Liverpool FC Forum

by **bigmick** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:49 am

As Inter sit seven points clear at the top of Serie A, and one or two people are once again touting Maureen as a potential manager for a big four club (who could they be?) I thought it might be interesting to look at his record.

Leaving aside for a second many peoples dislike for him as a person, is he a good manager or a bluffer?

We know he won the title at Porto, but they are quite a big club in those parts. He went on to win the Uefa Cup with them, which was no mean achievement in the days where you didn't have to win 73 matches and everyone took the competition seriously. We also won it around the same period and enjoyed it very much. He then won the title again with them, before winning the Champions League. On the way to winning the Champions League they put out a good Man Utd side, then beat Monaco in the final, who had deservedly put out Chelsea in the semi's. Realistically, winning the Champions League with a team like Porto was a remarkable achievement.

He arrived at Stamford Bridge in a blaze of self drummed up glory, and in that first close season spent a fortune. Players such as Drogba, Carvallhio etc arrived at huge expense to supplement the already excellent squad Ranieri had taken to second place in the previous season. They did though finish 11 points off the eventual winners (Arsenal) so the "special one" had a lot of ground to make up. He was asked to make the players gel from game one, it didn't appear that Abrhamovic was too keen on finishing second again.

Chelsea hit the ground running and blitzed all before them. Mourinho added a whopping 16 points onto Ranieri's second place and 79 points. Chelsea lost 1 game all season and won 29!!!!!! None of this "getting used to the Premiership" or trying to ingrain methodology which had been successful elsewhere. Mourinho who's Porto team was full of subtlety introduced an innovative 4-5-1 style with a sitter and two offensive wide men, which had "Power" at the centre of it's mantra. They smashed their way to the title, amassing 95 points into the process.

In Mourinho's second season they lost more times as both Man Utd and us managed to close the gap. They did though still win 29 games!!!! and once again swept all before them to finish on 91 points, 8 clear of the Mancs and 9 clear of us, on 82.

In his third season (2006/2007) after a good battle, the Mancs improved again from their 83 points of the previous season (they had gone from 75, to 77, to 83, to 89) to 89 points and won the title. Chelsea finished 6 points abck after drawing too many (only won 24 this time). Curiously, in this season we went from our 82 points of the previous season to 68 points. We finished 21 points behind the eventual Champions, and a whopping 14 points worse than in Rafa's second season.

In his fourth season, as we know he fell out with the owner and left after only a few matches. It's probably worth noting that they haven't won a trophy since, despite not by any means having a wholesale sell off. Just for the record, we improved another 8 points on our fairly dismal showing of the previous season, and finished on 76 points, 11 behind the eventual winners who were once again the Mancs, this time on 87 points.

Since then Mourinho has washed up at Inter Milan. There, he has taken over a team which were already very successful. I think they sacked Roberto Mancini to make way for him, which by all accoutns wasn't a popular decision. Still, Mourinho has breezed in and they are looking like they are going to win it again.

So I ask the question, good manager or bluffer?

by **maypaxvobiscum** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 4:03 am

personally..i really like him. he has style. has has charisma. he may have an ego but at least he walks his talks. i heard a story about him of how he would make the players sit in facing the sun while he spoke to them.

when GH got sacked, i wanted Mourinho.

right now in italy he is unpopular with the press and has shot off many verbal slingshots at rival managers. but so what? at least his team is winning. rafa..has an ego too. but lacks charisma, style and unfortunately has horrible timing with his press rants. i feel rafa has been using the press far too much to gain sympathy from the fans regards to his contract.

ive said it before, im sick of hearing him blabber tosh all the time. just shut up and let the team do the talking. ive always preferred the quiet rafa, not the press-talking one.

by **112-1077774096** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 4:20 am

great manager, sadly some people on here can not see past his personality, however if he did all the things he did and said all the things he said as liverpool manager those same people would be lauding him as a mind game genius, just as they were about rafa after rafas comments about red nose. others say he bought the title which it total bollox or they would still be winning it with other managers. one thing is for certain he has passion and he has man management skills that rafa can only dream of having.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 4:45 am

Moris is a talentless nobody who has blagged his way to prominence. He inherited a cracking squad at Porto, and the vast majority of the successful players at Chelsea where signed by his predecessor. Inter were the top team in Italy before the sh*t-stain took over, so anything they achieve is more to do with Mancini than the Spastic one.

The bloke has the tactical nous of a Harry Potter character. "Oh, we are loosing, yesh? I know - let's put Robert Huth up front, yesh?"

A tw*t of Biblical proportions.

by **bigmick** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 4:54 am

To be honest I've never really liked him as a person, but have rated in particular his man mangement skills. When I actually sat down and wrote the thread starter, he is a better football manager than I gave him credit for. His achievement at Chelsea to come in and instantly stick 16 points on top of Ranieri's total when he came second to Arsenal (now that is what I CALL progress) is a truly staggering achievement. It matters not that he spent money, to acquire the players and get them to gel instantly, to blend and to adapt to the Premiership upon arrival is a truly amazing achievement.

Similarly, when you look at him winning the UEFA Cup followed by the Champions League the following season with Porto, it gives lie to Lando's assessment.

He is a manager and a person who polarises opinion. In mine, if we were to be looking for a manager and he was available, we should absolutely move heaven and earth to get him. Put it this way, If Chelsea get him back next season they'll go very very close, and if Man City get him they'll finish in the top four. I have absolutely no doubts whatsoever about either statement, and would be happy to have a wee wager with anyone who differs.

by **maypaxvobiscum** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 4:54 am

but Lando if we were to go by the same examples you're using about how Mourinho already took over a side Mancini built, wouldnt it mean Scolari is a poorer manager then Mourinho as he did inherit a good side himself. as Saint has mentioned in another thread, its not just about taking over a good side, you need to be a good manager.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:09 am

bigmick wrote:To be honest I've never really liked him as a person, but have rated in particular his man mangement skills. When I actually sat down and wrote the thread starter, he is a better football manager than I gave him credit for. His achievement at Chelsea to come in and instantly stick 16 points on top of Ranieri's total when he came second to Arsenal (now that is what I CALL progress) is a truly staggering achievement. It matters not that he spent money, to acquire the players and get them to gel instantly, to blend and to adapt to the Premiership upon arrival is a truly amazing achievement.

Similarly, when you look at him winning the UEFA Cup followed by the Champions League the following season with Porto, it gives lie to Lando's assessment.

He is a manager and a person who polarises opinion. In mine, if we were to be looking for a manager and he was available, we should absolutely move heaven and earth to get him. Put it this way, If Chelsea get him back next season they'll go very very close, and if Man City get him they'll finish in the top four. I have absolutely no doubts whatsoever about either statement, and would be happy to have a wee wager with anyone who differs.

What is the point in starting a topic where you ask a question if you've already decided the answer?

What you are basically saying is that Moris is fantastico because he made the most expensive group of players in the World win a league where the competition wasn't as strong as it could have been. You add to this by referring to the UEFA and Champions' League successes he managed with an inherited squad.

Now, if Liverpool won it DESPITE Rafa, as you have intimated before, surely a squad lacking in any Moris influence whatsoever won it without HIS influence?

You need only look at Chelsea's results against Liverpool in the Champions' League to see that he was inferior to Rafa. Common sense shows this, as, despite a much better team, we f*cked them over.

The league matches had so many contentious issues where decisions went incorrectly to the chav b*stards, that you cannot realistically count them.

Moris is a nothing manager who relies completely on his arrogant ramblings and inherited squads to achieve anything.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:13 am

maypaxvobiscum wrote:but Lando if we were to go by the same examples you're using about how Mourinho already took over a side Mancini built, wouldnt it mean Scolari is a poorer manager then Mourinho as he did inherit a good side himself. as Saint has mentioned in another thread, its not just about taking over a good side, you need to be a good manager.

The team Scholari inherited is nothing like the one Moris won the titles with. The sheer fact is that I don't particularly rate "Big Phil", I just have more time for a manager who shows humility, rather than self-obsessed arrogance.

Moris is a militant, who will leave yoru club in disarray when he has had enough of it.

He's like a fat kid in a sweet shop - keen as mustard until he's had his fill, then he'll vomit everywhere.

by **bigmick** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:19 am

Lando_Griffin wrote:
bigmick wrote:To be honest I've never really liked him as a person, but have rated in particular his man mangement skills. When I actually sat down and wrote the thread starter, he is a better football manager than I gave him credit for. His achievement at Chelsea to come in and instantly stick 16 points on top of Ranieri's total when he came second to Arsenal (now that is what I CALL progress) is a truly staggering achievement. It matters not that he spent money, to acquire the players and get them to gel instantly, to blend and to adapt to the Premiership upon arrival is a truly amazing achievement.

Similarly, when you look at him winning the UEFA Cup followed by the Champions League the following season with Porto, it gives lie to Lando's assessment.

He is a manager and a person who polarises opinion. In mine, if we were to be looking for a manager and he was available, we should absolutely move heaven and earth to get him. Put it this way, If Chelsea get him back next season they'll go very very close, and if Man City get him they'll finish in the top four. I have absolutely no doubts whatsoever about either statement, and would be happy to have a wee wager with anyone who differs.

What is the point in starting a topic where you ask a question if you've already decided the answer?

What you are basically saying is that Moris is fantastico because he made the most expensive group of players in the World win a league where the competition wasn't as strong as it could have been. You add to this by referring to the UEFA and Champions' League successes he managed with an inherited squad.

Now, if Liverpool won it DESPITE Rafa, as you have intimated before, surely a squad lacking in any Moris influence whatsoever won it without HIS influence?

You need only look at Chelsea's results against Liverpool in the Champions' League to see that he was inferior to Rafa. Common sense shows this, as, despite a much better team, we f*cked them over.

The league matches had so many contentious issues where decisions went incorrectly to the chav b*stards, that you cannot realistically count them.

Moris is a nothing manager who relies completely on his arrogant ramblings and inherited squads to achieve anything.

Lets have a look line by line.

What is the point of starting a topic with a question if I've already decided the answer

What, am I not allowed to have an opinion myself then? The question at the start of the topic is so people can give their own opinion as you are. My opinion is surely valid though. Strange one that, but moving on.

On the Liverpool won the Champions League DESPITE Rafa, well I've simply never said that. I don't even believe it to be the case. I don't of course buy into the tactical genius theory which saw us going 3-0 down in the first half, but we never won it despite rafa, that's just being silly.

As for Liverpools results against Chelsea showing Mourinho is inferior to Rafa, I don't think so. I think those results show that rafa is an excellent manager over two legs, but I wouldn't be jumping to conclusions. Does last seasons result prove Avram Grant is a better manager than Rafa, or Mourinho's tendency to win every league match against us not matter? NO, I don't agree with that one either I'm afraid.

Ah and I see you've already addressed their league wins over us. They were down to referees, bad luck and the like. OK then we don't agree on anything whatsoever

.

Sill, on this subject I'm not totally surprised.

by **Lando_Griffin** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:32 am

bigmick wrote:
Lando_Griffin wrote:
bigmick wrote:To be honest I've never really liked him as a person, but have rated in particular his man mangement skills. When I actually sat down and wrote the thread starter, he is a better football manager than I gave him credit for. His achievement at Chelsea to come in and instantly stick 16 points on top of Ranieri's total when he came second to Arsenal (now that is what I CALL progress) is a truly staggering achievement. It matters not that he spent money, to acquire the players and get them to gel instantly, to blend and to adapt to the Premiership upon arrival is a truly amazing achievement.

Similarly, when you look at him winning the UEFA Cup followed by the Champions League the following season with Porto, it gives lie to Lando's assessment.

He is a manager and a person who polarises opinion. In mine, if we were to be looking for a manager and he was available, we should absolutely move heaven and earth to get him. Put it this way, If Chelsea get him back next season they'll go very very close, and if Man City get him they'll finish in the top four. I have absolutely no doubts whatsoever about either statement, and would be happy to have a wee wager with anyone who differs.

What is the point in starting a topic where you ask a question if you've already decided the answer?

What you are basically saying is that Moris is fantastico because he made the most expensive group of players in the World win a league where the competition wasn't as strong as it could have been. You add to this by referring to the UEFA and Champions' League successes he managed with an inherited squad.

Now, if Liverpool won it DESPITE Rafa, as you have intimated before, surely a squad lacking in any Moris influence whatsoever won it without HIS influence?

You need only look at Chelsea's results against Liverpool in the Champions' League to see that he was inferior to Rafa. Common sense shows this, as, despite a much better team, we f*cked them over.

The league matches had so many contentious issues where decisions went incorrectly to the chav b*stards, that you cannot realistically count them.

Moris is a nothing manager who relies completely on his arrogant ramblings and inherited squads to achieve anything.

Lets have a look line by line.

What is the point of starting a topic with a question if I've already decided the answer What, am I not allowed to have an opinion myself then? The question at the start of the topic is so people can give their own opinion as you are. My opinion is surely valid though. Strange one that, but moving on.

On the Liverpool won the Champions League DESPITE Rafa, well I've simply never said that. I don't even believe it to be the case. I don't of course buy into the tactical genius theory which saw us going 3-0 down in the first half, but we never won it despite rafa, that's just being silly.

As for Liverpools results against Chelsea showing Mourinho is inferior to Rafa, I don't think so. I think those results show that rafa is an excellent manager over two legs, but I wouldn't be jumping to conclusions. Does last seasons result prove Avram Grant is a better manager than Rafa, or Mourinho's tendency to win every league match against us not matter? NO, I don't agree with that one either I'm afraid.

Ah and I see you've already addressed their league wins over us. They were down to referees, bad luck and the like. OK then we don't agree on anything whatsoever .

Sill, on this subject I'm not totally surprised.

Tell you what - when you've finished with the attempted arrogance - give me an example of Moris' tactical ability, and I will counter it. Until then, a pathetic round of "I like the tanned rogue's tangerine-tinted Tom-foolery - let's all suck his orange balls" doesn't appeal to me. I have more about me than to start waxing lyrical about one of the biggest scumbags in recent times.

When you actually come up with specific examples of his ability to alter games and outwit opponents, rather than say "well, he won this and this with an inherited squad", I'll talk football.

'til then - I'll sit back and rip the "man" (if he can be referred to as that) apart personally, as he deserves everything he gets, the slimy tw*t.

by **maypaxvobiscum** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 5:58 am

Lando_Griffin wrote:
maypaxvobiscum wrote:but Lando if we were to go by the same examples you're using about how Mourinho already took over a side Mancini built, wouldnt it mean Scolari is a poorer manager then Mourinho as he did inherit a good side himself. as Saint has mentioned in another thread, its not just about taking over a good side, you need to be a good manager.

The team Scholari inherited is nothing like the one Moris won the titles with. The sheer fact is that I don't particularly rate "Big Phil", I just have more time for a manager who shows humility, rather than self-obsessed arrogance.

Moris is a militant, who will leave yoru club in disarray when he has had enough of it.

He's like a fat kid in a sweet shop - keen as mustard until he's had his fill, then he'll vomit everywhere.

CURRENT CHELSEA TEAM:
Petr Cech
Branislav Ivanovich
Ashley Cole
Michael Essien
Ricardo Carvalho
Frank Lampard
Franco Di Santo
Joe Cole
Didier Drogba
John Mikel Obi
Michael Ballack
Florent Malouda
José Bosingwa
Ricardo Quaresma
Paulo Ferreira
Deco
Salomon Kalou
John Terry
Mineiro
Rhys Taylor
Alex
Juliano Belletti
Nicolas Anelka
Henrique Hilário
Michael Mancienne
Miroslav Stoch
Claudio Pizarro
Wayne Bridge (left this season)
Carlo Cudicini (left this season)

FORMER PLAYERS UNDER JOSE:
Carlo Cudicini
William Gallas
Eidur Gudjohnsen
Jiri Jarosik
Robert Huth
Glen Johnson
Mateja Kezman
Maniche
Scott Parker
Alexey Smertin

looking at it, Gallas was replaced by Cole.
Smertin, Jarosik and Parker couldnt dislodge Malalele, Lampard and Essien. the trio hardly played.
Gudjohnsen and Kezman has been replaced by Anelka and Di Santo who IMO are far better players. (i feel Di Santo has amazing aerial ability!)
Maniche lasted just one season. Ballack and Mikel were ready made replacements.

all in all, Luis had a far better team. if i am missing some players please point it out as Chelsea's website doesnt happen to have a ''history'' section and i had to rely on wiki

by **bigmick** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:38 am

In fairness to Scholari (whio I think it is ridiculous to sack after 7 months) I don't think he has got anywhere near as good nor as hungry a team as Mourinho has. Drogba and Carvallio are both nowhere near the players they were under Mourinho. The striker looks like he wants away, while the defnder may just have gone over the top it's hard to tell.

Coming back briefly to Lando's point about tactical awareness, I wouldn't necessarily put Mourinho on the same elvel as Benitez. Equally, i think althoguh he bought well his buys were sometimes suspect, which until this closed season where we royally fecked it up Rafa hs been largely solid if not spectacular. The way he wins any comparison hands down is in the fact that he knows how to get people to play together and produce ona consistent basis. Perhaps his percieved lack of tactical finery means he doesn't get bogged down too much with intricacies, perhaps he doesn't buy into the rotation, the horses for courses, the delayed gazelles and the like because he believes the game is simpler than that. Who knows? Certainly not me, but I remember them rolling everyone over (including us many times) with ruthless efficiency in the league. It didn't take Mourinho five years to "get the hang" of the Premiership, it took five minutes.

I would also go back from a tactical point of view to the 4-5-1 which was quite innovative, both in the way they attacked and defended. Truth be told our set-up now is very much a derivative of it particularly from a defensive point of view, so he's not any mug I'm fairly assured of that. You don't win the Champions League with Porto if you don't understand tactics.

by **account deleted by request** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 7:32 am

I think we may find out a little more about Mourinho in the next round of the CL when Inter play the mancs. I would still fancy the mancs, but I wouldn't be surprised if the games are pretty close. I just think all the Italian clubs have a bit of an inferiority complex against the mancs. It would take something "special" for Inter to win.

Mourinho seems to have the knack of taking over a team and running with it, rather than the usual stutter that most managers have while they build their "OWN" squad and team.

For example when he joined Chelsea he only brought in 4 players in his first season while 14 players left. If nothing else he must have saved a bit on wages.

5 CUPS in 3 years is not a bad record anyway, and one Chelsea are unlikely to see again.

by **bigmick** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:55 am

s@int wrote:I think we may find out a little more about Mourinho in the next round of the CL when Inter play the mancs. I would still fancy the mancs, but I wouldn't be surprised if the games are pretty close. I just think all the Italian clubs have a bit of an inferiority complex against the mancs. It would take something "special" for Inter to win.

Mourinho seems to have the knack of taking over a team and running with it, rather than the usual stutter that most managers have while they build their "OWN" squad and team.

For example when he joined Chelsea he only brought in 4 players in his first season while 14 players left. If nothing else he must have saved a bit on wages.

5 CUPS in 3 years is not a bad record anyway, and one Chelsea are unlikely to see again.

Now that's an intersting stat S@int that 4 players in, 14 players out. Who were the four? Drogba, Carvallio, Ferrera and who else? Tiaco maybe?

I remember him saying that he didn't want a squad of more than 22 players I think as he said it was a recipe for disaffection within the camp. Certainly an interesting contrast to the way some managers do it. I didn't inlcude the cup successes when I was talking about him as it was really his league achievements which interested me. They did beat some decent teams in some of those finals though as I remember, and once again I'm not sure the results of those tie in with the "tactical imbecile" theory.

One thing about him though, very much like our current manager he does provoke a wide spectrum of opinions.

by **GYBS** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:01 am

Maureen

Porto - Won title there in a poor league , Won UEFA Cup against Celtic by diving all over the place but a talented team.
CL - Did well to win and got through couple of games by skin of their teeth but ended up beating monaco in a
Poor final

Chelsea - Took over a very good squad that should of won the CL the year before but for Raneri having a mental moment . Added the cheap Signings of Drogba ,Carvhalo Essien to the list and won two titles plus a Leagure cup but were beaten twice in three years by Liverpool in CL semi .

Inter - Took over a team that were already crusing to title wins in previous seasons and hasnt done much different there .

Overall think he is a decent manager but not as good as some think - He had a very good bunch of talented people at Porto and won a poor CL. At chelsea he was able to but whoever he wanted and at Inter he got another bunch of taalented guys .

How would he fair if he had to build a squad up from scratch without having billions to spend. ?

That is without mentioning his personality which is very very arrogant beyond belief. And as for getting on with our owners ? well can neve reve see that working .

Liverpool FC Forum

Jose mourinho. - Miracle or myth.

Who is online