The Mourinho Thread

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Some people here are being so ridiculous and childish to use this "not-so-successful" season of Mourinho's as a leverage to belittle his ability and achievements.

Mourinho led Porto to win Champions League, Porto for god sake! PORTO!

Mourinho led Chelsea to win Premier League after freaking 50 years! Twice in a row!

Mourinho led an unbelievably average Inter to win Champions League!

Can anybody else do that? If you can't find another one then shut the hell up and be grateful he is coming home!

He is only human, not freaking God, of course he can fail, a football manager is not like a bloody FIFA player that controls a whole team's faith all alone by a controller! His so-called failure in Madrid takes away nothing from him. I don't know why he doesn't get along with Madrid's Mr.BIGs and I simply don't give a damn, maybe they are jealous of Mourinho's handsomeness? or maybe they are too much an ego to be replaced by someone actually better? As a Chelsea fan I don't care about what's going on in Madrid, I only know Mourinho was loved at Porto, was loved at Inter, and most importantly he was loved at Chelsea! Fans worship him and players respect him, what else you need ffs.

Everybody has the possibility to fail in any team, but for Chelsea, Mourinho is our best bet, argue with that!

I will argue with that. Winning with Porto was an incredible achievement even if was in a very poor CL year. After that, his achievements have been much more mpdest and overall, he has done no better than should have been expected. He won with Chelsea with a team that out-spent everyone else in the Premier League about 10-1. He inherited a team that finished second and got to the semi-finals of the CL and had already players like Lampard, Terry, Gudjohnssson, Makalele, etc..He wasn't taking the 1987 Chelsea side to the promised land, he was taking the deepest, probably the most talented, and by far the most expensive squad there. Mourinho's performance at Chelsea was about what should have been expected. In 4 years, we won 2 Premier League titles, a few domestic Cups, and didn't get past the semi-finals in the CL. We got worse every year under Mourinho so by the time he got fired, we were playing awfully despite having an insanely expensive and talented side. People want to think of Mourinho getting fired as a clash of cultures, but it was mostly due to the team sucking under him at the end. We were significantly better under Avram Grant than we were under Mourinho's last while and Grant did nothing. This was not like RDM or AVb where we were losing to worse teams with imbalanced squads, this was a a squad that was losing to poorer teams with a bevy of world-class players like Makalele, Carvalho, Lampard, Terry, Cech, Essien, and Cole most of whom were at their peaks.

At Inter, the squad had won three straight Seria A titles before Mourinho got there so calling them mediocre is patently ridiculous. Like at Chelsea (and even at Porto), Mourinho was once again coaching for the biggest spending team in the league. The CL win has excellent, but it was not shocking. They were won of the best teams in Europe. At Madrid, his reign was an abject failure. Despite being once again, in charge of the highest spending club, Madrid only won 3 trophies in 3 years, only one of which was a major trophy, which is the worst haul in the history of the club for a manager who has been there that long. Post-Porto, he has managed top European clubs for 9 years and made and won 1 CL. That's not remarkable, it's actually not particularly good. If you gave a random manager 9 years with the squads Mourinho had at Chelsea, Inter, and Madrid, you'd still expect more European success. If he comes back to Chelsea, he will once again be coming back to what will likely be the highest spending club in the league. Yes, he'll likely have success, but like everywhere post-Porto, that success is based enormously on him choosing a team where success is almost inevitable.

He's a fine manager, but the regard that many Chelsea fans for him is so insanely over-inflated based on what he's actually accomplished. People also forget the negatives and there are negatives. The boring football (and this is not Greece at the Euros, this is taking the most talented team in the world and making them play super-defensively), the ego circus, the sore losing, etc...I just don't get the obsession or the desire to go back there.

[Waterfall 893]

"Boring football" argument bores me. I miss not having to worry about conceding late goals. We would have never dropped points like we did against Reading, Southampton, Liverpool and Tottenham with Jose. Honestly if you hear people talk, you would think we are tactically outplaying other teams right now when we are just relying on individual brilliance of likes of Mata, Hazard and Lamps. By the way, this is a different team to what he had 6-7 years ago. He's a lot more adaptable than many think. It's no coincidence that he's won 4 different leagues.

[English Freak 456]

I will argue with that. Winning with Porto was an incredible achievement even if was in a very poor CL year. After that, his achievements have been much more mpdest and overall, he has done no better than should have been expected. He won with Chelsea with a team that out-spent everyone else in the Premier League about 10-1. He inherited a team that finished second and got to the semi-finals of the CL and had already players like Lampard, Terry, Gudjohnssson, Makalele, etc..He wasn't taking the 1987 Chelsea side to the promised land, he was taking the deepest, probably the most talented, and by far the most expensive squad there. Mourinho's performance at Chelsea was about what should have been expected. In 4 years, we won 2 Premier League titles, a few domestic Cups, and didn't get past the semi-finals in the CL. We got worse every year under Mourinho so by the time he got fired, we were playing awfully despite having an insanely expensive and talented side. People want to think of Mourinho getting fired as a clash of cultures, but it was mostly due to the team sucking under him at the end. We were significantly better under Avram Grant than we were under Mourinho's last while and Grant did nothing. This was not like RDM or AVb where we were losing to worse teams with imbalanced squads, this was a a squad that was losing to poorer teams with a bevy of world-class players like Makalele, Carvalho, Lampard, Terry, Cech, Essien, and Cole most of whom were at their peaks.

At Inter, the squad had won three straight Seria A titles before Mourinho got there so calling them mediocre is patently ridiculous. Like at Chelsea (and even at Porto), Mourinho was once again coaching for the biggest spending team in the league. The CL win has excellent, but it was not shocking. They were won of the best teams in Europe. At Madrid, his reign was an abject failure. Despite being once again, in charge of the highest spending club, Madrid only won 3 trophies in 3 years, only one of which was a major trophy, which is the worst haul in the history of the club for a manager who has been there that long. Post-Porto, he has managed top European clubs for 9 years and made and won 1 CL. That's not remarkable, it's actually not particularly good. If you gave a random manager 9 years with the squads Mourinho had at Chelsea, Inter, and Madrid, you'd still expect more European success. If he comes back to Chelsea, he will once again be coming back to what will likely be the highest spending club in the league. Yes, he'll likely have success, but like everywhere post-Porto, that success is based enormously on him choosing a team where success is almost inevitable.

He's a fine manager, but the regard that many Chelsea fans for him is so insanely over-inflated based on what he's actually accomplished. People also forget the negatives and there are negatives. The boring football (and this is not Greece at the Euros, this is taking the most talented team in the world and making them play super-defensively), the ego circus, the sore losing, etc...I just don't get the obsession or the desire to go back there.

Every manager has positives and negatives. Mourinho is probably the only top-class manager available at the end of this season.

[Ainsley Harriott 2,732]

it was a joke klopp, pep, jupp, and even Mancini and Benitez are higher than Mou at this point. The guy had the most balanced team in Spain and still didn't win jack s00t.

Read this scrolling trough ESPN comments... Wtf

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Every manager has positives and negatives. Mourinho is probably the only top-class manager available at the end of this season.

I get that. I'm not against Mourinho coming, but he's not a genius or a saviour. He's a solid manager who will hopefully get time to implement a stable system.

[Rmpr 8,977]

I will argue with that. Winning with Porto was an incredible achievement even if was in a very poor CL year. After that, his achievements have been much more mpdest and overall, he has done no better than should have been expected. He won with Chelsea with a team that out-spent everyone else in the Premier League about 10-1. He inherited a team that finished second and got to the semi-finals of the CL and had already players like Lampard, Terry, Gudjohnssson, Makalele, etc..He wasn't taking the 1987 Chelsea side to the promised land, he was taking the deepest, probably the most talented, and by far the most expensive squad there. Mourinho's performance at Chelsea was about what should have been expected. In 4 years, we won 2 Premier League titles, a few domestic Cups, and didn't get past the semi-finals in the CL. We got worse every year under Mourinho so by the time he got fired, we were playing awfully despite having an insanely expensive and talented side. People want to think of Mourinho getting fired as a clash of cultures, but it was mostly due to the team sucking under him at the end. We were significantly better under Avram Grant than we were under Mourinho's last while and Grant did nothing. This was not like RDM or AVb where we were losing to worse teams with imbalanced squads, this was a a squad that was losing to poorer teams with a bevy of world-class players like Makalele, Carvalho, Lampard, Terry, Cech, Essien, and Cole most of whom were at their peaks.

At Inter, the squad had won three straight Seria A titles before Mourinho got there so calling them mediocre is patently ridiculous. Like at Chelsea (and even at Porto), Mourinho was once again coaching for the biggest spending team in the league. The CL win has excellent, but it was not shocking. They were won of the best teams in Europe. At Madrid, his reign was an abject failure. Despite being once again, in charge of the highest spending club, Madrid only won 3 trophies in 3 years, only one of which was a major trophy, which is the worst haul in the history of the club for a manager who has been there that long. Post-Porto, he has managed top European clubs for 9 years and made and won 1 CL. That's not remarkable, it's actually not particularly good. If you gave a random manager 9 years with the squads Mourinho had at Chelsea, Inter, and Madrid, you'd still expect more European success. If he comes back to Chelsea, he will once again be coming back to what will likely be the highest spending club in the league. Yes, he'll likely have success, but like everywhere post-Porto, that success is based enormously on him choosing a team where success is almost inevitable.

He's a fine manager, but the regard that many Chelsea fans for him is so insanely over-inflated based on what he's actually accomplished. People also forget the negatives and there are negatives. The boring football (and this is not Greece at the Euros, this is taking the most talented team in the world and making them play super-defensively), the ego circus, the sore losing, etc...I just don't get the obsession or the desire to go back there.

This is one overly pessimistic view on him, just like the immature fanboys have an overly optimistic view on him!

Not so down bellow and not so up above either...

[Waterfall 893]

I get that. I'm not against Mourinho coming, but he's not a genius or a saviour. He's a solid manager who will hopefully get time to implement a stable system.

He may not be the saviour we want/need, but if he's not a genius, I don't know who he is.

[Ronaldo 28]

I will argue with that. Winning with Porto was an incredible achievement even if was in a very poor CL year. After that, his achievements have been much more mpdest and overall, he has done no better than should have been expected. He won with Chelsea with a team that out-spent everyone else in the Premier League about 10-1. He inherited a team that finished second and got to the semi-finals of the CL and had already players like Lampard, Terry, Gudjohnssson, Makalele, etc..He wasn't taking the 1987 Chelsea side to the promised land, he was taking the deepest, probably the most talented, and by far the most expensive squad there. Mourinho's performance at Chelsea was about what should have been expected. In 4 years, we won 2 Premier League titles, a few domestic Cups, and didn't get past the semi-finals in the CL. We got worse every year under Mourinho so by the time he got fired, we were playing awfully despite having an insanely expensive and talented side. People want to think of Mourinho getting fired as a clash of cultures, but it was mostly due to the team sucking under him at the end. We were significantly better under Avram Grant than we were under Mourinho's last while and Grant did nothing. This was not like RDM or AVb where we were losing to worse teams with imbalanced squads, this was a a squad that was losing to poorer teams with a bevy of world-class players like Makalele, Carvalho, Lampard, Terry, Cech, Essien, and Cole most of whom were at their peaks.

At Inter, the squad had won three straight Seria A titles before Mourinho got there so calling them mediocre is patently ridiculous. Like at Chelsea (and even at Porto), Mourinho was once again coaching for the biggest spending team in the league. The CL win has excellent, but it was not shocking. They were won of the best teams in Europe. At Madrid, his reign was an abject failure. Despite being once again, in charge of the highest spending club, Madrid only won 3 trophies in 3 years, only one of which was a major trophy, which is the worst haul in the history of the club for a manager who has been there that long. Post-Porto, he has managed top European clubs for 9 years and made and won 1 CL. That's not remarkable, it's actually not particularly good. If you gave a random manager 9 years with the squads Mourinho had at Chelsea, Inter, and Madrid, you'd still expect more European success. If he comes back to Chelsea, he will once again be coming back to what will likely be the highest spending club in the league. Yes, he'll likely have success, but like everywhere post-Porto, that success is based enormously on him choosing a team where success is almost inevitable.

He's a fine manager, but the regard that many Chelsea fans for him is so insanely over-inflated based on what he's actually accomplished. People also forget the negatives and there are negatives. The boring football (and this is not Greece at the Euros, this is taking the most talented team in the world and making them play super-defensively), the ego circus, the sore losing, etc...I just don't get the obsession or the desire to go back there.

Good write up.

I have the same thoughts and concerns. However, I am viewed as a "Mourinho" hater since I post comments that don't make him into a god.

[Ronaldo 28]

Agree wholeheartedly.

His cocky attitude in the dugout, his bold but decisive subs, the way he teases the press, the way he mocks the opponents, the way he protects our own players, the way he injects never say die spirit into the team, his Armani, his fucking gorgeous face...... Chelsea's legacy

You homo?

[Ronaldo 28]

when is daddy coming back home?

Where'd you father go?

[cadenza666 221]

Jose Mourinho’s departure from Real Madrid is expected to be announced this week moving his return to Chelsea a step closer.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2326827/Jose-Mourinho-Real-Madrid-exit-confirmed-week-Chelsea-return-nears.html

[Rubber bullets 1,183]

I will argue with that. Winning with Porto was an incredible achievement even if was in a very poor CL year. After that, his achievements have been much more mpdest and overall, he has done no better than should have been expected. He won with Chelsea with a team that out-spent everyone else in the Premier League about 10-1. He inherited a team that finished second and got to the semi-finals of the CL and had already players like Lampard, Terry, Gudjohnssson, Makalele, etc..He wasn't taking the 1987 Chelsea side to the promised land, he was taking the deepest, probably the most talented, and by far the most expensive squad there. Mourinho's performance at Chelsea was about what should have been expected. In 4 years, we won 2 Premier League titles, a few domestic Cups, and didn't get past the semi-finals in the CL. We got worse every year under Mourinho so by the time he got fired, we were playing awfully despite having an insanely expensive and talented side. People want to think of Mourinho getting fired as a clash of cultures, but it was mostly due to the team sucking under him at the end. We were significantly better under Avram Grant than we were under Mourinho's last while and Grant did nothing. This was not like RDM or AVb where we were losing to worse teams with imbalanced squads, this was a a squad that was losing to poorer teams with a bevy of world-class players like Makalele, Carvalho, Lampard, Terry, Cech, Essien, and Cole most of whom were at their peaks.

At Inter, the squad had won three straight Seria A titles before Mourinho got there so calling them mediocre is patently ridiculous. Like at Chelsea (and even at Porto), Mourinho was once again coaching for the biggest spending team in the league. The CL win has excellent, but it was not shocking. They were won of the best teams in Europe. At Madrid, his reign was an abject failure. Despite being once again, in charge of the highest spending club, Madrid only won 3 trophies in 3 years, only one of which was a major trophy, which is the worst haul in the history of the club for a manager who has been there that long. Post-Porto, he has managed top European clubs for 9 years and made and won 1 CL. That's not remarkable, it's actually not particularly good. If you gave a random manager 9 years with the squads Mourinho had at Chelsea, Inter, and Madrid, you'd still expect more European success. If he comes back to Chelsea, he will once again be coming back to what will likely be the highest spending club in the league. Yes, he'll likely have success, but like everywhere post-Porto, that success is based enormously on him choosing a team where success is almost inevitable.

He's a fine manager, but the regard that many Chelsea fans for him is so insanely over-inflated based on what he's actually accomplished. People also forget the negatives and there are negatives. The boring football (and this is not Greece at the Euros, this is taking the most talented team in the world and making them play super-defensively), the ego circus, the sore losing, etc...I just don't get the obsession or the desire to go back there.

I think this is the first time we absolutely agree on something!

[Yeboii 1,844]

You homo?

Why are you on this forum? It looks like you came here just to bash the members, some players and Mourinho. Also, what if he is? Does it matter?

[Ronaldo 28]

Why are you on this forum? It looks like you came here just to bash the members, some players and Mourinho. Also, what if he is? Does it matter?

LOL. The question would help me understand the love he has for Mourinho.

Also, how is North Korea these days mate?

[The Skipper 20,593]

You can look at Jose in a very pessimistic manner such as what TorontoChelsea's write up is, or you can look at him in a positive way. I'm not going to bother countering the argument because the optimistic opinions have already been written up on here and are already known, but all I'll say is that money/having the best squad in the league does not automatically equate to one automatically winning tons of trophies.

Man City are a prime example of that. You could even make a case for the Real Madrid galacticos, who obviously had the most talented squad in the world by far - but still underachieved with that.

Jose has one thing that many other managers don't have, and that one thing is that he's just a winner.

It's easy to have a negative view on him now because this has been the worse season in his managerial career so far but I really do think he'll come back stronger than ever.

He has his critics which is fair enough, but no one can say he's just a "solid" manager in my opinion. He's clearly still one of the best managers in the world, his record speaks for itself.

[The Skipper 20,593]

The question would help me understand the love he has for Mourinho.

Well it's a bit obvious why most Chelsea fans love Mourinho. It's pretty self explanatory.

[Ronaldo 28]

Well it's a bit obvious why most Chelsea fans love Mourinho. It's pretty self explanatory.

Yea. I should realize Mourinho + Chelsea fans = Rafa + Liverpool fans.

It's a lose lose situation for me to even argue against Mourinho on this board.

[Tomo 21,685]

I will argue with that. Winning with Porto was an incredible achievement even if was in a very poor CL year. After that, his achievements have been much more mpdest and overall, he has done no better than should have been expected. He won with Chelsea with a team that out-spent everyone else in the Premier League about 10-1. He inherited a team that finished second and got to the semi-finals of the CL and had already players like Lampard, Terry, Gudjohnssson, Makalele, etc..He wasn't taking the 1987 Chelsea side to the promised land, he was taking the deepest, probably the most talented, and by far the most expensive squad there. Mourinho's performance at Chelsea was about what should have been expected. In 4 years, we won 2 Premier League titles, a few domestic Cups, and didn't get past the semi-finals in the CL. We got worse every year under Mourinho so by the time he got fired, we were playing awfully despite having an insanely expensive and talented side. People want to think of Mourinho getting fired as a clash of cultures, but it was mostly due to the team sucking under him at the end. We were significantly better under Avram Grant than we were under Mourinho's last while and Grant did nothing. This was not like RDM or AVb where we were losing to worse teams with imbalanced squads, this was a a squad that was losing to poorer teams with a bevy of world-class players like Makalele, Carvalho, Lampard, Terry, Cech, Essien, and Cole most of whom were at their peaks.

At Inter, the squad had won three straight Seria A titles before Mourinho got there so calling them mediocre is patently ridiculous. Like at Chelsea (and even at Porto), Mourinho was once again coaching for the biggest spending team in the league. The CL win has excellent, but it was not shocking. They were won of the best teams in Europe. At Madrid, his reign was an abject failure. Despite being once again, in charge of the highest spending club, Madrid only won 3 trophies in 3 years, only one of which was a major trophy, which is the worst haul in the history of the club for a manager who has been there that long. Post-Porto, he has managed top European clubs for 9 years and made and won 1 CL. That's not remarkable, it's actually not particularly good. If you gave a random manager 9 years with the squads Mourinho had at Chelsea, Inter, and Madrid, you'd still expect more European success. If he comes back to Chelsea, he will once again be coming back to what will likely be the highest spending club in the league. Yes, he'll likely have success, but like everywhere post-Porto, that success is based enormously on him choosing a team where success is almost inevitable.

He's a fine manager, but the regard that many Chelsea fans for him is so insanely over-inflated based on what he's actually accomplished. People also forget the negatives and there are negatives. The boring football (and this is not Greece at the Euros, this is taking the most talented team in the world and making them play super-defensively), the ego circus, the sore losing, etc...I just don't get the obsession or the desire to go back there.

Yes he may have inherited some good players and added to them also but every manager benefit's from players they inherit, Ranieri was saved from the sack in his first full season by the form of three players he inherited of Vialli.

At Chelsea he may have had lots of money to spend and ofcourse that helped him win the trophies he did with us, but if it was just so easy to spend and win Dalglish and Hughes would still be in jobs.

07/08 started badly, but Jose left with us level with United, who started just as badly. Who was to say things would not have improved?

Spending doesn't automatically mean success, a harsh lesson QPR have been taught. Jose came in 04/05. Manpe actually explained why Jose actually overachieved in his first two season's at Chelsea despite the money spent. This is his quote below.

One more point I would like to add. The squad Jose had in the first season was really average on paper. Arsenal had just finished their invicible season and they had retained that squad, which in truth, was much better than ours (on paper). Everybody thought that they were going to dominate English football for years to come, but it was put to an abrupt end, guess by who? Their squad was already full of stars and established players, we had only up and coming players. Add to that that many of them were new players, there was still a very real problem of making them play together like they had been playing together for ages.

So, instead of struggling with a new squad, he squeezed out the absolute best out of everyone. Lampard had his first truly world class season, as did Terry. Squad players did their bits as expected. He installed completely new tactics and way of playing. For example, look how many managers have trouble doing the exact same thing. What Jose did so seamlessly was really unprecedented. Man City have even more money, even bigger transfer budget, they've signed even more superstars, but they're still struggling to come out of the shadow of an average Man United side and they're absolutely pathetic in Europe, while we knocked Arsenal off their throne instantly and held Europe by its neck.

In conclusion, what I'm trying to say, is that yes, having money to buy players he wanted definitely helped, but it wasn't the main reason and he certainly didn't rely on any superstars. He made them superstars eventually. Can you imagine the Sven Goran Erikssons and Mancinis of the world doing the same? No, Mourinho did in fact overachieve and I don't know how it's even debatable.

I accept he is not perfect but the pro's overwiegh the con's big time.