowalski]

So we have now entered the 'when not if' territory about Mancini then have we?

And its not Pep or Jose but thats OK because a change is as good as a rest, as the saying goes.

And of course the rumours of player unrest and 'him or me' statements being made are trotted out whilst we also see Silva and Yaya sign new contracts even though Mancini is still in post.

Perhaps these world class players have only signed new contracts because they know that Mancini wont be here next year?

That brings to mind Hazard's choice when he signed for 'the European champions' even though they had no confirmed manager. That worked out well didn't it.

At the best guess it would cost City £10m to sack Mancini and then take a chance on a man who has won far less than him. That leaves me feeling less than happy about going out on a limb with someone on a list that doesnt include Klopp, Mourinho, Ancelotti or Guardiola all of whom I can see the draw of.

Is that change really worth making or should some players be asked if they are as committed to City as Silva or Yaya seem to be?

There is no doubt some have convinced themselves Mancini has gone largely because they want him gone so badly it hurts. Some people have also now convinced themselves that its OK we are not getting a top tier manager because its Txki and he spotted Pep and did I mention they want Mancini gone so badly it hurts? Txiki could unveil Mark Hughes and there would be threads about why it went wrong last time, why it wasn't Hughes fault and why this time it will work. Oh and Mancini will be gone so thats all right then.

There is one aspect that cannot be avoided and that is Mancini wants control and he has to work with Txiki who also wants control and the answer to that will determine Mancini's willingness to continue or Txiki's willingness to allow him to continue.

Now we may find out they are a match made in heaven but personally I have my doubts that they can co-exist and most top tier managers are going have the same problem so stories linking us to the likes of Pellegrini or Koeman or De Boer (who is now the second Pep apparently) do have a logic.

Mind you people doing their best to trash Mancini's record and blow life into Pellegrini's or paint De Boer as the new messiah now that the big names are off the table is funny as fuck.

 

[LongsightM13]

So we have now entered the 'when not if' territory about Mancini then have we?

And its not Pep or Jose but thats OK because a change is as good as a rest, as the saying goes.

And of course the rumours of player unrest and 'him or me' statements being made are trotted out whilst we also see Silva and Yaya sign new contracts even though Mancini is still in post.

Perhaps these world class players have only signed new contracts because they know that Mancini wont be here next year?

That brings to mind Hazard's choice when he signed for 'the European champions' even though they had no confirmed manager. That worked out well didn't it.

At the best guess it would cost City £10m to sack Mancini and then take a chance on a man who has won far less than him. That leaves me feeling less than happy about going out on a limb with someone on a list that doesnt include Klopp, Mourinho, Ancelotti or Guardiola all of whom I can see the draw of.

Is that change really worth making or should some players be asked if they are as committed to City as Silva or Yaya seem to be?

Excellent stuff, fbloke.
Ancelotti was ludicrously sacked by Chelsea after a season similar to ours this year. Do people think that was the right thing for them to do? That Chelsea don't now regret it? That they wouldn't have been better sticking with the serial trophy winner?
There is more than a whiff of noveau football 'hipsterism' about some of the posts in this thread. Remember when Athletic Bilbao we're all the rage? Or the Clarefontaine academy in France? They fell out of fashion as quickly as Onesies

 

[moomba]

Onesies are out of fashion?

Oh fuck.