Best Coach in the World

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Who had arguably the greatest team of all time to do it? I'm not saying that he doesn't deserve credit for it, but again opportunity is an important factor when it comes to coaching also.

I think SAF won titles despite not necessarily having the best team. I can't think of much that Pep has won without having the overwhelming favourite the entire time (which makes some of his failures stick out more, given the group of talent he's had, a burden I'm sure he's happy to carry).

4th place barca... yeah

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Anyone who says Simeone needs to get there eyes checked.

 

[The Abusement Park]

Klopp is fortunate he doesn’t have to compete against SAF on a regular basis

 

[les Habs]

Anyone who says Simeone needs to get there eyes checked.

Or put it into proper context, though the ref admitted he screwed them over in that first CL Final.

 

[Cassano]

Anyone who says Simeone needs to get there eyes checked.

330m spent on Felix, Lemar, D. Costa, Morata and Vitolo.

Absolute shambles, it makes LFC signing Konchesky, Caroll and Stewart Downing seem reasonable.

With the right signings, Atletico could've been a powerhouse being able to compete for La Liga. Instead, they're 6th in the table.

 

[les Habs]

330m spent on Felix, Lemar, D. Costa, Morata and Vitolo.

Absolute shambles, it makes LFC signing Konchesky, Caroll and Stewart Downing seem reasonable.

With the right signings, Atletico could've been a powerhouse being able to compete for La Liga. Instead, they're 6th in the table.

They've had some good signings of which Felix and Lemar might be a part of. Problem is he won't get the best out of those sorts of players.

 

[Blender]

No doubt Pep has a ton of talent as a manager and might have the best career argument, but the resources the guy has had dedicated to his teams are beyond absurd. When your clubs are spending way more on players for you than anyone else does, the expectations of success are rightfully higher.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Or put it into proper context, though the ref admitted he screwed them over in that first CL Final.

I mean he's had some great years for sure but his team is punching below their weight at times.

330m spent on Felix, Lemar, D. Costa, Morata and Vitolo.

Absolute shambles, it makes LFC signing Konchesky, Caroll and Stewart Downing seem reasonable.

With the right signings, Atletico could've been a powerhouse being able to compete for La Liga. Instead, they're 6th in the table.

This year he's battled with injuries but its the same story for the past few seasons.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

What exactly is "punching below their weight" for Atletico, a team that for the 15 years prior to his arrival got relegated and spent much of the time messing around in mid-table? This year, they're 6th after 27 games, just 2 points off 3rd place. They've been no worse than 3rd pretty much since he's been there. No coach on earth would have Atletico reliably challenge Real and Barca on an annual basis.

I'd say there's a certain bias against him because his teams aren't playing the 'right way' whatever that might be. Him outfoxing Klopp in the CL tie this year is just another indicator that he's a top, top manager.

 

[les Habs]

When your clubs are spending way more on players for you than anyone else does, the expectations of success are rightfully higher.

As they should be, yet this doesn't apply to Guardiola much.

 

[Blender]

As they should be, yet this doesn't apply to Guardiola much.

Yes, it absolutely does. He has had more net spend as a manager than anyone else. It's not even close.

 

[les Habs]

Yes, it absolutely does. He has had more net spend as a manager than anyone else. It's not even close.

09-10: Madrid spent 81 million more
10-11: Madrid spent 63 million more
11-12: Madrid spent 30 million more
14-15: BVB spent 55 million more
18-19: Liverpool spent 116 million more

And that's only considering Barça, Madrid, Bayern, BVB, City and Liverpool. So 5 seasons out of 12 he's been outspent by domestic rivals and that's not even considering continental rivals's spend. Pretty significant considering the few clubs I looked at and really puts your claim into context which you failed to do.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

What exactly is "punching below their weight" for Atletico, a team that for the 15 years prior to his arrival got relegated and spent much of the time messing around in mid-table? This year, they're 6th after 27 games, just 2 points off 3rd place. They've been no worse than 3rd pretty much since he's been there. No coach on earth would have Atletico reliably challenge Real and Barca on an annual basis.

I'd say there's a certain bias against him because his teams aren't playing the 'right way' whatever that might be. Him outfoxing Klopp in the CL tie this year is just another indicator that he's a top, top manager.

You understand Atleti 20 years ago isn't the same atleti now( largely due to him bringing them up by the bootstraps). However right now he should be challenging the big two more than he has. He spends hundreds of millions on offensive players just to play with 10 behind the ball against he likes of Getafe. He does this weekly. He also manages to kill young offensive players potential at an alarming right.

Yeah, because one game is all that matters. And who said he's not a top top top top manager. He clearly is.

09-10: Madrid spent 81 million more
10-11: Madrid spent 63 million more
11-12: Madrid spent 30 million more
14-15: BVB spent 55 million more
18-19: Liverpool spent 116 million more

And that's only considering Barça, Madrid, Bayern, BVB, City and Liverpool. So 5 seasons out of 12 he's been outspent by domestic rivals and that's not even considering continental rivals's spend. Pretty significant considering the few clubs I looked at and really puts your claim into context which you failed to do.

It's funny I didn't see these $$$ arguments when Mourinho was a God on here.

 

[Blender]

09-10: Madrid spent 81 million more
10-11: Madrid spent 63 million more
11-12: Madrid spent 30 million more
14-15: BVB spent 55 million more
18-19: Liverpool spent 116 million more

And that's only considering Barça, Madrid, Bayern, BVB, City and Liverpool. So 5 seasons out of 12 he's been outspent by domestic rivals and that's not even considering continental rivals's spend. Pretty significant considering the few clubs I looked at and really puts your claim into context which you failed to do.

From 2009-2010 to 2019-2020 Pep Guardiola has had £1.1 billion spent on players for him. Mourinho is second with £1.02 billion. Jurgen Klopp in comparison has had £562.75 billion spent on players. That he doesn't always have the highest spend on a year to year basis is pretty irrelevant when his club is consistently spending big on him over time.

Transfer expenditure per coach

 

[Blender]

It's funny I didn't see these $$$ arguments when Mourinho was a God on here.

When was "Mourinho a god"? Certainly not any time recently, and his record with Manchester United despite also having massive spending was embarrassing. Is that really the comparison you want to make? I'm certainly not making it, nor will I defend it.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

When was "Mourinho a god"? Certainly not any time recently, and his record with Manchester United despite also having massive spending was embarrassing. Is that really the comparison you want to make? I'm certainly not making it, nor will I defend it.

2009-2013 ish he was most certainly a God here and in footy in general.

Like I said would Klopp have won without spending answer is very clearly no.

 

[les Habs]

It's funny I didn't see these $$$ arguments when Mourinho was a God on here.

Exactly. Mourinho spent a ton. If you look at how much was spent (net spend) while he was at Chelsea (both spells), Inter, Madrid and United it was 740 million over 12 seasons. Guardiola's net spend in the 11 seasons he's been a manager is 746 million. Still with one season fewer Guardiola has more league titles and cups with a season in hand.

Also, if you want to put the net spend for Guardiola's teams into context about 70% of it has come from his time at City.

 

[les Habs]

From 2009-2010 to 2019-2020 Pep Guardiola has had £1.1 billion spent on players for him. Mourinho is second with £1.02 billion. Jurgen Klopp in comparison has had £562.75 billion spent on players. That he doesn't always have the highest spend on a year to year basis is pretty irrelevant when his club is consistently spending big on him over time.

Transfer expenditure per coach

Oh boy.

• Earlier you clearly said "net spend'.
• Could you cherry pick the dates anymore?
• That he doesn't always have the highest spend on a year to year basis is VERY relevant. To say otherwise is laughable even if you're using your argument which lacks context.
• As I just posted, about 70% of Guardiola's spending has occurred over only about 36% of his time as manager as it was with City.

 

[Blender]

Oh boy.

• Earlier you clearly said "net spend'.
• Could you cherry pick the dates anymore?
• That he doesn't always have the highest spend on a year to year basis is VERY relevant. To say otherwise is laughable even if you're using your argument which lacks context.
• As I just posted, about 70% of Guardiola's spending has occurred over only about 36% of his time as manager as it was with City.

You used 09-10 as a starting point, I was using the same dates. It's not relevant, because a club can spend huge one year but not the next, so the fact that Pep didn't have the highest spending club every year of his career is less relevant than the fact that over a long period of time his clubs have consistently spent huge. Money spent is money spent, how it's distributed over a few years isn't as relevant as the totals. His spending with City has been astronomical, and his results mixed. City hired him to get them a Champions League, not domestic titles or a points record (which are still certainly big achievements on their own).

 

[les Habs]

You used 09-10 as a starting point, I was using the same dates. It's not relevant, because a club can spend huge one year but not the next, so the fact that Pep didn't have the highest spending club every year of his career is less relevant than the fact that over a long period of time his clubs have consistently spent huge. Money spent is money spent, how it's distributed over a few years isn't as relevant as the totals. His spending with City has been astronomical, and his results mixed. City hired him to get them a Champions League, not domestic titles or a points record (which are still certainly big achievements on their own).

• I didn't have a starting point. I was referencing seasons where he'd been outspent.
• It's entirely relevant as it can have a big effect on that year's competitions. On top of that Madrid outspent Barça 3 of the 4 years Guardiola was there.
• That bolded part is just plain stupid. It's completely relevant because managers are generally not at the same club over that period.
• I don't know why City hired him. I also don't know that he's making all the transfer decisions as you just claimed in this post. What I do know is that while he maybe hasn't lived up to expectations he has still delivered some significant titles (and that's not to mention the additional context of Klopp's Liverpool). I also know that Guardiola's managerial career consists more than just the time he's spent at City.

 

[YNWA14]

Year to year spend is misleading if you've spent 500m the year before. Just because another team outspends you in a year where you don't need to outspend the Vatican doesn't erase what has already been done.

Pep has been a very successful manager, yeah, but ' he's ' also spent a ridiculous amount of money.

Also, for what it's worth, I think 'net spend' is relevant also since generally to have a low net spend you'll have to sell good players for good money (Coutinho for example, even though everyone knows how happy I was about that) and reinvest wisely. Very different from just buying amazing players over and over without ever needing to sell. Just as an example Pep has a net spend of 400m pounds with City (Liverpool with a meager 72m).

 

[Cassano]

As nicknamed by @Power Man, Pep Jackson is an accurate description for Guardiola's tenure as manager. Easier to win everything when you have MJ, Kobe and Shaq in their prime years.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Yeah, because everyone else was with Biglias and Zazas

 

[les Habs]

Year to year spend is misleading if you've spent 500m the year before. Just because another team outspends you in a year where you don't need to outspend the Vatican doesn't erase what has already been done.

Pep has been a very successful manager, yeah, but ' he's ' also spent a ridiculous amount of money.

I've already covered all of this. And for the record the only season where Barça outspent Madrid while Guardiola was manager was in 08-09 where the difference was 30 million. Go ahead and factor that in to the four year period with the figures I've already posted and have it.

Again, 70% of the money spent by teams he's managed has come out of city which covers a period of 36% of the time he's been a manager.

 

[Cassano]

Yeah, because everyone else was with Biglias and Zazas

Well yeah, Antonio Conte was with Zaza