The Mourinho Thread

[Miki-Liki 405]

yes,Mourinho is a genius.

Nah, he's just a coach.

[Emir 105]

Mourinho suits Chelsea and Chelsea suits Mourinho. He should and hopefully will be our manager, most important thing is sticking to your manager in the bad days.

[Blue Armour 4,158]

Very misleading. No way Mourinho and Pellergini are better than Ferguson. Ferguson played 800+ games in the league, that's why his winning percentage is lower. False stuff from BBC. Doing that so they can spark arguments on Facebook and Twitter.

EDIT: Mancini better than Wenger in PL history? Really? I hate Arsenal but that is so dumb.

They should have done this by the number of trophies they won, and if there's a tie between any THEN the number of wins.

Yes, as is with anything you can't judge quality by one factor alone, but what it does highlight is Mourinho's strong point.

Basically what it should teach is that you shouldn't be so quick to get rid one of the strongest assets you possess.

Anyway, the one thing I really liked about that video anyway was seeing how many Chelsea and ex-Chelsea managers made up the list...

[LDN Blue 7,903]

Lmao, this place would certainly be interesting if we didn't qualify for the Champions League

[Rmpr 8,977]

Lmao, this place would certainly be interesting if we didn't qualify for the Champions League

By interesting do you mean: new profiles being created just to insult everyone at the club, the same old moaners singing victory songs despite whats best for Chelsea, members reporting each one left and right, even more rumours about Jose/players leaving, etc? All of that culminating in absurd amounts of bullshit posts for the glorious TC history?

[oxfordblues 299]

Very misleading. No way Mourinho and Pellergini are better than Ferguson. Ferguson played 800+ games in the league, that's why his winning percentage is lower. False stuff from BBC. Doing that so they can spark arguments on Facebook and Twitter.

EDIT: Mancini better than Wenger in PL history? Really? I hate Arsenal but that is so dumb.

They should have done this by the number of trophies they won, and if there's a tie between any THEN the number of wins.

its done on percentage

[Essien19 1,415]

No it doesn't really highlight Mourinho's strong point as it's an unfair comparison. And it's laughable that you think Jose and Manuel are better in Sir Alex. Laughable.

Again Sir Alex played 800 games in the league, while Jose and Manuel played less than 300. If Pep comes to the league and wins his first 8/10 games, he's suddenly the best PL manager in history right??? Because that's what this thing is.

And nobody in this planet bar Mourinho fanboys/shit media to gain more clicks would look at who is the best manager from this perspective.

It's the trophies won (and always has been until this article showed up to majorly favour Jose), not win percentage.

In 27 years 13 Championships.

Mourinho: 5 seasons 3 Championships.

Jose Mourinho isn't doing so bad, is he?!

I don't want to say who is the best, they all are very good managers.

Ferguson did it time and time again, kudos to him, but his European record isn't that good so every person has his weak spot.

The thing which is laughable here (imo) is that some people call their own people fanboys just because they like their manager.

Everyone who doesn't get in line is just a fanboy or the media is shit, what about freedom of opinion?!

[Muzchap 8,966]

In 27 years 13 Championships.

Mourinho: 5 seasons 3 Championships.

Jose Mourinho isn't doing so bad, is he?!

I don't want to say who is the best, they all are very good managers.

Ferguson did it time and time again, kudos to him, but his European record isn't that good so every person has his weak spot.

The thing which is laughable here (imo) is that some people call their own people fanboys just because they like their manager.

Everyone who doesn't get in line is just a fanboy or the media is shit, what about freedom of opinion?!

Also you need to remember that English clubs were banned for a part of Fergies reign... So that could skew the results slightly and it was in an era without as much technology and advancement - so it really was going into the unknown back then

[MihaiM24 156]

How about Manuel?

2 seasons, 1 PL trophy. And Manuel's on his way to his 2nd PL trophy.

Until Mourinho matches Ferguson with the trophy count, he's no way better than Ferguson.

I'm not saying Jose is bad, and I agree Jose is one of PL's best managers of all time, but I'm saying it's ridiculous to say Jose is better than Sir Alex at this point of time. Sir Alex has a clear distance between all other PL managers at the moment.

His European record is bad, and Jose edges him there I agree but we are not talking about who's the best CL manager in history here.

The reason I'm calling out on the fanboys because there shouldn't be ANY doubt that who is the best PL manager of all time. You can have your own opinion, that because Jose was a Chelsea manager and won the most trophies with us, his your favourite manager.

But to say he's the best PL manager in history, even Jose himself will disagree with you.

How can I be serious with you if you use win percentage to determine who's the best ever PL manager? Mourinho currently holds the best PL win percentage of all time, that's it. You don't win PLs by having the greatest win percentage.

Real Madrid had the best win percentage in our 2012 CL. Barca has the best win percentage in the past 3 years. Do any of us care?

compare the number of seasons between SAF and Jose first and after that the trophy count

[Essien19 1,415]

Also you need to remember that English clubs were banned for a part of Fergies reign... So that could skew the results slightly and it was in an era without as much technology and advancement - so it really was going into the unknown back then

What i like about Ferguson is his approach to the game. It's what the likes of Scholes and Gary Neville did criticise in their modern days game;

simply the lack of attacking.

Although Ferguson had more or less job security he was never ever afraid to think outside the box, he adapted quickly,

for example to Chelsea back in the day. His lineups had changed over the years.

His Manchester side with Ronaldo was something else.

But some firms believe that only young people can be creative....

Maybe Ferguson was sometimes too ruthless with his players, i think Berbatov could have been handedly differently, especially leaving him out against Barcelona, that was just unfair, imo.

That's where Mourinho and he differ, of course in their approach too, but Mourinho would never do that before such a big game.

I think Mourinho is closer to his players and i respect that.

They both handle the media perfectly, i like the evaluation of the officials too, sometimes pure comedy, but that's just my two cents worth.

How about Manuel?

2 seasons, 1 PL trophy. And Manuel's on his way to his 2nd PL trophy.

Until Mourinho matches Ferguson with the trophy count, he's no way better than Ferguson.

I'm not saying Jose is bad, and I agree Jose is one of PL's best managers of all time, but I'm saying it's ridiculous to say Jose is better than Sir Alex at this point of time. Sir Alex has a clear distance between all other PL managers at the moment.

His European record is bad, and Jose edges him there I agree but we are not talking about who's the best CL manager in history here.

The reason I'm calling out on the fanboys because there shouldn't be ANY doubt that who is the best PL manager of all time. You can have your own opinion, that because Jose was a Chelsea manager and won the most trophies with us, his your favourite manager.

But to say he's the best PL manager in history, even Jose himself will disagree with you.

How can I be serious with you if you use win percentage to determine who's the best ever PL manager? Mourinho currently holds the best PL win percentage of all time, that's it. You don't win PLs by having the greatest win percentage.

Real Madrid had the best win percentage in our 2012 CL. Barca has the best win percentage in the past 3 years. Do any of us care?

I think it's impossible for Mourinho to reach Ferguson's heights, but he has already admitted to it and there is not shame in it, imo.

I don't think you need to be so serious about it, most people like the thought that it's the best deal possible.

For me, Mourinho is part of the Chelsea family and sometimes we all go over the line, Real Madrid backs Cristiano every time for Ballon d'Or,

no matter what. That's the spirit, yes, you have made your valid points, maybe more logical, but it's a Chelsea community, so what you do expect?

Everyone's girlfriend is the most beautiful in the world, that's what it is.

You win some, you lose some, but if you win more and more instead of losing, you don't need to be numbers nerd that a future crowning is becoming more and more a possibility.

So i do think that the best PL win percentage of all time has its use.

At the end of the day there is no winner her, imo.

Football is about emotions and in some cases it's difficult to overcome them.

You call some of us "Mourinho fanboys" i feel some frustration, so even yourself aren't that logical all the time,

instead of staying with the arguments, you get emotional attached and choose a different path (no harm meant).

But that's what happens in football, everything gets personal, imo.

[Essien19 1,415]

Maybe I was being a bit too serious about it, but I just wanted to make it clear BBC is only doing that for clicks (If you live outside the UK, you'll see ads on the website) and Facebook chatter to gain popularity.

Win percentage is a great achievement, and I do agree it have its use, but at the end of the day, that's not what the PL's all about. It's part of it sure, but that is not the main goal.

Let's flip this the other side. Let's say BBC posts "The Best PL Managers in History" but based on the undefeated streak. Arsene Wenger will be #1, therefore the best PL manager of all time. Would you agree? Because win percentage stat is just as big as this undefeated streak stat.

Again, these are wonderful achievements to have. But trophy count will always be superior to these achievements as it shows how many times you finished the league first place. We do bus parades, boast, have parties for getting the trophies. I'm just trying to make my point here.

This is a Chelsea community yes. We are going to have biased opinions, just like we can go to Arsenal-Mania and they have biased opinions too.

And yes, Mourinho having the best win percentage is a superb achievement and should not be overlooked. But for him to be the best PL manager in history based on that is just a weird examination. They should have worded it "Top 10 best PL managers based on win percentage"

P.S - Also I apologise for mentioning Mourinho fanboys. I was angry at the time.

It's alright mate, finally we have reached an agreement.

Yes, BBC didn't do it for the football, they did it for the clicks what means in the end more money.

Therefore they didn't include all the necessary numbers. It's your right to point the finger.

Again, these are wonderful achievements to have. But trophy count will always be superior to these achievements as it shows how many times you finished the league first place. We do bus parades, boast, have parties for getting the trophies. I'm just trying to make my point here.

I fully agree with this.

Some users however won't.

I heard trophies are just for tourists and for the museum, one can look up low scoring results on the internet and so on.

But that's how it is, everyone has his own idea about the perfect game.

Regards

[bellion 170]

The main reason for me why Mourinho will never reach the heights of Ferguson is due to his constant neglect of home grown youth players.

The class of '92 will always be a legendary team and it was all due to Fergie's faith and management ability of his young players.

[Rhino's Skin 972]

Yes I know. But the name of the video is called 'The top PL managers in history' and it's ranked. And at first, like a normal person would think this is going to be based on trophies won, not win percentage.

Manuel is 2nd place, only won 1 PL trophy so far and he's already better than Sir Alex and even Wenger? Can you say that in a straight face?

You can have the most wins in the season. But if you don't win the league that season, nobody gives a shit. That's what I'm saying here.

Win percentage is a weird way to examine which manager is better. As I said in the previous post, Pep can take over a club, win 8/10 games and he's the best. In fact, he only needs to win his first game!! 100% win percentage!

Ray Wilkins should be top

[Rhino's Skin 972]

The main reason for me why Mourinho will never reach the heights of Ferguson is due to his constant neglect of home grown youth players.

The class of '92 will always be a legendary team and it was all due to Fergie's faith and management ability of his young players.

but since then in the PL it has never happened again to that scale and success not even by Ferguson.

That was a one off which served them well for several years but he still needed to spend a lot as well to compliment them.

The game has changed since then with revenue and trophies more important than bringing through loads of youth

[Fulham Broadway 16,386]

Wee Pat Nevin was on R5 saying such is the demand of owners of top clubs, Chelsea in particular, there is never a chance to nurture and play 'da yoof'.

Its nothing to do with Mourinho he said, just the demands of instant success of big business

[Laylabelle 9,292]

Wee Pat Nevin was on R5 saying such is the demand of owners of top clubs, Chelsea in particular, there is never a chance to nurture and play 'da yoof'.

Its nothing to do with Mourinho he said, just the demands of instant success of big business

Which is what he said years and years back.Would happily play youth,develop players and maybe not win trophies in that period but cause of demands to win didnt feel he could..something along those lines.Was when everyone was going on about Arsenal in the Carling Cup that year we won

[Fulham Broadway 16,386]

Which is what he said years and years back.Would happily play youth,develop players and maybe not win trophies in that period but cause of demands to win didnt feel he could..something along those lines.Was when everyone was going on about Arsenal in the Carling Cup that year we won

Am sure a lot of fans have the same romantic notion of youth development and maybe forfeit silverware for a while.

The bitter reality is that this would never happen. Chelsea Football Club is first and foremost a business to make profit. Everything else is secondary and periphery. I wish people would understand this instead of the 'mourinho is such a 'orrible git for not playing josh, ruben, insert any youth player here[............]

[Jase 43,479]

Wee Pat Nevin was on R5 saying such is the demand of owners of top clubs, Chelsea in particular, there is never a chance to nurture and play 'da yoof'.

Its nothing to do with Mourinho he said, just the demands of instant success of big business

But doesn't Roman want to see the youth players being integrated as well? We want success yes but if the manager integrates some of the youth players, then I'm sure Roman would give some leeway if we don't win things. And it's not like he and the fans are asking Mourinho to throw in say 10 youth players into the starting XI but 2-3 certainly won't hurt. Even Mourinho said himself last year that if he doesn't bring through some youth players, then he would have failed and if he or we in general don't do that, we might as well just close the academy.