Ribery: Pep lacks experience

dostoevsky wrote:A formula which backfired dramatically in the form of another Champions League win.

That doesn't matter though. What matters is do you have plan B and can play different styles of football ala Mourinho.

rincon wrote:Lol yea, he signed Ibra and that lasted about half a season. Great example. No CF, no wingers, no physical mids, no alternatives.

False 9, inside forwards and AM/CM (Iniesta and Fabregas). That became the formula for everything.

WAT.



Also they did have wingers, so i dunno what you are on about tbh.


Also acting like Fabregas was the same as the other midfielders lol, he's completely the polar opposite to Xavi and Iniesta lol.

Like saying that Kroos and Ozil are the same player. Also the fact Ibra didn't work as irrelevant, he was clearly an alternative because it didn't work lends credence to the idea of plan B being a myth.

Also i agree they didn't have a CF but please tell me a time for Barca or Spain where a traditional CF ever worked? Costa looks like ass for Spain and during the high time Villa was their most successful forward by a significant margin, Torres had his moments but they were very fleeting as shown by the fact that his record overall for Spain is poor.

People say he should have bought a traditional CF but where's the evidence that it works with Xavi and Iniesta? Traditional CFs rely on space, crosses and long passes, something that doesn't happen with Xavi and Iniesta mainly because they are not great at them.

The whole plan B stuff is just a very short sighted and ignorant argument with little to no foundation to form a solid argument.

Oh yes, Keita the game changer . Keita was just used to plug holes and provide cover, not exactly providing options in play or changing things going forward. The last midfielder of the type that Barca was Yaya, and Im sure you know who sold him.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:
Also they did have wingers, so i dunno what you are on about tbh.

And what wingers exactly? every wide player Barcelona's front 3 for a long time now has either played inside forward (Messi, Pedro, Alexis, Villa, Bojan, etc.) or worked as an extra midfielder (Fabregas and Iniesta). Unless I missed the time when they signed Jesus Navas for width, I must not have paid attention.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:
Also acting like Fabregas was the same as the other midfielders lol, he's completely the polar opposite to Xavi and Iniesta lol.

This proves my point, he was very different from Xavi or Iniesta. Instead of managing to play to his strengths, or using him in a way that he could impact the way in a different manner, he was asked to play the exact same way as the rest. Fabregas got unreal amounts of criticism for not being able to play as the other Barca mids, no lack of comments back then about how the EPL had ruined him in how direct he had become. Because he wasn't expected to change the game, he was expected to carry the game on with the rest. He was played in the front 3 to try to find space for him on the LW or at false 9 for when Messi was out because he couldn't play Pep's way in the mid... because it was the only way he wanted things.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:
please tell me a time for Barca or Spain where a traditional CF ever worked?

David Villa, he couldn't have been more important for Del Bosque's team.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:
Torres had his moments but they were very fleeting as shown by the fact that his record overall for Spain is poor.

Torres' record with Spain is outstanding. Its the only reason he kept getting called back even though he sucked for club. The final in 08, golden boot in 12, played and scored in the world cups. And its a top 3 top scorer ever for Spain, hardly a poor record.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:
People say he should have bought a traditional CF but where's the evidence that it works with Xavi and Iniesta? Traditional CFs rely on space, crosses and long passes, something that doesn't happen with Xavi and Iniesta mainly because they are not great at them.

It doesn't need to work every game and every minute (even though it did with Villa). It needs to be a tactical option. Why in the world would one rely on calling Pique up to play CF late in games instead of having an actual CF on the bench is just weird.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:
The whole plan B stuff is just a very short sighted and ignorant argument with little to no foundation to form a solid argument.

The arguments are there, you just can't seem to see where he can improve. You tried to use Ibra as point in favor of Pep, when that was literally one of his most public screw ups.

Every manager in the world looks for options, its not ignorant or short sighted. Even Luis Enrique improved so much when he realized that prime Pep-Barca style was not the only way to play. When he was at Roma he did everything he could to play a similar game even though he didn't have the players for it. Ironically by the time he joined Barca he had changed and become a much more flexible manager.

Every manager has flaws and room to improve, Pep included.

Whuuut.

Why does it always come back to Barca? It's like you can't talk about Pep without it always coming back to Barca. We all know what he did at Barca, and I'm sure as hell not saying he was missing some elements in that team, because he was not

My point is that his Bayern team suffered heavily from any half decent rigid, counter attacking team or good enough teams to switch from possession to direct play on the fly. Oh, Plan B's don't exist. Ok, let's call them tactical tweaks. The Bayern team could not hold a clean sheet to save their lives when up against half decent sides, or to my annoyance: CL matches. It was always a desperate attempt to pass after those away matches, usually 2 goals down. Reaching semi's after some shaky matches and then going out pretty much the same way year after year is highly annoying.

Pep's biggest strength (his tactical expertise) coupled with his stubbornness could also be his biggest weakness, in the fact that his game plan is his game plan and frak if I'm going to succumb to changing something in my 2 CL, 9 league resume.

I find it funny that if it were another manager with his same Bayern record people would be like, "lulz, it's only 3 Buyernligue wins. Anyone could do that with that team", but it's Guardiola, so it's more like "Dude, plan B, plan C, fix your defense. Who gives a fack when you succeeded so much with Barca? He fixed Messi's injury-prone record". What? Every manager makes mistakes, but you guys are so blinded by the Barca greatness to not see that Pep's Bayern run was not so special after all.

Who's the one getting special treatment?

rincon wrote:Lol yea, he signed Ibra and that lasted about half a season. Great example. No CF, no wingers, no physical mids, no alternatives.

False 9, inside forwards and AM/CM (Iniesta and Fabregas). That became the formula for everything.

He won 14 of 19 titles, what did you want 19 of 19? The formula was a massive success why change it?

At BM he did use a striker, he did have wingers and he did use DM's.

You lads just don't get the point. I'm going to buy a Döner now, then go to the gym afterwards and then come back to explain to you the point.

rincon wrote:
2 aspects that he seems incapable (or unwilling) of introducing in his games that I find absolutely key are: 1) closing a game and 2) administering the flow of play.

When has Pep decided that its better to secure the victory or goal-margin instead of continuing with his usual plan? That was a big fault in the Juve-Bayern game this year when we came back from 0-2. Its not always right to close shop, but its SOMETIMES right, and with Pep it never seems to be an option.

I don't think playing a pair of Alaba and Kimmich as deep CB's would be the easiest thing to do. They actually did end up dropping the line when Benatia came on, but they still conceded another goal.

Anyhow, I find this claim about failing to close games out, to be fairly interesting. So, I did some research and saw how many times Pep's teams lost the lead after the 70th minute and never regained it. I'm going to compare it to how many times Mourinho's teams lost the lead after the 70th minute, only to not regain it later on during the game. Since they're both polar opposites, I think the comparison would make sense. Pep thinks the best way to see out the game is by controlling the ball, and Mou thinks it's by putting men behind the ball. 9/10 times when Pep's team's lost the lead they were probably dominating the game, while Mou's teams were sitting back.

---

Pep:

2008/2009:
CL: Barca vs Basel 1-1. Basel scored the tying goal in the 82nd minute.
League: Barca vs Racing 1-1. Racing scored the tying goal in the 76th minute.
League: Atletico Madrid vs Barca 4-3. Atletico Madrid scored the tying goal in the 80th minute and the winning goal in the 90th.
League: Barca vs Villareal 3-3. Villareal scored the tying goal in the 90th minute.
League: Mallorca vs Barcelona 2-1. Mallorca scored the tying goal in the 73rd minute and winning goal in the 78th minute.

2009/2010:
CL: Arsenal vs Barca 2-2. Fabregas scored the tying goal in the 85th minute.
Copa Del Rey: Barca vs Sevilla 1-2. Negredo scored the winning goal in the 76th minute.
League: Osasuna vs Barcelona 1-1. Pique scored an own goal in the 90th minute.

2010/2011:
CL: Arsenal vs Barca 2-1. van Persie scored the tying goal in the 78th minute and Arshavin scored the winning goal in the 83rd minute.
Copa Del Rey: Athletic Bilbao vs Barca 1-1. Llorente scored the tying goal in the 85th minute.
Copa Del Rey: Real Madrid vs Barca 1-0. Cristiano Ronaldo scored the winning goal in the 103rd minute.
League: Real Madrid vs Barcelona 1-1. Cristiano Ronaldo scored the tying goal in the 82nd minute.
League: Real Sociedad vs Barcelona 2-1. Ifran scored the tying goal in 71st minute, and Prieto scored the winner in the 82nd minute.

2011/2012:
CL: Milan vs Barca 2-2. Thiago Silva scored the tying goal in the 92nd minute.
League: Espanyol vs Barca 1-1. Vasquez scored the tying goal in the 86th minute.
Copa Del Rey: Barca vs Madrid 2-2. Benzema scored the tying goal in the 72nd minute.

2013/2014:
CL: Bayern vs City 2-3. City scored 3 goals after Bayern had a 2-0 lead (they were before 70th min, but I included it anyways).
League: Freiburg vs Bayern 1-1. Hofler scored the tying goal in the 86th minute.
League: Bayern vs Hoffenheim 3-3. Firmino scored the tying goal in the 75th minute.

2014/2015:
CL: City vs Bayern 3-2. Aguero scored the tying goal in the 85th minute and the winner in the 91st.
DFB Pokal: Bayern vs BVB 1-1. Auba scored the tying goal in the 75th minute.
League: Bayern vs Schalke 1-1. Howedes scored the tying goal in the 72nd minute.
League: Freiburg vs Bayern 2-1. Petersen scored the winning goal in the 89th minute.

2015/2016:
CL: Bayern vs Juventus 2-2. Sturaro scored the tying goal in the 76th minute.
CL: Benfica vs Bayern 2-2. Talisca scored the tying goal in the 76th minute.
League: Bayern vs Mainz 1-2. Cordoba scored the winning goal in the 86th minute.
League: Borussia Monchengladbach vs Bayern 1-1. Han scored the tying goal in the 72nd minute.

Pep's team have given up the lead 27 times (after the 70th minute) that saw them either tie or lose.

---

Mourinho:

2008/2009:
League: Palermo vs Inter 2-2. Succi scored the tying goal in the 76th minute.
League: Juve vs Inter 1-1. Grygera scored the tying goal in the 90th minute.
League: Napoli vs Inter 1-0. Zalayeta scored the winning goal in the 73rd minute.
League: Chievo vs Inter 2-2. Luciano scored the tying goal in the 73rd minute.
League: Cagliari vs Inter 2-1. Acquafresca scored the winning goal in the 71st minute.

2009/2010:
CL: Barca vs Inter 1-0. Pique scored the winning goal in the 84th minute.
League: Inter vs Bari 1-1. Kutuzov scored the tying goal in the 74th minute.
League: Sampdoria vs Inter 1-0. Pazzini scored the winning goal in the 72nd minute.
League: Atalanta vs Inter 1-1. Tiribocchi scored the tying goal in the 82nd minute.
League: Catania vs Inter 3-1. Mascara scored the winning goal in the 82nd minute.
League: Roma vs Inter 2-1. Toni scored the winning goal in the 72nd minute.
League: Fiorentina vs Inter 2-2. Krøldrup scored the tying goal in the 82nd minute.

2010/2011:
CL: Lyon vs Madrid 1-1. Gomis scored the tying goal in the 83rd minute.
CL: Madrid vs Barca 0-2. Messi scored his first in the 77th minute and second in the 87th minute.
League: Madrid vs Sporting Gijon 0-1. Cuevas scored the winning goal in the 79th minute.

2011/2012:
CL: CSKA Moscow vs Madrid 1-1. Wernbloom scored the tying goal in the 93rd minute.
CL: Bayern vs Madrid 2-1. Mario Gomez scored the winning goal in the 90th minute.
League: Madrid vs Malaga 1-1. Cazorla scored the tying goal in the 92nd minute.
League: Villareal vs Madrid 1-1. Senna scored the tying goal in the 83rd minute.

2012/2013:
CL: City vs Madrid 1-1. Aguero scored the tying goal in the 74th minute.
CL: Gala vs Madrid 3-2. Drogba scored the winning goal in the 72nd minute.
League: Getafe vs Madrid 2-1. Barrada scored the winning goal in the 75th minute.
League: Madrid vs Espanyol 2-2. Albin scored the tying goal in the 88th minute.

2013/2014:
CL: Chelsea vs Basel 1-2. Streller scored the winning goal in the 81st minute.
CL: Basel vs Chelsea 1-0. Salah scored the winning goal in the 87th minute.
League Cup: Sunderland 2-1 Chelsea. Borini scored the tying goal in the 88th minute and Ki scored the winning goal in the 118th minute.
League: Stoke vs Chelsea 3-2. Assaidi scored the winning goal in the 90th minute.
League: WBA vs Chelsea 1-1. Anichebe scored the tying goal in the 87th minute.
League: Aston Villa vs Chelsea 1-0. Delph scored the winning goal in the 82nd minute.
League: Chelsea vs Sunderland 1-2. Borini scored the winning goal in the 82nd minute.

2014/2015:
CL: Chelsea vs PSG 2-2. David Luiz scored the tying goal in the 86th minute (1-1), and Silva scored the tying goal in the 114th minute (2-2). PSG went through on away goals.
FA Cup: Chelsea vs Bradford 2-2. Morais scored the tying goal in the 75th minute and Halliday scored the winner in the 82nd minute.
League: City vs Chelsea 1-1. Lampard scored the tying goal in the 85th minute.
League: United vs Chelsea 1-1. RVP scored the tying goal in the 94th minute.
League: Chelsea vs Burnley 1-1. Mee scored the tying goal in the 81st minute.

2015/2016 (-Dec 17 2015):
FA Cup: Everton vs Chelsea 2-0. Lukaku scored the winning goal in the 77th minute.
League: Chelsea vs Crystal Palace 1-2. Ward scored the winning goal in the 81st minute.
League: West Ham vs Chelsea 2-1. Carrol scored the winning goal in the 79th minute.
League: Chelsea vs Bournemouth 0-1. Murray scored the winning goal in the 82nd minute.

Mou's teams have lost the lead 39 times since 2008/2009 (after the 70th minute) that saw them either tie or lose.

---

Maybe, holding onto the ball, isn't the worst way to see out a game? Ball possession is a defensive tool, after all.  And it seems like Pep's defensive tactic seems to be working better for Pep than Mou's defensive tactics do for Mou. Pep has a philosophy (as all great coaches do) and he's stubborn about it. With the type of success he's had so far, why should he change it? His way of closing out games seems pretty effective. Mou is also just as stubborn as Pep. Mou will rarely close out a game by playing proactively, and up until this season, he probably never thought he had to, considering he's had a lot of success.

I'm thinking of watching those goals as well. I would like to see how many of them came from a counterattack (under Pep) and how many of them came against a deep block (Mou). I'd like to write a more in-context post regarding those goals and where they came from. I'd also like to add other coaches to this comparison as well. I think possession vs deep block in terms of closing out games is a pretty interesting discussion!

Now they're using his trophies at Barca as justification for the lack of plan B.

Please....



The real key figure for 3 of Barca's trophies in 2009 is this man. If we're now on the subject of giving credit where credit is due, then I don't see why he shouldn't be mentioned.

Then there's Wolfgang Stark's blunder in 2011 vs RM that lead to another 2 or 3 trophies for Barca.

Lord Awesome wrote:Now they're using his trophies at Barca as justification for the lack of plan B.

Please....



The real key figure for 3 of Barca's trophies in 2009 is this man. If we're now on the subject of giving credit where credit is due, then I don't see why he shouldn't be mentioned.

Then there's Wolfgang Stark's blunder in 2011 vs RM that lead to another 2 or 3 trophies for Barca.

What the ** is a plan B ? Sit back and defend ?

Lord Awesome wrote:Now they're using his trophies at Barca as justification for the lack of plan B.

Please....



The real key figure for 3 of Barca's trophies in 2009 is this man. If we're now on the subject of giving credit where credit is due, then I don't see why he shouldn't be mentioned.

Then there's Wolfgang Stark's blunder in 2011 vs RM that lead to another 2 or 3 trophies for Barca.

best plan b ever

LeBéninois wrote:

Lord Awesome wrote:Now they're using his trophies at Barca as justification for the lack of plan B.

Please....



The real key figure for 3 of Barca's trophies in 2009 is this man. If we're now on the subject of giving credit where credit is due, then I don't see why he shouldn't be mentioned.

Then there's Wolfgang Stark's blunder in 2011 vs RM that lead to another 2 or 3 trophies for Barca.

What the ** is a plan B ?  Sit back and defend ?

Well originally it was:

Why doesn't his teams cross?

Why doesn't his teams attempt to shoot from far away?

Why doesn't he use a physical midfielder?

Why doesn't he use a striker?

Why doesn't he use long balls?

Why all the little link-up instead of quicker transitions?

Why doesn't he use the wings more often rather than that constantly building through the middle?

He ended up doing all of that at Bayern.

It's a dopey argument by those who don't know what they're talking about. It makes no sense to drop and cede control when you are the best team in the world at controlling the ball and controlling the space (offensively). Ball possession can be used as a defensive tool. His teams are probably less likely to concede holding onto the ball than they are sitting back. They spent much more hours defending with the ball rather than putting 10 behind it. Guardiola has to be the only coach who is criticized for using his team's strengths.

Pep's team's position and possession game are so good that they don't need to counterattack. Luis Enrique's team counterattacks because their possession and position game isn't as good as Pep's Barca's was. Average position and possession with no counterattacks = Tata Martino 2014 or tikinaccio. So really, Lucho did the logical thing. When you add the fact that Xavi retired and Iniesta is past it, it makes sense. Especially, with the addition of MSN.

Why doesn't Simeone attempt to dominate games? Because his teams are the best at controlling the space (defensively), so why tell your team to attack, if you can counter attack, more effectively?
It's also not like Atletico are boneheads when it comes to controlling the ball. They are better at attacking than they're given credit for.

Mourinho has all the resources in the world, but he rarely tells his teams to play proactively against other strong teams. Why isn't he accused of being one dimensional? What is Mou's attacking game plan? I want Lord Awesome to answer this question because he accuses Pep of things that Mou is also as guilty of, yet he's a big fan of Mourinho.

People hate the fact that Pep does something different. At Bayern, he did everything differently to what he did at Barca apart from changing the main idea, which is, ''control the ball and control the space to dominate the game.'' Ultimately, that is his philosophy. All great coaches have one. It's a strength, yet has it's weaknesses as all playing styles do. However, he's been incredibly successful with his view of football, so I don't understand why he needs to change it, just to appease some fans on the internet. His football is successful. The reward is greater than the risk.

Does his refusal of giving up the ball make him inflexible? Depending on how you view football, sure, but there is no one who is more flexible than him when it comes to attacking the opposition and dominating the ball in their half.

At Bayern, his team could do it all. Long balls, long shots, wing play, link up, overloads, transitions, and patient build up. And let's get even deeper into his actual system...

He prepares 3 systems per game and uses a positional grid to train specific player movements, depending on the location of the ball ffs. And in each of those systems, the players have different movement and positioning. So this idea that he only has a plan A is so far off. He trains many different solutions to the opposing team's weaknesses. If those systems don't work, he'll propose another one in the match because in all likelihood Bayern probably used a different system just a few matches ago. If the solutions he brought up pre-game don't work, he'll implement different ones at half time. Which other coach is as flexible as Pep, offensively?

Pep's position game is at another level. Very few top coaches, coach the way he does. There's Paco Jemez, Michael Laudrup, Jorge Sampaoli, LVG and Thomas Tuchel. Tuchel only started implementing positional play after Pep told him that's how his Barca was so good. It's the constant search for vertical superiorities, which very few coaches put as much emphasis as Pep does.

I'll give a few examples:

- If Douglas Costa has the ball on the left wing, but he's up against a RM and a RB, Pep will instruct the LB to make an underlap so that creates a 1v1 for Costa. Costa is one of the best 1v1 players in the world, so that's a superiority. But with the LB high up the pitch, the LCM needs to move deeper and wider to occupy that space. The DM will drift a bit to the left so there is more solidity on the left wing, and the LCB will advance higher to aid circulation of the ball.

That action alone creates many different kinds of superiorities. You have Costa on a 1v1 which he's going to win 9/10 times. You have an overloaded left flank which makes the link-up play better. Then you have the left side safely secured against opposing counterattacks due to the positioning of the LCM, DM, and LCB.

This is just one potential action Bayern might do when the ball is on the left byline. They probably have 3-5 different actions memorized and depending on the opponent, system, and match situation they'll do a specific action.

- Building from the back. I mean the more common method, of splitting the CBs, wingbacks wide, with the DM dropping deep. That was practiced in Mexico in the 90s and by the national team in the 2006 WC. Pep used it when he came to Barca and now a bunch of teams attempt to play out from the back. The idea is, if you're against 1 CF, the 2 CB's have a numerical superiority, so one can advance the play, while being covered by the other Cb. If you're against 2 strikers, the DM drops deep to create a 3v2. If an opposing team is playing a narrow 4-3-3, The RCM and LCM will drop deeper to provide support. But very few are actually able to progress the play because the players don't position themselves correctly in order to do so. However, if done correctly you'll be able to gain a numerical superiority and counterattack. This is another sequence that Pep teaches many different versions of and he'll use a specific shape depending on the opponent.

For me, that is true flexibility. The different variations he teaches his teams to use depending on the opponent and match situation. These specific examples are just one variation of what he teaches in those specific areas. In fact, they're probably the most common and basic shapes he uses. No other team plays the complex football Pep does. If they did you could tell, but they don't. Any coach can teach their team to play with 2 banks of 4 and play compact and deep, very few can teach what Pep does. Some coaches use some elements, but very few actually coach it in it's purest form. As I mentioned earlier, you have Pep, Paco, Sampaoli, Tuchel, LVG, and Laudrup. Pep implements a more sophisticated positional play than those other coaches do.

Personally, that style of football is the most enjoyable. It's not the best because quite frankly there is no best style of football. Yet, I enjoy watching it the most because it's basic principles are what I find enjoyable in football. Different strokes for different folks.

Some top players don't like it because they find it too complex and it reigns in their individuality. That's definitely true. Pep is closer to LVG than Cruyff in that regard. Cruyff gave players the freedom to express themselves, LVG doesn't, while Pep only gives it to few players. I mean, I understand when a guy like Ribery says it's too complex. He's a street footballer. He obviously doesn't enjoy all those instructions and would rather have freedom of mind to do his own thing. However, Pep's successful and his system does work, so I don't see him changing much because he doesn't need to.

TL;DR: Why cede the ball if you're the best at controlling it, Pep's teams play the most sophisticated football in the world, his football does reign individuality and is complex so strong personalities dislking it isn't surprising

Wow Casciavit, nice post

Good to know... and I always thought Mou > Pep due to the Inter beating Barca in the CL and the Real beating Barca days... would be great to see what insight you have on Mou, if you could write a post on Mou like the one above that would be awesome

As good as Pep is though, the weakness is still always the defense. He just doesnt focus on defending, and his GK and defenders are always asked to do so much, and errors about bound to happen, often fatal ones. I dont know if there is a way to fix or improve that, if so, then his methods and results can be even better.

@Casciavit

I think you might be interested in watching a bit of what André Schubert does, too.

Admittedly, in the match against Freiburg, Gladbach lost, but this was probably more due to the fact that the players were already thinking of ManCity. In the second half of the match, he went from a 3-4-3 over a 4-4-2 to a 3-5-2 within about a quarter of an hour, which I found pretty interesting, although in that match it was probably too much for the defenders.

I'm really curious how he will set up Gladbach for the match against ManCity tomorrow.

Casciavit wrote:
Mourinho has all the resources in the world, but he rarely tells his teams to play proactively against other strong teams. Why isn't he accused of being one dimensional? What is Mou's attacking game plan? I want Lord Awesome to answer this question because he accuses Pep of things that Mou is also as guilty of, yet he's a big fan of Mourinho.

He prepares 3 systems per game and uses a positional grid to train specific player movements, depending on the location of the ball ffs. And in each of those systems, the players have different movement and positioning. So this idea that he only has a plan A is so far off. He trains many different solutions to the opposing team's weaknesses. If those systems don't work, he'll propose another one in the match because in all likelihood Bayern probably used a different system just a few matches ago. If the solutions he brought up pre-game don't work, he'll implement different ones at half time. Which other coach is as flexible as Pep, offensively?


TL;DR: Why cede the ball if you're the best at controlling it, Pep's teams play the most sophisticated football in the world, his football does reign individuality and is complex so strong personalities dislking it isn't surprising

Sophisticated? 3 systems? Hmm. The way you wrote this makes it seem like you know him personally.

Anyway, gonna answer this.

If Guardiola is as "multi systematic" then why does it appear like he's trying to do the same thing over and over again. Pep only attempted to play Bayern the way Barca did. I say he attempted cause in the end we all saw that he could not mirror them neither on the field nor in the trophy cabinet. When I say "the same poop" I mean that Pep's mind doesn't stray from attempting the tactic of prioritizing possession of the ball until the defense breaks. You see sophisticated I see a borefest. Effective? Yes. Despite Guardiola's stained CL successes, the effectiveness of his strategy is shown in the numbers overall and that's why I consider him a good manager, at least.

However, when compared to Mou I only consider Mou better only because he can vary his strategy more than Pep. Some people here in GL think that arming a defense is easy and that it's only the quality of defenders that makes a defense good. If it were really that simple than any manager would how to defend against any opposing team. Mou has shown to be more tactically sound compared to Pep. While Pep sticks to his own strategy Mou changes depending on the situation presented. Everybody anti Mou follower here seems to think Mou only defends and nothing else. While Mou is defo more confident in using the shield he's not estranged to playing attacking football when he sees the opportunity. Normally, Mou pushes his team outward when he sees that the opposition won't be able to breach his defense enough or when he sees that the opposing team is open at the back and opts for counters. He's a bit more open when the scores are even or when he's down a goal or when he wants to take the first strike and flush the other team out. Normally, he grinds or surprises to obtain the leading goal and once Mou achieves that advantage he changes to a counter attacking team since the opposing team will normally be given the ultimatum to score. That's already 2 different dimensions (however you look at it) that Mou utilizes in his games. First the measurement of the opposing teams prowess to set the initial strategy (Mou's best aspect IMO) and then the 2nd dimension for when he has the lead. He can give a 3rd dimension for when he's down. Basically find a way to attack the opposing defense while attempt to not let the margin go higher. IMO it's his weakest dimension but he's made the occasional come back here and there. No one's perfect.

Needless to say Mou, is swayed by the scoreline and changes the dimension of his game according to the scoreline and has shown to work with all his strategies just fine, in my book. Manager's who are results based are usually like that.

"tactically more sound compared to Pep"

Needless to say Mou, is swayed by the scoreline and changes the dimension of his game according to the scoreline and has shown to work with all his strategies just fine, in my book. Manager's who are results based are usually like that.

1) "managers who are results based are usually like that" I don't understand that quote tbh. Are you saying Guardiola, Bielsa etc don't care about results? That they're just like "philosophy philosophy philosophy" even if they're losing most games?

2) If we just take a look at Pep and Mou's respective win rates, we can see which manager is more "results based"

Pep
74,7 % Wins
15,2 % Draw
10,1 % Losses

Mourinho
65,6 % Wins
19,5 % Draw
14,9 % Losses

Pep vs Mou in meetings: 9-3 (that is the statistic, right?).

To me it looks like maybe it's actually Mourinho who should alter his tactics a bit.

*Not even going to get into the fact that Mou's teams, for being as tactically sound as they are, tend to fall after a couple years.

I'm not so sure that it's really a fair comparison to look purely at their percentages. Look at the comparative quality of Mourinho's teams versus Pep's teams.

I mean, I personally prefer Pep and much, much prefer his style of play but I think that Mourinho is more pragmatic.

Hmm?

Mou inherited one of the most stacked Porto teams in history (or at least modern history). Then he went to Chelsea, was able to buy whoever he wanted and create a fantastic squad (which he did well with). Went to Inter in a declining Serie A without Juventus and had another fantastic squad, then went to Real Madrid and had unlimited funds to build whatever team he wanted. Then he went back to Chelsea inheriting a great team AND having funds to create whatever squad he wanted.

Guardiola started at Barca who won 50% of their matches in La Liga and finished behind Villareal and 18 points behind Madrid now I'm not joking anyone, it was an incredibly talented but unperforming squad. I'm not trying to make it seem like the squad wasn't stacked but it's not like he inherited a better squad in his respective league than Mou did for Inter or Porto. Then he went to Bayern where he had an amazing squad and then to Man City...who have a pretty decent squad, and he has unlimited funds.

My point isn't that Guardiola has had it harder than Mourinho. He hasn't. Guardiola has gone from stacked team to stacked team. My point is that Mourinho also did OR he at least had unlimited funds to make his team stacked.

I'm not really sure where this myth of Mourinho taking teams who are pretty good but aren't CL contenders to new heights came from. Honestly, I don't. He hasn't gotten anyone to overperform*, he's done the same thing as Guardiola, he's either had stacked teams or unlimited funds.

I think the comparison is definitely fair. Where is it unfair?

*Winning the CL with Porto was impressive admittedly, and that's kind of where I think this myth originates.

I dunno, winning the treble with Inter was pretty impressive and winning the CL with Porto was also very impressive. He did well with Real Madrid and Chelsea also. I'm not saying that Mourinho had bad teams or that he got the majority of them to overperform or anything, but let's be honest regardless of how much of a hand Pep had in motivating that team in Barcelona it was one of the most stacked teams of all time, including the best player of all time in his prime and some of the best supporting cast of all time as well. He then went to a Bayern team that had just won the CL (and the treble) and it certainly was one of the more stacked teams in the world. I'd argue even that Pep's Bayern was a more stacked team than any Mourinho has ever managed (as was Barcelona).

Still, like I said, I like Pep better but the percentages and such still don't tell the whole story of their tactical ability.

I mean, if I wanted to tell the whole story of their tactical ability, I certainly wouldn't throw a couple percentages around and a couple other statistics and call it a day. Putting a couple percentages out there is a quick retort to Lord Awesome claiming something really weird about Pep not being results based and Mourinho being a "results based" manager and how they set up their teams accordingly.

As such, it's pretty clear that whatever Pep is doing for his teams is getting results, and very good ones. To which I would ask 1) why should he change what he's doing, then? 2) given the good results, is it fair to say he is a "results based" coach (especially given his maturity at Bayern? Oh btw, like I said, I still don't understand what "results based" coaches are)?

If you want to question the validity of the numbers relative to Mourinho, I would be alright with you doing that even though I respectfully disagree, but the numbers by themselves should raise some questions to Lord Awesome's thinking. This one dimensionality (complete myth) thing seems to be getting Pep pretty far

Anyone that thinks Mourinho is better tactically than Pep either in actual implementation and flexibility doesn't really understand football.

Did I just dreamt it, or Pep proved to be much more flexible than Mourinho, dominating ManU at their own field extensively in the first half, and securing the result through defense in the second?

Roy Keane says Pep Guardiola is the Special One - not Manchester United boss Jose Mourinho

"Two coaches in Manchester. Mourinho reckons he’s the special one, to me this guy is."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/pep-guardiola-special-one-not-8838514

Winter is Coming wrote:"tactically more sound compared to Pep"

I'm still wondering if he said that with a straight face

Considering his history he probably believes it.

http://pepfraud.esy.es/