Mourhino is on his way to City.....

[Skashion]

Because top managers have no reasons to take lesser jobs when they're still successful? Mourinho had his 'paying dues' job at U.D. Leiria with a 52% win rate (took them to their highest position ever - they are now in the Portuguese 3rd division), that got him the Porto job and he's never looked back since.

That's very disingenuous. He only took over in April with seven games of the season left when they finished 5th! They were at 7th when he arrived. He paid his dues by getting them two places higher? They were 4th the following season when he left.

He paid his dues alongside Bobby Robson and Louis van Gaal, and did enough in 30 games at U.D. Leira to convince one of Portugal's greatest clubs that he was something special. Should he have wallowed in mediocrity for a couple of seasons? He ascended the managerial ladder faster than most simply because he was that good, and soon became the greatest manager on the planet.

You're pulling the same idiotic move. It's an utter straw man. I'm not saying he should have taken lesser jobs. I'm saying you cannot use it to compare win ratios. If you want to compare value-added win ratios i.e. win ratio in the season before Mancini took over, and win ratio in the final season managing those clubs (we'll take 12/13 to be that season for current clubs), I'm up for that. If you want to compare overall win ratios, that's farcical. The clubs they've managed were in very different circumstances.

 

[OB1]

Because top managers have no reasons to take lesser jobs when they're still successful? Mourinho had his 'paying dues' job at U.D. Leiria with a 52% win rate (took them to their highest position ever - they are now in the Portuguese 3rd division), that got him the Porto job and he's never looked back since.

That's very disingenuous. He only took over in April with seven games of the season left when they finished 5th! They were at 7th when he arrived. He paid his dues by getting them two places higher? They were 4th the following season when he left.

He paid his dues alongside Bobby Robson and Louis van Gaal, and did enough in 30 games at U.D. Leira to convince one of Portugal's greatest clubs that he was something special. Should he have wallowed in mediocrity for a couple of seasons? He ascended the managerial ladder faster than most simply because he was that good, and soon became the greatest manager on the planet.

This is the whole point of why some of us think it would be a good idea to try and grab him for City if he becomes available.

 

[NipHolmes]

If people want to debate then they must have the knowledge to back their point up and also put effort in. All I see is mythical points stated as fact and also people just posting inane bollocks and :) this shit.

Threads fail because of shit posts. Simple.

 

[Skashion]

Threads fail because of shit posts. Simple.

Indeed, please try making some good ones that use logic.

 

[Anonymous]

Tbh billy even dave agreed last week that the sheikh will probably have the last say.

Then I don't agree with either of you ... I just don't see what the actual point is in having two guys with the experience of business and football at the highest level , and then making a decision on who the next manager should be or whether the current incumbent should be given more time yourself. Totally pointless and counterproductive and absolutely no doubt in my mind that neither man would've taken the job if that was the case.

Here's an interesting tidbit for you ... Roman spent a good portion of 2011 trying to hire Txiki but didn't get close. I suspect because ultimately Roman decides at Chelsea and that isn't going to work for a footballing guy like Bergiristain.

 

[MSP]

I could understand that people want Mancini to stay. Each managerial change, specially the one who would be in front of some coming changes in players department is huge and I give it to them that hey could feel it would be all over from the start and so..

But to see people ready to actually challenge Mourinho's managerial supremacy over Mancini is just wow.

 

[NipHolmes]

Saved me the post, I was just about to mention that he did that and was also in the right place at the right time really.

The fact of the matter is he's had high platforms and he's delivered.

It's like saying Messi isn't the best of all time or one of the best because he never played for a club outside of the top 4 for instance. Bollocks. Big players and big managers deliver at the highest stage, hence why they are employed by the elite.

Should Jose suddenly say, 'nah fuck it, fuck PSG, United, City and Chelsea, I must manage Newcastle and work my magic, all to prove some doubters wrong!' or should he just do as he does and win anoth league title or another european trophy.

People talk bollocks to make a point. It's plain sad!

It's you who's talking bollocks to make a point! You're using win ratio as if it's a fair comparison. OK Mourinho never had to manage a shit team. I certainly haven't criticised him for taking the top jobs, but at the same time you can't pretend comparing the win ratio of teams who had high win ratios before the manager arrived is the same as managing a team that didn't have as high a ratio. Surely we should be looking for value added i.e. what is the difference in win ratio between when they arrived and when they left.

Here's an interesting comparison, Mancini takes over Inter when they were in 4th place, manages a win ratio of 61.67%. Mourinho takes over them in 1st place and manages a win ratio of 62.04%. Scarcely any difference despite Mancini taking over when they hadn't won a title since 1989. I'm not even making the case that Mancini is the better manager but I'm willing to be fair and compare like for like. You're not doing. You're being a fucking fanboy right now and trying to make out like it's others are blaming Mourinho for not taking the tougher jobs when we're merely pointing out that if you take top jobs your win ratio will be better so it's not a fair comparison.

I'm talking facts to make a point, not bollocks.

Nothing interesting what you posted either. Mancini won the league with high win ratio. How can that be bettered by much? Short of adding more teams its impossible.

I argue trophies and win ratio. That's the point.

I'm a fan of Jose. But don't be so ignorant as to assume I'm some carried away fanboy. I'm trying to educate a few who clearly don't know what the fuck they are on about.

Mancini is dire in Europe, Jose is not. We want to do well in Europe, its not rocket science what the next bit is.

Get angry, get frustrated. Do whatever you want but you cannot twist or rewrite the truth.

 

[bernabias home shirt]

Threads fail because of shit posts. Simple.

Indeed, please try making some good ones that use logic.

This
I can see him using the wenger card soon.

 

[LoveCity]

But to see people ready to actually challenge Mourinho's managerial supremacy over Mancini is just wow.

Exactly. I'm happy enough if Mancini stays because of what he's done for us but if Mourinho is an A+ manager, Mancini is a B or B+ manager at best. It's amazing some people are trying to demean Mourinho - the best manager in the world - because of the perceived threat they feel he poses to Mancini's job. Mourinho is a better manager than Mancini, denying it is as Blue blinkered as a United fan saying Phil Jones is better than Vincent Kompany. That doesn't mean Mancini is rubbish, he is far from it, but it does mean that if Chelsea or United get Mourinho we have a big reason to be worried... especially if Chelsea get him as that'd put Mancini up against Ferguson and Mourinho rather than just Mourinho. And it wouldn't be good for us if our manager was up against two of his superiors.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I could understand that people want Mancini to stay. Each managerial change, specially the one who would be in front of some coming changes in players department is huge and I give it to them that hey could feel it would be all over from the start and so..

But to see people ready to actually challenge Mourinho's managerial supremacy over Mancini is just wow.

That's the comedy of it.

If you took 1000 people from around European football; club owners, managers, international players, respected ex players, senior journalists and football analysts and asked them 'who is the more successful manager?' You would get 1000 people saying 'Mourinho'. Yet you get desperate posters on here trying to argue the opposite.