Wenger and Mourinho are the only elite organic managers in the century

Attached: IMG_20220511_124222.jpg (1080x1201, 304.67K)

Other urls found in this thread:


Pep would have had the 2011-2016 Arsenal team performing much better than scraping top 4

I'm glad he won a few FA Cups before leaving anyway.

That graphic makes Ferguson look more impressive than Wenger.

Pep never did shit without Messi or an unlimited amount of money

Ferguson bought low and sold high, minus Veron of course.

What makes you think that? When did he ever manage on a budget?

>What makes you think that?
Because his teams are greater than the sum of their parts. He improves players. Only retards think Man City have a world XI. You think the players are great because Pep makes them look great.

>top 4
why is this considered an achievement

Name 11 players that walk into City's starting team

Explain the relevance of doing that first

still, top 4 resembled both CL qualification and big prem team relevance until Sky decided it should be a "Big 6" because citeh and spuds

The reason he can even get the perfect players for his system is because he has unlimited money.
No one's denying his quality, anyone else in his position wouldn't have been as dominant but being able to spend 100m on a bench player surely helps.

Yeah, I'm sure some guy like Ruben Dias that no one had ever heard of before he was linked with Man City was the perfect guy and is proof Pep buys the league

Wenger got a lot of unfair criticism and his trophy haul doesn't really do his career justice. However top 4 back then was much easier when there was only a "big 4" to worry about. Ever since Man City and Tottenham started to become decent, the competition for top 4 has become much tougher with 6 teams fighting for it (plus other teams like Leicester, West Ham and Wolves putting pressure from below).

And Arsenal did start to spend more money from 2013 onwards, when they bought Mesut Ozil. By that point the stadium had mostly been paid off and they were no longer forced to sell their best players. They just made some poor choices. They really should have gotten Suarez instead of offering that cheeky £40m+1 (probably would have been a better signing than Ozil given how badly Arsenal needed to fill the Van Persie void). In the summer of 2015, they didn't sign a single outfield player, had the squad been a little stronger they probably could have pipped Leicester to the title. Mustafi for £35m was a complete joke. While Xhaka isn't exactly bad, he wasn't the right solution to Arsenal's midfield problems and £40m was a bit expensive.

Unlimited budget is not about 100m+ signings. It's about being able to buy flop after flop until you find the right player. Team with no money will be stuck with flop.

So, you're telling me Pep spent 70m on a gamble? A player no one heard about (not true, btw) and maybe would work? He had a great season with Benfica. Same with Rodri, great season for Atleti, another 70m.

fergie is more impressive because he also had to live in m*nchester

You stated only retards think that City have a world XI. I'm not entirely sure anyone does actually think this but I'm interested to know which world class players you think start ahead of their current roster.

How many of Man City's big signings have actually flopped under Guardiola though? Benjamin Mendy and Claudio Bravo are probably the only disasters, the former mainly for off-the-pitch stuff and the latter was only £16m.

wenger the king of min-maxing

Good take. In my opinion Wenger suffered from the rot of accepting mediocrity and when he inevitably had the chance to win a title V Leicester he couldn't muster up the strength that he had before what with the humiliating defeats.

He was a very good manager who had to accept mediocrity due to circumstances and could never regain his previous level of success.

He buys bench players for sums that other clubs pay for starters.

He's playing FIFA Manager Mode IRL

The point is that Pep doesn't care if they flop as he doesn't have to worry about his budget in the slightest. $50m John Stones has never started more than 27 games in his 5 year stretch and that's common for Pep, he has no need to play expensive players often because he has a stacked deck.

Also you remember Mangala? Pretty sure he was a record transfer for a defender and 2 seasons later he was gone and even you don't remember him. Pep has done that more than once and it seems like all his flops get swept under the table because he signs whoever for massive numbers and doesn't need to use them.

Are you really too dumb to understand that?

What good is qualifying for a tournament if you don't manage to seriously compete in said tournament? I understand the money aspect but why should fans give a fuq about budgets

Pick up the damn phone

Ah yes, Mourinho, so organic. He's only managed some of the richest clubs in their respective countries. Props.

>So, you're telling me Pep spent 70m on a gamble?
Well, United spent that money on Maguire.

Ah, yes, the UCL title contender Porto. The UCL giant Inter that took a casual break from winning it for over 50 years. The traditional Chelsea that also took a break from winning the league for 50 years before he arrived.

money and reputation

never really thought he was elite but thats really good ngl

>Ah, yes, the UCL title contender Porto
Richest team in Portugal against the mighty Depor and the mighty Monaco
>The UCL giant Inter that took a casual break from winning it for over 50 years
Richest team in Italy at the time.
>The traditional Chelsea that also took a break from winning the league for 50 years before he arrived.
Ok you got me, 9/10 bait

>played in a final
>passed the group stage in every single CL from 03-04 to 16-17

sounds like seriously competing to me

Most league winning sides have that bit of mongrel in them to grind out a few 1-0s when their form has gone to shit and the star midfielder has a broken leg. Wenger sides used to have it in spades but he never quite got it back after they left Highbury

Ive never understood why people give pep and man city shit for spending billions of dollars. like yah boo hoo moneyball but every team in top top 5 barring lesters miracle run in 2016 spends upwards of 70m a year on transfers

No, you could check op's image for evidence or any other spending table.

>the point
>the stratosphere
>your head

You can't be considered an elite manager if you haven't won a CL. Simple as

I never watched them before the last 10 years or so but when somebody says "they left their soul in Highbury" it seems a bit too metaphorical when in actual fact when they left Highbury they got financially shackled so much that it broke Wenger and his ability to command his team. They (>we btw) literally left Wenger's legacy in Highbury, poor guy.

Wenger is the greatest manager to ever live

The other big turning point was Wenger selling Patrick Vieira and building the team around Cesc Fabregas. The team switched from having strong players to having technical players. Arsenal played some fantastic football at the Emirates but they ultimately lost the grit that used to win them league titles.

*qualifies 2nd in CL group*
*loses 8-1 to barca/bayern*


Highbury had a lot of soul, built up over many years of history obviously. It'll take many years for the Emirates to do the same if ever.

Attached: 119885494.0 (1).jpg (1600x900, 399.95K)

how is top 4 harder now? a fucking arse team that is worse then the 08-09 arse team is in the top 4 a cheski that lose lose lose is 3rd, its not got harder every team got shit

had their best players bought by money teams*

The reason Arsenal, Man Utd, Spurs and Chelsea are dropping more points this season is because the rest of the league has improved.

theres almost a 30 pt gap just between 1st and 8th

City and Liverpool are another level but I'm talking about the others. Man Utd are not that far ahead of West Ham this season.

Mate, you wanna compare FC Porto's finances with Drug Money Super Depor and Fiscal Paradise Monaco?

he flopped at bayern btw.

Alisson, Neuer, Diogo Costa, VvD, Pepe (literally, still better than Dias), Militão, TAA, Theo Hernandez, Reece James, Robertson, Casemiro, Fabinho, Kante, …
…Lewandowski, Mbappe, Haaland, Kane, Son, Benzema, Vlahovic, Lautaro, Darwin

Portoposter speaks the truth

Wonga was so good at keeping Arsenal in top-4, he kept them there even when they were the only top-4 team challenging for the title LMAO

Arsenal, Man Utd, Spurs and Chelsea
they are bad sides arsenal is held by youth and get lucky alot
man u is just a bad team a really bad team
spurs has what two really amazing players and a bunch of shitters
chelsea is somehow a team meant to be 3rd and nearly in 4th like what are you trying to tell me the the prems shit

feel like shit

If I were a posh North Londoner which building would I most like to live?

what was the arsenal side of 08-13 like? I wasn't really watching much football back then

Yes, look at the players mourinho had. his porto win is not impressive. he was there at the right time with the right players

so why didn't you never win one

I would only need to name one in that case. I can name at least 5 or 6 Liverpool players alone who would. Van Dijk. That was easy.