Time To Back The Manager...

[Feed-The-Goat]

A debate on Guardiola's attributes outside of Barcelona would be a decent yarn.

Pep would be a huge success at City, IMO. Guardiola inherited a great situation at Barca but has still done a magnificent job. His bold tactics this season go to demonstrate a superior football brain at work.

He inherited 3 of the 4 best players in the world.

Not Craig Bellamy, Santa Cruz and Adebayor

 

[OB1]

Chelsea are a prime example of what chopping and changing managers can cause.

Yes but they were stupid enough to sack Jose and replace him with a series of worse managers. If City were to replace Mancini with Mourinho, the Hughes to Mancini to Mourinho would represent an upgrade path.

An upgrade? I wouldnt take Mourinho over Mancini, i wouldnt say its an upgrade at all.

Why the talk about sacking Mancini anyways? If he delivers us the title this season, the contract will be waiting for him, and i for one would be happy to see him sign it.

were finally a stable club, with a manager who has his own team, and its showing now, changing of managers shouldnt be brought up.

It's a forum, it's a debate.

And for the record, I'm a huge fan of Mancini and was an advocate of replacing Hughes with him well before it occurred but I'm not advocating getting rid of Mancini.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Chelsea are a prime example of what chopping and changing managers can cause.

Yes but they were stupid enough to sack Jose and replace him with a series of worse managers. If City were to replace Mancini with Mourinho, the Hughes to Mancini to Mourinho would represent an upgrade path.

An upgrade? I wouldnt take Mourinho over Mancini, i wouldnt say its an upgrade at all.

Why the talk about sacking Mancini anyways? If he delivers us the title this season, the contract will be waiting for him, and i for one would be happy to see him sign it.

were finally a stable club, with a manager who has his own team, and its showing now, changing of managers shouldnt be brought up.

As you state, if Bobby delivers the title this season, the contract will be waiting for him.

Why not now, sending out a clear message he is here to stay, then?

The thread is about backing the manager now with hard funds - which should be backed up by taking his long-term future out of the equation, barring a ridiculous collapse over the next few years.

 

[OB1]

A debate on Guardiola's attributes outside of Barcelona would be a decent yarn.

Pep would be a huge success at City, IMO. Guardiola inherited a great situation at Barca but has still done a magnificent job. His bold tactics this season go to demonstrate a superior football brain at work.

He inherited 3 of the 4 best players in the world.

Not Craig Bellamy, Santa Cruz and Adebayor

So?

 

[johnny crossan]

All the signs are that City's owners would have liked to get Jose in and would have had no qualms about axing Bobby to get Jose. It would also appear that they are quite prepared to wait and see what further success Bobby brings, or doesn't, before they give him a new contract. What is unclear is whether they would ditch Bobby if he won the league and Jose then became available. Mourinho has made much play of building a dynasty in his next job, so going for him would not be an intentionally short-term move. Mourinho is a better manager than Mancini but whether the gap between them is wide enough to justify a change, if it were a viable option, is an interesting debate.

lie layered upon lie, you swallowed the baseless Cabal version whole.

JC, you appear to be confusing opinion/view with agenda?

No confusion TH, the Cabal smear Mancini at every opportunity and they use the fans forums to feed the media bottom feeders, who in turn regurgitate their bile. One objective - undermine the manager and get him replaced by Mourinho. Simple and sordid as that.

 

[Chris in London]

Posts like this should come with a health warning. I expect there's a few forum users who will read it then spontaneously combust!

No need, and should cool their adour.

It's Groundhog Day around this time for past three season.

Bobby has delivered and I expect him to do so again.

Mourinho does what is best for him and reads the landscape better than anyone.

Our owners, however, should not be underestimated when it comes to being ruthless.

Ask Mark Hughes.

Well not that ruthless then. Ruthless would have seen Hughes sacked in the summer of '10. Very ruthless would have seen him sacked in December '09.

Mancini will be here as long as he delivers silverware and doesn't fall out with the powers that be. Playing good attractive football does him no harm either. That said I get no impression that Mansour is Abramovich where sacking the manager is the default option when displeased plus if we are interested in adhering to FFP then you need to look at coaches who are willing and prepared to bring academy prospects through to the first team which to date Mourinho has shown little inclination to do. Guardiola (for example) would be an interesting option bearing FFP in mind.

What is also clear and I assume is clear to the owners is that in addition to success on the pitch is the desirability of building a brand of football that is synonymous with City and builds a worldwide fanbase. Mancini has made a start with this and long may it continue because in the long run how you win is just as important to the identity of the club as winning itself and by identity I mean 'brand' and the ability to maximise revenues from merchandise/TV rights etc.

Mancini is here to establish solid foundations and a winning mentality. That he is demonstrably doing. How long he is here for is only important in the sense that the foundations are properly laid. Beyond that and as long as we have been sensible and established a culture and philosophy of football that not only brings success but is gorgeous to watch with an emphasis on bringing through academy players then debating how long Mancini is here for is irrelevant.

That said if we are to debate it, as we seemingly must, then it would be nice to discuss the merits or otherwise of other coaches other than Jose. Assuming we actually know any other coaches other than Mourinho that is.

I think that 'identity' point is very important.

There is a mentality at Barcelona which they refer to as 'mesq'un club' which means 'more than a club' or is perhaps better put as 'not just a club'. The mentality highlights community ties, Barca's place in Catalan/spanish history, high levels of respect and gratitude towards (and knowledgeable about) former players and non-playing servants, high levels of corporate/social/ethical responsibility, high importance attached to youth development and so forth. And very attractive football.

There is a mentality at Chelsea, 'I don't care if you won the double last season, win me the champions league this season, or you're toast'. Roman emperors often took a simialr approach to Generals who failed to subdue rebellious provinces, whatever the practical difficulties they encountered. Maybe it's a 'Roman' thing.

I see considerable evidence of an admiration for the Barca model in City's actions post 2008, and possibly a desire not just to emulate it but also to overtake it. I see no evidence whatsoever of any desire to emulate the Chelsea model.

 

[Feed-The-Goat]

Yes but they were stupid enough to sack Jose and replace him with a series of worse managers. If City were to replace Mancini with Mourinho, the Hughes to Mancini to Mourinho would represent an upgrade path.

An upgrade? I wouldnt take Mourinho over Mancini, i wouldnt say its an upgrade at all.

Why the talk about sacking Mancini anyways? If he delivers us the title this season, the contract will be waiting for him, and i for one would be happy to see him sign it.

were finally a stable club, with a manager who has his own team, and its showing now, changing of managers shouldnt be brought up.

As you state, if Bobby delivers the title this season, the contract will be waiting for him.

Why not now, sending out a clear message he is here to stay, then?

The thread is about backing the manager now with hard funds - which should be backed up by taking his long-term future out of the equation, barring a ridiculous collapse over the next few years.

Thats a question no one can answer, other than the board. Im all for mancini gettin the backing he wants from the board, give the man what he wants.

 

[allan harper]

lie layered upon lie, you swallowed the baseless Cabal version whole.

JC, you appear to be confusing opinion/view with agenda?

No confusion TH, the Cabal smear Mancini at every opportunity and they use the fans forums to feed the media bottom feeders, who in turn regurgitate their bile. One objective - undermine the manager and get him replaced by Mourinho. Simple and sordid as that.

You don't believe that do you ?

 

[Feed-The-Goat]

Pep would be a huge success at City, IMO. Guardiola inherited a great situation at Barca but has still done a magnificent job. His bold tactics this season go to demonstrate a superior football brain at work.

He inherited 3 of the 4 best players in the world.

Not Craig Bellamy, Santa Cruz and Adebayor

So?

Would Guardiola have achieved what Mancini has at City, if he was appointed instead?

 

[twinkletoes]

Chelsea are a prime example of what chopping and changing managers can cause.

Yes but they were stupid enough to sack Jose and replace him with a series of worse managers. If City were to replace Mancini with Mourinho, the Hughes to Mancini to Mourinho would represent an upgrade path.

Ancelloti is not a worse manager. I would say it is too early to even make a judgement about AVB, but his record so far isnt exactly shabby.

I think that Mourinho's style has tainted Chelsea and that is why nobody has made a success of things since his departure.