Luis Enrique

I feel like you have an irrational hatred against Enrique Alex. Talking about what he would do with Tata's team is a waste of time and pure conjecture. When you look at what he's done with Barca however, it surely shows a better understanding of the game than Tata, limited as he is.

Tata was blindly copying the tactics of old, ignoring the fact that the midfield wasn't as good, pressing was gone, teams had adjusted, etc.

Enrique had at least the foresight to concede the midfield, put Messi and Neymar on opposite flanks, use the wings, counter attack more, etc. Tactically he was spot on against Atletico, a team Tata struggled with and showed no sign of improving. Let's not forget his man management has been spot on with the likes of Pique and Xavi, his rotation last season was perfect, Rakitic (who was his signing) has been critical, the use of Sergi Roberto, etc.

Of course Enrique has a better squad, no one is disputing that. But he's definitely shown more as a coach than Tata ever did, even if his football can be ugly at times.

Kick wrote:I think I will always prefer Pep's Barca, tbh.

That team was magic, something which three of the best attackers in the world can't really compete with, for me.

Although, I'd love to see what Pep could do with this team

Agree completely. It's arguable that this team is as strong if not more but Pep's team was pure symphony.

Ganso wrote:pep's team got extremely boring for me after 2011. I remember i barely watched barca games in his last season.

Yes when he did all those things that began to irritate me - 343 formation, introduction of Fabregas, Xavi dropped deep, Iniesta shunted to the left, Messi running the game, valid accusations of being a one man team, etc.

However for three seasons his team was awesome. For 2009-10 people may debate that Ibrahimovic never fitted it, Busquets took time to grow into his role, Maxwell replacing injured Abidal as left back made us vulnerable and Iniesta was injured for most of the season but Xavi and Messi were so brilliant that they made up for almost everything else. Both 2008-09 and 2010-11 however remain Pep's greatest seasons and are right up there with any season any team ever had in football history.

the excuse also of having msn = instant success no props to manager is dumb
i can downplay pep also by saying he had an inform Xaviniesta, a prime hard working messi, prime puyol and alves.

fact is having super talents isn't everything.. proper coaching is so important just look at madrid.

Donuts wrote:the excuse also of having msn = instant success no props to manager is dumb
i can downplay pep also by saying he had an inform Xaviniesta, a prime hard working messi, prime puyol and alves.

fact is having super talents isn't everything.. proper coaching is so important just look at madrid.

If we had a coach as poor as Rafa Benitez then both MXI and MSN could have been made to look worthless. A very simple illustration of this is look at Napoli last year and look at them now at the summit of the Serie A table when they are being coached by a guy whose name I didn't know a few months back.

Rafa Benitez is quite simply the worst big name manager in the world. The only thing that was ever good about him was his tactical ability to win key games, albeit mainly with defensive tactics but even that he has lost after which I think he is just totally worthless for any big club and not too much better for a small club either. Just hiring him should be enough to get Florentino Perez the boot. While Perez is hardly a stranger to harakiri this one might just top his list of wrong doings when they are evaluated a few years later.

The Franchise wrote:Do you mean the 11-12 season or the 12-13 season?

12-13 was the late Tito Vilanova's sole season and it was certainly an improvement over the 11-12 season. We won the league quite comfortably if I remember correctly. We had the incredible 4-0 turnaround against Milan in our season best performance. The main weakness was that we weren't completely ready to face a truly strong team like Bayern Munich at that time as the team still needed some more tweaks and our coach had been absent for long periods due to ill-health.

alexjanosik wrote:To be honest I dont agree with the criticism of Tata.
I actually find that Tata played better football. Lets not forget that Enrique has served up some utter dross.
Plus Tata never got to sign anybody,didnt have a proper pre season, had a ton of injuries, Messi being a disgrace and saving himself for the World Cup, Neymar first season in Europe.
And still was a whisker away from winning the league.
So I dont agree with the notion that Enrique is some super coach(he is not) and Tata is some scrub.

linetty wrote:I thought we were over this "Messi saving himself for the WC" BS claim?? He was equally bad at the actual tournament as before which for me proves he wasn't 'saving' himself...

Tito's and Tata's football was equally boring in the CL. The difference was leauge performances where Tito was a GOAT.

Tata is up there with the biggest frauds of coaches and he's proving it yet again with Argentina.

No Enrique thread without Suarez and fantasy Neymar fanboys.  





With almost exact team results.

Please continue.

The Franchise wrote:He was totally alone.

The team was ruined by Cesc and had to accommodate the useless bastard anyway we could.

3 defenders, playing him as a forward, everything.

Then I recall too many injuries. Alexis first season, got injured, torn hamstring. Iniesta torn hamstring. Villa broken leg. Abidal liver transplant.

Hardly any pace in the team. Pedro being who he is, Alexis adjusting, Villa over 30.

Horrible season for a number of reasons.

Very fair points but I have one question.

As far as I have always gotten to know it's Pep who wanted to sign Fabregas. So Pep being as wise as he is, shouldn't he have realized beforehand that Cesc wouldn't fit into our team? For buying him firstly and then playing him even when it was to the demerit of the team, the blame will have to be placed on Pep shoulders.

Cruijf wrote:I feel like you have an irrational hatred against Enrique Alex. Talking about what he would do with Tata's team is a waste of time and pure conjecture. When you look at what he's done with Barca however, it surely shows a better understanding of the game than Tata, limited as he is.

Tata was blindly copying the tactics of old, ignoring the fact that the midfield wasn't as good, pressing was gone, teams had adjusted, etc.

Enrique had at least the foresight to concede the midfield, put Messi and Neymar on opposite flanks, use the wings, counter attack more, etc. Tactically he was spot on against Atletico, a team Tata struggled with and showed no sign of improving. Let's not forget his man management has been spot on with the likes of Pique and Xavi, his rotation last season was perfect, Rakitic (who was his signing) has been critical, the use of Sergi Roberto, etc.

Of course Enrique has a better squad, no one is disputing that. But he's definitely shown more as a coach than Tata ever did, even if his football can be ugly at times.

A lot of your post is revisionism.Enrique didnt put Messi on the wing. That was just pure dumb luck. One game Messi went wide, Suarez went central on their own and they just stayed there. It was down to the players. Absolutely nothing to do with Enrique.
And his man management skills arent all that great. Again lets not revise history. He had a major bust up with Messi and was one game from the sack. If anyone could be credited with salvaging the situation, it was Xavi who bridged the gap between Messi and Enrique. So yeah, I credit Xavi's man management skills.
Since then, Enrique has successfully managed to ostracize some of the more talented youth team players while playing scrubs like Roberto and Gumbau.
I see that as the opposite of great man management.
Dont see how Enrique deserves credit for the Atletico games while Tata blame.
Enrique has a battering ram in Suarez while Tata had a disinterested Messi who was saving himself for the World Cup. Had Tata had Suarez, he would have been just as successful.

FYI, I dont consider Tata a super coach. But I hate revisionism. And I dont subscribe to the view that Enrique is some coaching GOD while Tata is some scrub. They are both of the same level.

LOOOOL The coach who put Neymar on the right wing EVERY SINGLE time, even after Simeone publicly explained that he is more dangerous on the left, who won nothing and has given up on the team in the midst of the season, is at the same level as a treble winning coach who boasts a higher win percentage than Pep. Because: "Herp da derp, Suarez."

Stay mad.

The Franchise wrote:Pretty good comparison. I think as time goes you can see more the differences in two strong teams.

I think this current team, if you press them. They have an alternative, they can play directly to the 9. They can use the space behind. Even if you dont press them, if you simply leave space behind, you can get badly punished at any moment.

Pep's team didnt have that. In the early years that was a bigger threat, with Henry and Etoo, Villa first year. But after that, with Ibrahimovic, no. But they didnt play to that, when it came along it happened (often against Madrid for example) but it wasnt their idea.

However, Pep's team didnt need that as much as they team because you couldnt press them into mistakes. They were too good with the ball around the back, everyone was super composed. And they had different way to go forward, they could drop Busquets into a back 3 on a whim depending on how many forwards the opponants pressed with and the other players understood perfectly how that changes their role.

This Barca doesnt do that, they can be pressed into errors and dont have as much composure. Like I said, they have an alternative.

I dont think you can compare them directly, because they didnt have shared opponents, obviously.

I think running behind the defense has always been the difference maker. No wonder then that in the three best seasons that we have had since the summer of 2008 we had a great forward trio with wonderful interplay and movement between them - Henry, Eto'o Messi in 2008-09, Villa-Messi-Pedro in 2010-11 and Neymar-Suarez-Messi in 2014-15. The difference is in the individual abilities of the trios. The present one is by far the best and after that it's the first one that was better not that the second one was bad in any way.

Where 2010-11 stood out was that in terms of our midfield it was the best ever season. Xavi's last great season in which he had less consistency than the super human performances of 2009-10 but he made pretty much all of the big games his own. Iniesta probably had his most consistently brilliant season ever for Barca at that time. Messi had grown since 2008-09 and was outstanding once again. We still had the age old warrior the peerless Tarzan, Dani Alves was great throughout, Busquets was the most improved player in the world and Eric Abidal when he could play was simply awesome. There was a time in this season when all eleven of them produced sheer flawless displays in which you couldn't find even one fault with even one player right through the game. For all our success since then I don't think we have seen such days again. The point that you make about ball play and composure is related to what I am saying here.

That was the end of MXI as we knew it. From world's best team we sank down to become a one man team. Only in 2014-15 did we regain our mantle again but with quite a different dynamic and two more world class forwards added.

This Barca isn't the symphony that Barca was. It isn't as flawless either. However it has three bonafide superstars of the kind that rarely exist in the same team and when they do they rarely get along. To make three such players play so well in tandem is where the present team is truly exemplary and there is a nice support structure built around them. Not sure how long it can or will last but at the moment it is really special.

alexjanosik wrote:
A lot of your post is revisionism.Enrique didnt put Messi on the wing. That was just pure dumb luck. One game Messi went wide, Suarez went central on their own and they just stayed there. It was down to the players. Absolutely nothing to do with Enrique.
And his man management skills arent all that great. Again lets not revise history. He had a major bust up with Messi and was one game from the sack. If anyone could be credited with salvaging the situation, it was Xavi who bridged the gap between Messi and Enrique. So yeah, I credit Xavi's man management skills.

1. If putting Messi on the wing was pure luck then thank goodness for such luck because it essentially made our entire season. Even dani had said long back that Messi would never be able to play on the wing again. Who could have possibly seen this coming?

2. Did you read this anywhere that Xavi helped to bridge the gap between them?

Is this the time you are going to go full revisionist mode again?
Suarez has come out and publicly said that Messi went wide and he central by accident. But Let me guess. It was actually Enrique who put Messi on the wing.It was all part of his genius master plan.
And while we are at it,lets also pretend that Enrique didnt get schooled at the Bernabeau(lost 3-1 could have been much worse). Lets also pretend that Enrique wasnt getting schooled left, right and center till that infamous bust up with Messi. Lets also forget that he got schooled by freaking Moyes of all people.
And finally lets also forget that post the bustup(and Xavi's intervention), Enrique conceded ground to Messi and from then on it was MSN all the way.
Lets just pretend that none of that ever happened.

It is irrelevant if Suarez and Messi figured out on their own where they are most comfortable. Messi deciding where he wants to play has already happened under Pep. I advise Ibra's book for some history lessons (also for history lessons when it comes to falling out with star players).

What is relevant is that the coach makes it work at the end. Tata also played Messi on the wing but he didn't make it work. Because he wanted Messi "not to participate in the game and just take on players 1 on 1 on the wing". Under Enrique it's the opposite. Messi sees more of the ball than ever before, despite playing wide.

Won't even respond to the rest of your idiotic rumblings. "Schooled left and right". The biggest gap between Barca and Madrid (in 22 game in a row record breaking form) was 4 points.

"Schooled by Moyes". Because he had to bench half the first XI after international breaks, on a ground where Barca hasn't won in ages, by an own goal by Alba.

Back to the debate - who deserves coach of the year? As objectively and honesty as possible I think it's the man who unfortunately didn't make the top three - Max Allegri. Here is why.

I think he is a criminally underrated manager and the best in the world at maximizing resources.

When a new coach takes over from a successful coach most often there is a blip. Even though Antonio Conte was so important for Juventus, Allegri continued the success seamlessly. What's much more impressive though is he made them do what Conte never managed - perform in Europe. Juventus is probably the last big name club people could have expected to grace the UCL final but they did.

Then what does he get in the summer for his efforts? Loses not one not two but three of his best players and gets pretty much nothing to compensate for it. Many coaches in his place would have either resigned or resorted to endless cribbing. Instead he just goes about his job quietly and begins to rebuild the team.

Juve started off the season badly but look at them now. Both in the league and the UCL they are quite well placed.

Juventus' win over ManCity earlier this season was one of the best if not the very best tactical victory I have seen this calendar year. Juve neither parked the bus nor pressed like hounds but they still neutralized their opponents as if by a magic spell. It's rare that we get to see a team display this kind of splendid tactical organization.

In comparison if I look at Pep Guardiola for all the victories and the style that he has brought there is one glaring problem that I see and can't get over. He inherited what was then the best team in the world but in the two and a half years that he's been in charge has he been able to make his team that strong? The simple answer to that is no. That in a very rough and blunt sense can be called a failure because the yard stick by which performers at this level are judged is extremely high.

messixaviesta wrote:1. If putting Messi on the wing was pure luck then thank goodness for such luck because it essentially made our entire season. Even dani had said long back that Messi would never be able to play on the wing again. Who could have possibly seen this coming?

2. Did you read this anywhere that Xavi helped to bridge the gap between them?

It wasn't dumb luck.

Suarez - "Honestly, I just ended up in the central position during a game by chance, and Leo said to me: ”Stay there.” Afterwards the coach saw that we’d come up with a good solution by ourselves, and we started trying it out. No one officially took the decision, but obviously from then on it was the coach who started putting me as number 9."

messixaviesta wrote:

The Franchise wrote:He was totally alone.

The team was ruined by Cesc and had to accommodate the useless bastard anyway we could.

3 defenders, playing him as a forward, everything.

Then I recall too many injuries. Alexis first season, got injured, torn hamstring. Iniesta torn hamstring. Villa broken leg. Abidal liver transplant.

Hardly any pace in the team. Pedro being who he is, Alexis adjusting, Villa over 30.

Horrible season for a number of reasons.

Very fair points but I have one question.

As far as I have always gotten to know it's Pep who wanted to sign Fabregas. So Pep being as wise as he is, shouldn't he have realized beforehand that Cesc wouldn't fit into our team? For buying him firstly and then playing him even when it was to the demerit of the team, the blame will have to be placed on Pep shoulders.

Yes he should have, but I think he went back to his time as a former player and it impaired his judgement.

I think that he saw how the Barca players wanted Cesc back and he assisted in granting them his wish. Also I am sure he thought Cesc wouldnt struggle as he did. I dont know how much he actually watched Cesc.

If he was a stranger to Cesc, he may have paid more attention and and seen his failings.

Of course it was Pep's fault for that.

messixaviesta wrote:

1. If putting Messi on the wing was pure luck then thank goodness for such luck because it essentially made our entire season. Even dani had said long back that Messi would never be able to play on the wing again. Who could have possibly seen this coming?

I said that because defensively he gives you nothing going backwards and with Xavi and Iniesta in midfield, its impossible to cover.

But I obviously did not forsee signing Rakitic and successfully sacrificing his game to defend that side of the pitch.

linetty wrote:I thought we were over this "Messi saving himself for the WC" BS claim?? He was equally bad at the actual tournament as before which for me proves he wasn't 'saving' himself...

Tito's and Tata's football was equally boring in the CL. The difference was leauge performances where Tito was a GOAT.

Tata is up there with the biggest frauds of coaches and he's proving it yet again with Argentina.

Let's remember Tata was the only coach not to bring us to the semifinals of the CL since 2004/2005.

So no, he wasn't at Tito's level in the CL either.

Tito passed away around the same time we got knocked out of the UCL, if I remember correctly. Not to mention the NUMEROUS scandals we are still going through pretty much were all fresh around that time. I like how you guys ignore all the nuances that were going on around that time, the squads we faced, the mood of our squad then vs now etc.

Not defending Tata, as I know he was not up to the task, but I am also still not a big fan of Lucho and believe he pretty much landed at the right place at the right time.

What does lucho have to do to get some respect around here lmao, play samper every game?

I said nothing about that.

windkick wrote:I am also still not a big fan of Lucho and believe he pretty much landed at the right place at the right time.

I'm curious, have you ever played for a bad coach?

Because when I did, I realized just how bonkers the claims of people who say treble winning coaches "landed at the right place at the right time". Let's not forget this is the same BS argument people use to devalue Pep.

Don't get me wrong, Enrique is a limited tactician and Pep is twice the manager he ever will be, but this criticism is getting ridiculous. You just know Tata wouldn't have bought Rakitic (amazing purchase in hindsight), would have played Xavi week in week out, would put Suarez on the right and Messi and false nine, wouldn't have benched Pique (which was very clearly what resulted in his improved form), wouldn't have rotated as effectively... I could go on and on.

At the highest level it is impossible for a bad coach to win the treble. There is no way Barca would even have won the league if Lucho was as clueless as you guys claim. I've criticized him numerous times, but to say the coach who took a trophyless team and won the treble "landed in the right place at the right time" shows a fundamental under appreciation for the importance the manager plays in any team. I'm shocked that not just you, but numerous Barca fans like Alex, think it is possible to stumble to the treble with a completely clueless coach. It just isn't.

I didn't say he was clueless, and I never said I thought Tata was better (hello no, lol). I am saying I am not as confident of Lucho's abilities as his line of work has suggested. But the *bleep* keeps on winning, so your right in the regard that he can't be that bad or we wouldn't be going on a good path. That much I can agree with.

Mind you I didn't like him before he landed, and as someone who watches every Barca game I have my feelings towards that he has some great qualities (stubborn and will bench players) but is also very limited. When people said Pep won because he had XAVIESTAMESSI it was ridiculous, because it was clearly his vision/tactics plus amazing players. I do however feel Lucho has been helped greatly by his players he has at his disposal, but obviously he is doing something right.

windkick wrote:Mind you I didn't like him before he landed

I wonder where this antipathy is coming from. You are not the only one. I mean with people like alexjanosik it's clear, they have an agenda. Some people have started watching Barca post 08/09 and now are salty that another coach is emulating their hero's achievements. But with real fans of the club it doesn't make an awful lot of sense. Lucho is a Barca legend. He's won 3 league titles, more than half a dozen Cups, always gave his all on the pitch and scored and celebrated countless goals against Madrid. Then he's coached the B team. Under his reign he got Barca B promoted to the Segunda and then reached the best position in Barca B's history in 10/11 with a 3th place finish in the 2nd division. Then he's won a treble with the first team. A treble! Any other fanbase would go bonkers if one of their former players would achieve anywhere close to such success. Look how desperate Madrid are to build up Zidane as their future coach. Just look at Redcafe and how much affection there is for Neville taking over Valencia and how their fans hope he can be successful and eventually coach Manchester United in the future. But Barca fans are turning their noses up on one of their own who has delivered a treble? Because he isn't tactically as astute as Pep? LOL Good luck supporting this club once the current dominance ends - and it will end sooner or later - and a lot worse stuff will happen than winning trebles but without 80 % possession in Allianz Arena.

I personally didn't want him at the beginning because I feared he would try to be a poor man's Pep and play sterile, useless "possession over everything" football. Kudos to him for shaking things up completely and implementing different ideas. Apart from my initial fear which didn't turn out true I have no major issues with him. He does get things wrong like every coach but he doesn't need to be Sacchi or Rinus Michels for me to respect his work.

I will ignore the sly insult, you revisionist.
My criticisms have always been on point.
1) That the football for a lot of last season was average. That the football barring the 3 recent games this season has been downright pathetic.

2)That he doesnt trust the more talented youngsters instead preferring scrubs.
You only have to look at Deulofeu and Halilovic shining at other clubs to realize that Enrique's youth policy is retarded.
This will have a knockdown effect where talented youngsters will want to leave(case in point: Grimaldo is most probably out the door).

3) That I hate revisionism. People take swipes at Tata while claiming Enrique to be some sort of genius who saved us from Tata. Revisionism of the highest order. Conveniently forgetting that Tata didnt have Suarez and Neymar to bail him out when Messi was saving himself for the World Cup.
And the revisionism doesnt stop there. A lot of fans wanted Enrique out when we were struggling and lost to freaking Moyes. A certain person develops selective amnesia and facts are brushed under the rug.
Bottom line: Enrique had a major bust up with Messi and was one game from the sack. Xavi helped smooth things over and pretty much told Enrique that Messi is boss and he has to accept it. Messi and Suarez went GOAT mode and we end up winning the treble.
From then on Enrique has quietly acquiesced to be Messi's bitch and Messi has Enrique's balls in a vice.
And yet the revisionists like to pretend that none of this ever happened.
The revisionists also try to claim that it was Enrique who put Messi right and Suarez central when the cold hard fact is that it happened by dumb luck. The revisionist mentions the success with the B team and with us but conveniently fails to mention that Enrique flopped at Roma.

The revisionist wont debate these 3 points but will instead attack me personally.

I rate Enrique. I think he is a decent to good coach.I credit his rotation policy and he has clearly worked on the players fitness. But he aint a super coach and I maintain that plenty of coaches could have won the treble with the players Enrique has and with everything aligning like it did in the second half of last season.
To be a super coach, he has to win with a lesser squad or come up with a revolutionary style of playing. When I say revolutionary, I mean he has to advance the game like how Pep did.