Jose Mourinho

montecarlotwenty wrote:Shame Mourinho can't "motivate" youth player like Leon, Canales, Garay, Balotelli, Santon. Instead publicly destroys their confidence and throws them on the scrap heap before they're given a chance.

Nobody hires Mourinho to develop youth ...

They hire him to win them trophies ... and he's doing that perfectly 'till now ...

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:Let's not forget that as soon as Mou leaves the team he is coaching they all have been underperforming compared to when he was coaching them. (Chelsea and Inter). Porto is the only one you can't compare becouse all their players were sold.

You think it is Mourinho's brilliance that makes him irreplacable ? It is the fact that he uses teams until they win, and has no foundation or support. Other teams prepare for the loss of legends, like SAF losing many of his legends this year.

Mourinho buys whoever is good now, and lets the teams figure it out when he leaves.

The "finished" Chelsea still was able to challange Barca, plus he left them after they lost in a final in penelties. He did not leave them but was sacked, but his influence was noticable.

And where are Chelsea and Inter today ? Old, aged, and in shambles. He gets a team in their prime, wins, and leaves them so they fall apart. They are held with tape, and are a comestic team with no support or anything to parachute them when they fall.

omarish wrote:

I see that as a genius. Just wherever you go, your influence is noticable. I don't know what is a genius for you.

Then Wenger, SAF, Hiddink, Del Bosque and many others who have a noticeable influence are all geniuses.

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:Let's not forget that as soon as Mou leaves the team he is coaching they all have been underperforming compared to when he was coaching them. (Chelsea and Inter). Porto is the only one you can't compare becouse all their players were sold.

You think it is Mourinho's brilliance that makes him irreplacable ? It is the fact that he uses teams until they win, and has no foundation or support. Other teams prepare for the loss of legends, like SAF losing many of his legends this year.

Mourinho buys whoever is good now, and lets the teams figure it out when he leaves.

The "finished" Chelsea still was able to challange Barca, plus he left them after they lost in a final in penelties. He did not leave them but was sacked, but his influence was noticable.

And where are Chelsea and Inter today ? Old, aged, and in shambles. He gets a team in their prime, wins, and leaves them so they fall apart. They are held with tape, and are a comestic team with no support or anything to parachute them when they fall.

This is the single biggest argument against him (other than him going into teams that can spend tons of money or are already dominant in the league), he can push them to the top, but he cannot or dare not try to stay at the top and regenerate the success. People like Fergie, Capello and recently Pep did that, reach the top and stayed there

Mou's managerial abilities and tactical sense are genius... there's really no denying that. He balances his team's strength with the opponent's weakness in tight games. When his team has a large talent advantage, he allows his team to impose itself. His goal is to win; nothing more, nothing less.

The discipline, cohesion and mental toughness he has brought to Madrid is night and day. We no longer just try to "out talent" everyone. There's a logic to the team that hasn't been there in a while.

He's also spending a lot of time and effort bringing youth to the team and emphasizing Madrid Castilla. This is the most surprising aspect to me.

He building a team and a youth structure for the next 5-10 years... not only for 2 years.

Getting back to topic, the proof of brilliance is results. You just don't take 4 teams to the top without it. Porto, Chelsea, Inter and now Madrid have all become elite European teams when they were a step below when he arrived.

It's like Phil Jackson of the Bulls and the Lakers... everyone downplayed his coaching because they said "anyone could win with that talent". Well, the records speak for themselves. If all it took was great talent, he shouldn't be able to set all these records. Many other should have been just as successful.

Just recognize and stop the hate.

ToEy wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:Let's not forget that as soon as Mou leaves the team he is coaching they all have been underperforming compared to when he was coaching them. (Chelsea and Inter). Porto is the only one you can't compare becouse all their players were sold.

You think it is Mourinho's brilliance that makes him irreplacable ? It is the fact that he uses teams until they win, and has no foundation or support. Other teams prepare for the loss of legends, like SAF losing many of his legends this year.

Mourinho buys whoever is good now, and lets the teams figure it out when he leaves.

The "finished" Chelsea still was able to challange Barca, plus he left them after they lost in a final in penelties. He did not leave them but was sacked, but his influence was noticable.

And where are Chelsea and Inter today ? Old, aged, and in shambles. He gets a team in their prime, wins, and leaves them so they fall apart. They are held with tape, and are a comestic team with no support or anything to parachute them when they fall.

This is the single biggest argument against him (other than him going into teams that can spend tons of money or are already dominant in the league), he can push them to the top, but he cannot or dare not try to stay at the top and regenerate the success. People like Fergie, Capello and recently Pep did that, reach the top and stayed there

Lol I like this ... People always use things against coaches like ... he hasnt won anything in another league ... and now u blame him because the teams he left suck !? It's not his problem obviously ....

kiranr wrote:

omarish wrote:

I see that as a genius. Just wherever you go, your influence is noticable. I don't know what is a genius for you.

Then Wenger, SAF, Hiddink, Del Bosque and many others who have a noticeable influence are all geniuses.

Wengers influence hasn't been shown for a few years now.
SAF is a legend, no comments.
Hiddink is a great coach but has he taken every team he has managed into a winning team, or a top team? Or a strong team? I'd dare to say no. Great manager nonetheless.
Del Bosque is a Real Madrid legend. Enough said.

ToEy wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:Let's not forget that as soon as Mou leaves the team he is coaching they all have been underperforming compared to when he was coaching them. (Chelsea and Inter). Porto is the only one you can't compare becouse all their players were sold.

You think it is Mourinho's brilliance that makes him irreplacable ? It is the fact that he uses teams until they win, and has no foundation or support. Other teams prepare for the loss of legends, like SAF losing many of his legends this year.

Mourinho buys whoever is good now, and lets the teams figure it out when he leaves.

The "finished" Chelsea still was able to challange Barca, plus he left them after they lost in a final in penelties. He did not leave them but was sacked, but his influence was noticable.

And where are Chelsea and Inter today ? Old, aged, and in shambles. He gets a team in their prime, wins, and leaves them so they fall apart. They are held with tape, and are a comestic team with no support or anything to parachute them when they fall.

This is the single biggest argument against him (other than him going into teams that can spend tons of money or are already dominant in the league), he can push them to the top, but he cannot or dare not try to stay at the top and regenerate the success. People like Fergie, Capello and recently Pep did that, reach the top and stayed there

Exactly. It is easy to be the best and then quit, that is actually being a, excuse my French, pu55y. I would love to see him regenerate a squad and do what he did with Inter this year when they are losing Eto'o, have an aged and under-performing Lucio and Maicon, etc.

Nothing special about what he does. Really, there is nothing special. I admire Wenger more than Mourinho even if he has not won for seven years because he builds squads, and can deal with losing players and he scouts.

JuvenelCuore wrote:

ToEy wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:Let's not forget that as soon as Mou leaves the team he is coaching they all have been underperforming compared to when he was coaching them. (Chelsea and Inter). Porto is the only one you can't compare becouse all their players were sold.

You think it is Mourinho's brilliance that makes him irreplacable ? It is the fact that he uses teams until they win, and has no foundation or support. Other teams prepare for the loss of legends, like SAF losing many of his legends this year.

Mourinho buys whoever is good now, and lets the teams figure it out when he leaves.

The "finished" Chelsea still was able to challange Barca, plus he left them after they lost in a final in penelties. He did not leave them but was sacked, but his influence was noticable.

And where are Chelsea and Inter today ? Old, aged, and in shambles. He gets a team in their prime, wins, and leaves them so they fall apart. They are held with tape, and are a comestic team with no support or anything to parachute them when they fall.

This is the single biggest argument against him (other than him going into teams that can spend tons of money or are already dominant in the league), he can push them to the top, but he cannot or dare not try to stay at the top and regenerate the success. People like Fergie, Capello and recently Pep did that, reach the top and stayed there

Exactly. It is easy to be the best and then quit, that is actually being a, excuse my French, pu55y. I would love to see him regenerate a squad and do what he did with Inter this year when they are losing Eto'o, have an aged and under-performing Lucio and Maicon, etc.

Nothing special about what he does. Really, there is nothing special. I admire Wenger more than Mourinho even if he has not won for seven years because he builds squads, and can deal with losing players and he scouts.

But what if his teams are just underperforming becouse they lack him? Just what if he is that great of a manager, he would never be able to prove your point. Btw, Chelsea won the league after he left, a double for Ancelotti.

Chelseas time was NOT over when he left.

pUsHa wrote:

ToEy wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:Let's not forget that as soon as Mou leaves the team he is coaching they all have been underperforming compared to when he was coaching them. (Chelsea and Inter). Porto is the only one you can't compare becouse all their players were sold.

You think it is Mourinho's brilliance that makes him irreplacable ? It is the fact that he uses teams until they win, and has no foundation or support. Other teams prepare for the loss of legends, like SAF losing many of his legends this year.

Mourinho buys whoever is good now, and lets the teams figure it out when he leaves.

The "finished" Chelsea still was able to challange Barca, plus he left them after they lost in a final in penelties. He did not leave them but was sacked, but his influence was noticable.

And where are Chelsea and Inter today ? Old, aged, and in shambles. He gets a team in their prime, wins, and leaves them so they fall apart. They are held with tape, and are a comestic team with no support or anything to parachute them when they fall.

This is the single biggest argument against him (other than him going into teams that can spend tons of money or are already dominant in the league), he can push them to the top, but he cannot or dare not try to stay at the top and regenerate the success. People like Fergie, Capello and recently Pep did that, reach the top and stayed there

Lol I like this ... People always use things against coaches like ... he hasnt won anything in another league ... and now u blame him because the teams he left suck !? It's not his problem obviously ....

Obviously you did not complehend what I just said lol...I did not blame him because the team he left sucks, I am saying he brought them to the top and left, hence is unproven whether he can stay at the top or not...say all you want about that, until he can prove that he can stay and win with a club at the top for 3 years and above, this argument will forever be held against him, genius or not

As my answer stated above, he is building with youth in Madrid and building + integrating the Madrid youth system.

My belief is that he follows the vision of the owner/president and the mandate he's given. In Chelsea and Inter, he was likely told to only focus on winning and winning immediately.

At Madrid, he has that same mandate... but there's also a great insistence by the fans of Madrid that youth come into the team. We were fed up with galacticos policies.

For the first time methinks, Mou has close to full control of club operations and close to complete cooperation with the president.

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

ToEy wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:Let's not forget that as soon as Mou leaves the team he is coaching they all have been underperforming compared to when he was coaching them. (Chelsea and Inter). Porto is the only one you can't compare becouse all their players were sold.

You think it is Mourinho's brilliance that makes him irreplacable ? It is the fact that he uses teams until they win, and has no foundation or support. Other teams prepare for the loss of legends, like SAF losing many of his legends this year.

Mourinho buys whoever is good now, and lets the teams figure it out when he leaves.

The "finished" Chelsea still was able to challange Barca, plus he left them after they lost in a final in penelties. He did not leave them but was sacked, but his influence was noticable.

And where are Chelsea and Inter today ? Old, aged, and in shambles. He gets a team in their prime, wins, and leaves them so they fall apart. They are held with tape, and are a comestic team with no support or anything to parachute them when they fall.

This is the single biggest argument against him (other than him going into teams that can spend tons of money or are already dominant in the league), he can push them to the top, but he cannot or dare not try to stay at the top and regenerate the success. People like Fergie, Capello and recently Pep did that, reach the top and stayed there

Exactly. It is easy to be the best and then quit, that is actually being a, excuse my French, pu55y. I would love to see him regenerate a squad and do what he did with Inter this year when they are losing Eto'o, have an aged and under-performing Lucio and Maicon, etc.

Nothing special about what he does. Really, there is nothing special. I admire Wenger more than Mourinho even if he has not won for seven years because he builds squads, and can deal with losing players and he scouts.

But what if his teams are just underperforming becouse they lack him? Just what if he is that great of a manager, he would never be able to prove your point. Btw, Chelsea won the league after he left, a double for Ancelotti.

Chelseas time was NOT over when he left.

Yeah, I forgot how brilliant Mourinho is. He keeps the footballing world in an equilibrium.

Chelsea were performing at a lesser level when he was gone, albeit they did well.

Don't argue with people that downplay Lev Yashin's greatness :lol!: I can't really respect their opinions after that frankly.

sportsczy wrote:Don't argue with people that downplay Lev Yashin's greatness :lol!: I can't really respect their opinions after that frankly.

Ever heard the expression "no use crying over spilled milk ?"

Apply it. It was said in another thread, and it is my opinion. "I think, therefore I am."

Get over it. Or get a room.

sportsczy wrote:Mou's managerial abilities and tactical sense are genius... there's really no denying that. He balances his team's strength with the opponent's weakness in tight games. When his team has a large talent advantage, he allows his team to impose itself. His goal is to win; nothing more, nothing less.

Does that constitute as genius? Every top manager does this and more with their team.

sportsczy wrote:The discipline, cohesion and mental toughness he has brought to Madrid is night and day. We no longer just try to "out talent" everyone. There's a logic to the team that hasn't been there in a while.

Did Capello "out talent" everyone? His Madrid team also achieved great results.

sportsczy wrote:Getting back to topic, the proof of brilliance is results. You just don't take 4 teams to the top without it. Porto, Chelsea, Inter and now Madrid have all become elite European teams when they were a step below when he arrived.

Madrid was well on its way to becoming a top team. You dont get players like CR, Benzema, Pepe etc and then not remain elite.

He competed well in Europe with Chelsea, but so did Arsenal with Wenger and he spent a lot lesser. In every one of Mourinho's teams, it was a project purely geared towards achieving success in Europe. He had the funds to spend and he had a lot of depth in his squad.

sportsczy wrote:It's like Phil Jackson of the Bulls and the Lakers... everyone downplayed his coaching because they said "anyone could win with that talent". Well, the records speak for themselves. If all it took was great talent, he shouldn't be able to set all these records. Many other should have been just as successful.

No one's downplaying his coaching. He is a great manager, but he is just like every other top manager out there. I do not see any difference that makes his abilities be labelled genius, yet the same honour is not bestowed on other top managers.

So Phil Jackson is also like any top basketball coach out there kiranr? Because Mou and Jackson are achieving the same things in different sports with the same stigmas attached to them.

omarish wrote:

kiranr wrote:

omarish wrote:

I see that as a genius. Just wherever you go, your influence is noticable. I don't know what is a genius for you.

Then Wenger, SAF, Hiddink, Del Bosque and many others who have a noticeable influence are all geniuses.

Wengers influence hasn't been shown for a few years now.
SAF is a legend, no comments.
Hiddink is a great coach but has he taken every team he has managed into a winning team, or a top team? Or a strong team? I'd dare to say no. Great manager nonetheless.
Del Bosque is a Real Madrid legend. Enough said.

Wenger's philosophy is putting a slight block on the results he is achieving. But make no mistake, if Mourinho is a tactical genius, the Wenger is as much a genius (and maybe more).

The projects undertaken by Hiddink are very different from the ones undertaken by Mourinho.

SAF is a greater genius if Mourinho is a genius!

Basically, people are saying "He won = genius" which could not be more far from the truth. Mourinho is a decent coach at best, and his mentality at Real Madrid has gone downhill because he is no longer a dominant coach.

At Inter, he had a huge degree of cockyness. Inter had won numerous titles in a row, and he came in with his ego filling every seat at the San Siro. Now, as many reports have suggested, he looks sickly, beaten, and yellow in the face. This was after the 5-0 or another loss I believe.

sportsczy wrote:So Phil Jackson is also like any top basketball coach out there kiranr? Because Mou and Jackson are achieving the same things in different sports with the same stigmas attached to them.

I dont follow bball Sportsczy.

There will always be detractors to a successful person. But the counter-argument is not to elevate the said person to levels unwarranted.

JuvenelCuore wrote:

sportsczy wrote:Don't argue with people that downplay Lev Yashin's greatness :lol!: I can't really respect their opinions after that frankly.

Ever heard the expression "no use crying over spilled milk ?"

Apply it. It was said in another thread, and it is my opinion. "I think, therefore I am."

Get over it. Or get a room.

When Mou leaves a club, it means he has got no influence over its future anymore Now, when a certain Rafa or Avram Grant come and mismanage everything, how is Mourinho responsible for their lapses?

You know, Inter sucked in CL for a looooooooooooooooong time, very long time. He got his men as cheap as possible Ibra vs. Eto'o+ cash was the deal of century ( ask any Farca fan) , Militto didn't cost a lot as well Lucio was free and the only guy he bought for real was Snejder
In Chelsea, he bought Essien, Drogba and changed Lampard to out and out goal scorer. Now, they were their backbone for years No denying it...

I won't mention Porto, maybe you weren't born by that time or too small ( Your comments suggest that).

Present time, ever looked at the average age of Real Madrid players?
How is it what he is doing different from Wenger except he keeps his people at the club? Look at the starters: Ozil, Carvalho, Khedira ( He bought Sahin), Varane etc.
I know what you guys will say next, he works with finished products and doesn't develop anyone... Did you see Benzema last year? He was a fat overweight lazy bum. Ever saw Marcelo defending prior to Mourinho ( not only didn't he defend, he didn't know how to)? Ever saw CR7 track back like in the last two clasicos?
Name me a team that managed 47% possession against full strength Farca team?

@kinrar

I got your point. You want to know what's the system behind Mou's attacking tactics There's none except for every attacker has to watch out for the space he's occupying to recover on time for defending when needed. It means, as long as the attackers watch out for their defensive duties, they're free to play the way they like. Another aspect is his zonal attacking game. His attackers make runs into free space but under no given pattern. Top fitness is required of course. All the team is fit, Fergie or Wenger don't do it any different( very fit players). He's got a very big emphasis on holdup play in final 3rd to create holes in opponents defence. Benzema, CR7 and Ozil were trained for it, you could see the results recently.
Now, it has benefits and problems. The problems: each match the attackers have to improvise anew to get the job done. The positive: the attack is virtually unpredictable. The system works wonders with players like Ozil and Benzema because they're creative to the bone. Di Maria's final pass or other magic moments aren't too shabby either.
Overall, to each their own, but I enjoy Real Madrid games a lot more than those from Farca because each game is very different and I get to see all kind of goals

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

omarish wrote:Let's not forget that as soon as Mou leaves the team he is coaching they all have been underperforming compared to when he was coaching them. (Chelsea and Inter). Porto is the only one you can't compare becouse all their players were sold.

You think it is Mourinho's brilliance that makes him irreplacable ? It is the fact that he uses teams until they win, and has no foundation or support. Other teams prepare for the loss of legends, like SAF losing many of his legends this year.

Mourinho buys whoever is good now, and lets the teams figure it out when he leaves.

The "finished" Chelsea still was able to challange Barca, plus he left them after they lost in a final in penelties. He did not leave them but was sacked, but his influence was noticable.

And where are Chelsea and Inter today ? Old, aged, and in shambles. He gets a team in their prime, wins, and leaves them so they fall apart. They are held with tape, and are a comestic team with no support or anything to parachute them when they fall.

Season after he left Inter won 3 titles(SC,WCC and Copa Italia) finished 2nd in Seria A(with biggest injury problems since i fallow Inter + Milan buying shitload of players) and Quarters of CL. And that is definition of being in shambles, ok.

Then what is e.g. Juve with that same criteria, im really interested in that.

babun1024 wrote:

JuvenelCuore wrote:

sportsczy wrote:Don't argue with people that downplay Lev Yashin's greatness :lol!: I can't really respect their opinions after that frankly.

Ever heard the expression "no use crying over spilled milk ?"

Apply it. It was said in another thread, and it is my opinion. "I think, therefore I am."

Get over it. Or get a room.

When Mou leaves a club, it means he has got no influence over its future anymore Now, when a certain Rafa or Avram Grant come and mismanage everything, how is Mourinho responsible for their lapses?

You know, Inter sucked in CL for a looooooooooooooooong time, very long time. He got his men as cheap as possible Ibra vs. Eto'o+ cash was the deal of century ( ask any Farca fan) , Militto didn't cost a lot as well Lucio was free and the only guy he bought for real was Snejder
In Chelsea, he bought Essien, Drogba and changed Lampard to out and out goal scorer. Now, they were their backbone for years No denying it...

I won't mention Porto, maybe you weren't born by that time or to small ( You comments suggest that).

Present time, ever looked at the average age of Real Madrid players?
How is it what he is doing different from Wenger except he keeps his people at the club? Look at the starters: Ozil, Carvalho, Khedira ( He bought Sahin), Varane etc.
I know what you guys will say next, he works with finished products and doesn't develop anyone... Did you see Benzema last year? He was a fat overweight lazy bum. Ever saw Marcelo defending prior to Mourinho ( not only didn't he defend, he didn't know how)? Ever saw CR7 track back like in the last two clasicos?
Name me a team that managed 47% possession against full strength Farca team?

1) He won a CL with Inter. Congrats. When did I say he never won anything ?

2) The transfer deals were none of his doing. They happened during his reign, so what ? They are automatically his ?

3) I acknowledged Porto, I said it was what made his career. Besides that, nothing was impressive. Care to read ?

4) Average age of RM players ? What does that have to do with anything ? The fact a 31-year old Ricardo Cavalho followed him to Madrid ? Nice.

5) Benzema ? Did him and Mourinho not get into a scuffle ? Marcelo ? He improved. That is automatically his doing ? Prove that. Ronaldo is still the same cancer he was a year ago, even RM fans think it.

6) Name me a team that spent as much as Madrid did to get close to that possession count.

cant believe such a shitty thread gets so many replys, specially from haters.

they are meaningless words written accross the internet that have no value and i for one wont waste my time

babun1024 wrote:
You know, Inter sucked in CL for a looooooooooooooooong time, very long time. He got his men as cheap as possible Ibra vs. Eto'o+ cash was the deal of century ( ask any Farca fan) , Militto didn't cost a lot as well Lucio was free and the only guy he bought for real was Snejder

Dude...just saying....in Inter the deals are done/determined/planned by Moratti...thank Moratti for the ibra etoo deal...not mourinho...and btw "farca farca" are you a kid?

kiranr wrote:

sportsczy wrote:So Phil Jackson is also like any top basketball coach out there kiranr? Because Mou and Jackson are achieving the same things in different sports with the same stigmas attached to them.

I dont follow bball Sportsczy.

There will always be detractors to a successful person. But the counter-argument is not to elevate the said person to levels unwarranted.

Well.. let me tell you that Phil Jackson set records that will never be broken as a coach. Ever. But he only won the best coach award once in his career and was always criticized for only winning with Michael Jordan/Pippen and Shaq/Kobe or Kobe/Gasol/Odom. he only got his due in the last 3-4 years.

I think the whole "he only won because he had the players" argument is pretty stupid. It takes great talent to win? No shit! But doe great talent always win? Not consistently. That's the key word: CONSISTENCY.

If Mou had only achieved his success with one team and one set of core players, i would've deemed the "genius" tag overstated perhaps. But he's doing it every year with 4 different teams and 4 different set of players in 4 different leagues. To me, that is undeniable proof of brilliance. And it's not like there was a transition year anywhere... immediate success in completely different circumstances with consistency.

So while his personality is not the best, Mou has to be considered a genius just based on his unique and, likely, never to be matched again CV.

The Madrid One wrote:cant believe such a shitty thread gets so many replys, specially from haters.

they are meaningless words written accross the internet that have no value and i for one wont waste my time

Yeah you will not waste your time on this thread and you posted....thanks for the lulz