The fact is that it takes a manager at least 3 seasons to get a team playing the way he wants it and once he leaves a successful club then it takes just as long for his influence to wear off. Hence why Avram Grant came within a penalty kick of winning the CL with what was Mourinho's team. If Villanova can do the same thing in 10 years time with his own squad then you can fairly say what you've said.BoyBlue_1985 said:Guardiola is a myth look at Tito Villanova, doing even better than Pep did
BoyBlue_1985 said:I actually agree with you but he will never be able to walk in to a team like Chelsea and be successful because of all the points you made there.sam-caddick said:BoyBlue_1985 said:Guardiola is a myth look at Tito Villanova, doing even better than Pep did
I disagree.
- Pep was the man who took a depreciating Barcelona side and reinvigorated them with a style of football that will probably define it's generation in years to come.
- Pep was the man who decided to get rid of the likes of Ronaldinho and co and replace them with the players from the academy - players who he worked with whilst in charge of Barcelona B.
- Pep was the man who made Messi a superstar and nutured him into the player he is today.
- Pep's philosphy is admired and probably the most copied style of football around today, every team want's to play his 'tika-taka' style of football.
Tito inherited Pep's team, he knew there was not much to be changed because it was already a winning side and had a philophy embedded in them that was a successful philosophy, it was Pep's philosophy.
Tito has freshened things up, added a few changes in the style of play that other teams were finding how to play against and given them an enhancment on what already was.
Why do you think Tito was hired? He knew the Barcelona way, the modern way that Pep created - if they had choosen an 'outside' manager, the style of play might and probably would of been completely different.
The modern Barcelona will always be defined by Pep Guardiola in my opinion, he is the man that created what many believe to be the greatest club side ever.
He had Messi
Best youth facilities in the world
Knew all the good youngsters coming up
A philosophy he had embedded while at the Barcelona B team
Barcelona were already heading towards tika-taka he just made it so
alky313 said:Villanova's Barca are more lethal than Peps.
That would mean Mourinho's double title winning side was actually ranieris that are title winning side was Hughes. Of course im being stupid because we know the change of manager is what made these teams what they became. My whole deal with Pep is that although he has a tika taka vision he had the team set up for it. He never had a plan B and while he hardly needed one when he did he was lost. I think most managers could go in and win something with Barca as long as they didnt try and stop the passing pressing game. Im not even saying Tito is better im just saying a team with Messi, Xavi, Iniesta Pedro, Busquets, Pique etc hardly need to be told what to do as its been instilled in them since they were 6 or 7 years old.Prestwich_Blue said:The fact is that it takes a manager at least 3 seasons to get a team playing the way he wants it and once he leaves a successful club then it takes just as long for his influence to wear off. Hence why Avram Grant came within a penalty kick of winning the CL with what was Mourinho's team. If Villanova can do the same thing in 10 years time with his own squad then you can fairly say what you've said.BoyBlue_1985 said:Guardiola is a myth look at Tito Villanova, doing even better than Pep did
BoyBlue_1985 said:That would mean Mourinho's double title winning side was actually ranieris that are title winning side was Hughes. Of course im being stupid because we know the change of manager is what made these teams what they became. My whole deal with Pep is that although he has a tika taka vision he had the team set up for it. He never had a plan B and while he hardly needed one when he did he was lost. I think most managers could go in and win something with Barca as long as they didnt try and stop the passing pressing game. Im not even saying Tito is better im just saying a team with Messi, Xavi, Iniesta Pedro, Busquets, Pique etc hardly need to be told what to do as its been instilled in them since they were 6 or 7 years old.
Im not so much down talking Pep as he achieved unimaginable success im just saying it was a one off deal and he will not do it with another side
My whole argument has always been though mate that I dont think he could do it elsewhere, no one can argue what he did there it would be stupid to trypeoffrey said:BoyBlue_1985 said:That would mean Mourinho's double title winning side was actually ranieris that are title winning side was Hughes. Of course im being stupid because we know the change of manager is what made these teams what they became. My whole deal with Pep is that although he has a tika taka vision he had the team set up for it. He never had a plan B and while he hardly needed one when he did he was lost. I think most managers could go in and win something with Barca as long as they didnt try and stop the passing pressing game. Im not even saying Tito is better im just saying a team with Messi, Xavi, Iniesta Pedro, Busquets, Pique etc hardly need to be told what to do as its been instilled in them since they were 6 or 7 years old.
Im not so much down talking Pep as he achieved unimaginable success im just saying it was a one off deal and he will not do it with another side
I disagree. Barcelona promoting from within and having everyone playing their way and to their standards is what ensures they'll remain one of the best for the forseeable. If Guardiola wasn't up to standard then he'd never have been involved. Barcelona played some incredible football and Guardiola's record there is outstanding.
Most Managers couldn't go in there and win something. They need to earn the respect of the players and be able to deal with the pressure of the job.
BoyBlue_1985 said:peoffrey said:I disagree. Barcelona promoting from within and having everyone playing their way and to their standards is what ensures they'll remain one of the best for the forseeable. If Guardiola wasn't up to standard then he'd never have been involved. Barcelona played some incredible football and Guardiola's record there is outstanding.
Most Managers couldn't go in there and win something. They need to earn the respect of the players and be able to deal with the pressure of the job.
My whole argument has always been though mate that I dont think he could do it elsewhere, no one can argue what he did there it would be stupid to try
I would say there would be no harm in trying certainly. Whilst I am a fan of Mourinho im not sure he would be the manager for City. One thing is for certain Guardiola will have to have a will of iron and a hard line to make a different team see in his vision. Tika taka does not just happen and he always brought in the players he felt worked to his style. It was obvious he never wanted Inbrahimovich as he does not fit in to that style. I dont think he is afraid of the hard work and transforming a team but it will be alot more work than Barca were. One way or another I think we will find out come August next yearpeoffrey said:BoyBlue_1985 said:peoffrey said:I disagree. Barcelona promoting from within and having everyone playing their way and to their standards is what ensures they'll remain one of the best for the forseeable. If Guardiola wasn't up to standard then he'd never have been involved. Barcelona played some incredible football and Guardiola's record there is outstanding.
Most Managers couldn't go in there and win something. They need to earn the respect of the players and be able to deal with the pressure of the job.
My whole argument has always been though mate that I dont think he could do it elsewhere, no one can argue what he did there it would be stupid to try
If he's won the Champions League twice then you'd suspect anything else in football wouldn't be out of his reach. He's also been able to sign players to fit in to his system and ideas etc.
Whilst we simply don't know whether he can be a success elsewhere, his record so far suggests he's very likely to be so. I certainly wouldn't be disappointed to see him linked as a replacement should Mancini go. I'd welcome him over Mourinho.