Pep Guardiola - King of the Carabao Club

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Also if you're going to do this properly actually mention players like Gundogan, Sane, Mahrez lol.

You know actual good players who don't start games who further the argument of Pep having an unfairly good squad.

Not trash like Otamendi or Danilo lol, DAT feel when the so called "Pep fanboy" is better at making Pep look like a fraud than the "Pep haters " are.

lol 30m „trash“ is how deep Man City‘s depth goes. They signed these players for so much because they were good players, who turned out bad under Pep and then repöaced with more 30m+ players. Meanwhile you mentioned Arsenal who still have to play Mustafi despite being actual trash for years, just to extract some of that wasted money on him. Arsenal have to deal with the consequences of signing an expensive bad player, while Pep just replaces him in the next transfer window and still fails to complete the clubs main objective.

At least Mole finally indirectly admit Sane isn't a go to starter with that post.

And besides Unique's hyperbolic use of the phrase "world class", City is the only PL team that can field two competitive squads that, more or less, doesn't lose the needed quality to get 3 points in the league.

Also, Otamendi wasn't always trash. They also spent 40+ million on him as well. But hey, money is minor hence they went and purchased John Stones for 50+ mil the following season. And the season after, 50+ mil for Mendy, Walker and Laporte each and the latter was at the end of the Jan transfer window. Yup, money is definitely a minor thing for City and Pep has to work with so little. Danilo was also bought in that same window as well but he is shit and rotational so that doesn't count.

Problem i have with these arguments is they imply a lot of money spent on a player means they're good.

Which is complete nonsense lol, this isn't so much a Pep thing as it is a people are blinded by money spent = good which I've constantly fought against us for years now.

Also City aren't winning titles because of any of the players mentioned, they're winning titles because of the Silva's, De Bruyne, Aguero, Sterling etc.

Like people went insane when the summer they won the league when they spent insane money on fullbacks that barely played but the real reasons they won the league last year were because of players already there.

Money in football is so insane (especially in the PL) that for the most part it's meaningless and just a number to put on a screen.

I genuinely don't give a shit how expensive a player is or how much money any team spends, i care how good they are.

Like Liverpool spent god knows how much on Naby Keita and he's hot trash, i genuinely don't give a shit about money spent unless it's on genuine quality it doesn't mean anything.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Problem i have with these arguments is they imply a lot of money spent on a player means they're good.

Which is complete nonsense lol, this isn't so much a Pep thing as it is a people are blinded by money spent = good which I've constantly fought against us for years now.

Also City aren't winning titles because of any of the players mentioned, they're winning titles because of the Silva's, De Bruyne, Aguero, Sterling etc.

Like people went insane when the summer they won the league when they spent insane money on fullbacks that barely played but the real reasons they won the league last year were because of players already there.

Money in football is so insane (especially in the PL) that for the most part it's meaningless and just a number to put on a screen.

I genuinely don't give a shit how expensive a player is or how much money any team spends, i care how good they are.

Like Liverpool spent god knows how much on Naby Keita and he's hot trash, i genuinely don't give a shit about money spent unless it's on genuine quality it doesn't mean anything.

if money means so little why didnt pep join cardiff and with the title with them.

You're going off the deep end lol.

I mean at the top, last summer like more than a half a dozen teams spent more than 100m.

Yet I'm supposed to believe that in the PL it isn't relative and having that type of money isn't as big an advantage as it would be elsewhere.

In Lol Liga you have like 2 or 3 teams who can spend 50m on a player but in the PL there's like 10 teams who can do that lol, like it or not it definitely makes a team like City not as ridiculous as say PSG.

It's undeniable that City in any other league would be at a way bigger advantage than they can be in PL.

Players costing a lot doesn't automatically mean they're good, but City's wealth is an undoubted advantage because it widens their margin of error. If one of their buys doesn't work out, they can simply buy a replacement without being concerned about the costs of signing an expensive flop. While the other teams in the league are wealthier as well, they're not at that level. And while they're correcting their "errors", they can still spend big on other positions to strengthen their squad even more, while the rest of the league have to wait or sell first because even now, a £30m purchase is still a significant investment.

To demonstrate the difference, let's compare City to Arsenal. Arsenal had a large budget but it was finite. So when they spent £46m to buy Lacazette that was most of the budget gone and they couldn't make another expensive purchase that summer. In January they spent £54m on Aubameyang but only after selling three players (Coquelin, Giroud and Walcott; Sanchez's fee went straight on Mkhitaryan). The following summer their most expensive signing was Torreira at £25m, which is significant because they signed five first team players and didn't sell anyone for decent money. So their budget had to stretch across multiple positions.

City, on the other hand, signed Ederson, Danilo, Walker, Mendy and Bernardo Silva in one summer and then spent £50m+ on Laporte in January when they were having issues at centre back. And did they suffer from all that expenditure? No, they went and spent £60m on Mahrez who isn't even a starter for them. Arsenal, Spurs, hell not even Chelsea now can do that. These clubs can sign one £50m+ player per year without selling and that's it. If they're having problems, they can't throw money at it. Arsenal spent all of last January arguing with Barcelona about the loan of Denis Suarez ffs, that's how little budget they had left. City are never going to have that problem.

None of this is to undermine Guardiola's success with City, because he clearly has a knack for managing top players and extracting incredible performances on a consistent basis. Very few managers would be able to pull of a 100 point season playing the way they did. Nonetheless, City do have an advantage over the rest. I don't think that can disputed.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:No one is complaining lol, it's the overhyping of squad players to further an agenda Jibers is on about lol.

Funny thing is the same players who apparently great when it comes to this are also considered trash by everyone on this forum lol when games are on lol.

Exactly. Makes no sense.

urbaNRoots wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Also if you're going to do this properly actually mention players like Gundogan, Sane, Mahrez lol.

You know actual good players who don't start games who further the argument of Pep having an unfairly good squad.

Not trash like Otamendi or Danilo lol, DAT feel when the so called "Pep fanboy" is better at making Pep look like a fraud than the "Pep haters " are.

lol 30m „trash“ is how deep Man City‘s depth goes. They signed these players for so much because they were good players, who turned out bad under Pep and then repöaced with more 30m+ players. Meanwhile you mentioned Arsenal who still have to play Mustafi despite being actual trash for years, just to extract some of that wasted money on him. Arsenal have to deal with the consequences of signing an expensive bad player, while Pep just replaces him in the next transfer window and still fails to complete the clubs main objective.

So who was the replacemtn for Mendy then. They have played without a LB for pretty much 2 seasons. I guess Pep should have won the Sextuple with Kolarov and Sagna as Full backs  then.

O I know, Zinchenko is a WC FB and when he's injured Fabien 'Maldini' Delph can take his place.

Thje same Danilo that was labelled a liability by Madrid fans who were glad he was sold is now a WC full back I guess.

Stones was mocked for being a joke on here but now he's Baresi.

The clubs main objective? What is it. Please do tell...






It's insane the measuring stick that is used for Pep. I guess SAF is a flop for winning only 2 cls in 25 years despite dominating the EPL. O wait but he's the GOAT for winning so many EPL titles though!

I guess Saachi is not regarded as one of the best coaches ever despite spending a lot of money on the best players in the world and winning 1 Serie A. After that he flopped in every other club he took over.

I guess Cruyff is s bum as well and is not regarded as the most influential coach in the history of football because he one only 1 European Cup and lost 4-0 in a final despite having 5 of the worlds best players in his starting 11....


I guess when it comes to Pep the goal post is moved. Not winning the CL now is apparently is failure

Jay29 wrote:Players costing a lot doesn't automatically mean they're good, but City's wealth is an undoubted advantage because it widens their margin of error. If one of their buys doesn't work out, they can simply buy a replacement without being concerned about the costs of signing an expensive flop. While the other teams in the league are wealthier as well, they're not at that level. And while they're correcting their "errors", they can still spend big on other positions to strengthen their squad even more, while the rest of the league have to wait or sell first because even now, a £30m purchase is still a significant investment.

To demonstrate the difference, let's compare City to Arsenal. Arsenal had a large budget but it was finite. So when they spent £46m to buy Lacazette that was most of the budget gone and they couldn't make another expensive purchase that summer. In January they spent £54m on Aubameyang but only after selling three players (Coquelin, Giroud and Walcott; Sanchez's fee went straight on Mkhitaryan). The following summer their most expensive signing was Torreira at £25m, which is significant because they signed five first team players and didn't sell anyone for decent money. So their budget had to stretch across multiple positions.

City, on the other hand, signed Ederson, Danilo, Walker, Mendy and Bernardo Silva in one summer and then spent £50m+ on Laporte in January when they were having issues at centre back. And did they suffer from all that expenditure? No, they went and spent £60m on Mahrez who isn't even a starter for them. Arsenal, Spurs, hell not even Chelsea now can do that. These clubs can sign one £50m+ player per year without selling and that's it. If they're having problems, they can't throw money at it. Arsenal spent all of last January arguing with Barcelona about the loan of Denis Suarez ffs, that's how little budget they had left. City are never going to have that problem.

None of this is to undermine Guardiola's success with City, because he clearly has a knack for managing top players and extracting incredible performances on a consistent basis. Very few managers would be able to pull of a 100 point season playing the way they did. Nonetheless, City do have an advantage over the rest. I don't think that can disputed.

I don't disagree, but my original argument was that while they have a clear financial advantage it's not as huge as it would be anywhere else.

So it's relative compared to other stuff, that's all i said and people freaked out lol.

jibers wrote:Today I learnt City can field 2 WORLD CLASS TEams

Zinchenko is a WC LB
Danilo is a WC RB
Gundogan is a WC holding MF
Gab Jesus is now a WC striker

The lengths people will go through

They may not be world class but other teams would kill to have them on their bench. Hell some of them would start in a lot of big teams .

To be fair, I don't necessarily think Champions League would be THE main objective for City this summer.

Their owners would be more than happy at this point be winning the league every year because they realize how difficult it is to win the tournament especially when you are a newbie club like City that doesn't have much experience in big European nights.

This hype about a 'Quadruple' is just created by the media and the fans.

City have one of the deepest squads in Europe no doubt but they're still a work in progress when it comes to CL.

Work in progress? Once Agüero, Silva, Fernandinho are done, which is within the next 2 - 3 seasons, City are done for and Pep will move on just about before it happens.

I said they are a work in a progress in the Champions League

You just can't go out there, build a  stacked squad and expect to win Champions League. History and heritage matters. Experience matters.

Before Barca were smashing teams in CL and winning trebles, they were seen as one of the biggest chokers in Europe. Just an example.

I don't think history and heritage matters tbh i do agree experience matters though.

S wrote:I said they are a work in a progress in the Champions League

You just can't go out there, build a  stacked squad and expect to win Champions League. History and heritage matters. Experience matters.

Before Barca were smashing teams in CL and winning trebles, they were seen as one of the biggest chokers in Europe. Just an example.

Man City went out to Monaco, Liverpool and injury-ridden and Kane-less Spurs while conceding 15 goals in those 3 ties. They didn't need heritage to overcome those teams, they needed proper coaching. You can't concede 3+ goals in 4 of 6 ties with such a quality squad and not be called out on it.

Pep's tactics are only working when the disparity between his squad and the rest his huge. In the league that is the case in 9 out of 10 games. Additionally, in the Mule League in particular, middle and lower table teams don't have any other answer but park the bus and hoof which is totally counter productive against the way Pep leaves his defense exposed tactically.  

In a do-or-die CL one-off game where the opponent matches Pep's intensity and can't just hope for a draw from the get-go, his tactics get exposed. The sample size is too huge now to deny this. 0-4 Real, 0-3 Barca, 0-3 Liverpool, 1-3 Monaco. Like, seriously?

Some managers are great in the league but they are not good enough for the CL. Pep is one of them.

It's a travesty that the greatest football team of this generation didn't win multiple CL in a row.

This is why Mourinho will always be a better coach.

Kaladin wrote:

I saw this in my suggestions lol, haven't watched it yet but he undoubtedly does.

RealGunner wrote:This is why Mourinho will always be a better coach.

No way lol

Myesyats wrote:

RealGunner wrote:This is why Mourinho will always be a better coach.

No way lol

He's trolling

Looking at it, his system is really a failure in Europe, even with Barca winning those 2 CLs under him, 1 of it was due to the greatest refereeing scandal of all time (still followed by a last minute desperation goal from outside the box) and the other was a result of the genius of the best footballer of all time dribbling an entire team in the semi finals.

Will we ever see Pep win a CL thanks to "his" system ?

His system isn't the problem, nor are his tactics.

He loses because he overthinks things in big CL away games, he goes away from what works.

Shit like benching De Bruyne, playing an extra midfielder and mucking around with his defence is something he does away from home in the CL consistently.

He then goes back to what works every single in the second leg and usually wins the game but loses the tie because he goes all Catenaccio in the first leg.

This goes all the way back to his days with Barcelona, he got rid of Eto'o in exchange for Ibra because he feared they were "becoming too predictable".

It's been an issue his entire career, winning or losing. He has a real problem with trying to fix something before it's even broken, that's his issue and why he's struggled comparatively to his early Barca days nothing else.

Thats true, but must be only a part of it. Another big problem is just his system is flawed. Concedes goals too easily, and scores a lot, but takes a lot of energy from his players to do so. It happens all the time, they score an amazing goal, and concede so easily. Individual mistakes often, but it must be his system when it happens time and time again over the years.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:His system isn't the problem, nor are tactics

Then you proceed to explain how his tactics are the problem

rincon wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:His system isn't the problem, nor are tactics

Then you proceed to explain how his tactics are the problem

No i didn't, i was talking about mental approach, lineup decisions which changes when it matters for big games.

Nothing to do with tactics.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:No i didn't, i was talking about mental approach, lineup decisions which changes when it matters for big games.

Nothing to do with tactics.

well if you take a different approach and change the line up that has to be tactical