To clear it up, Pep Guardiola is a very good manager. Under certain conditions he is amazing. I am merely trying to prove why he is NOT anywhere near the best ever manager. Solely in the Premier League Thomas Tuchel and Brendan Rodgers are as good and Jurgen Klopp is better. I will look at older criticisms, but I actually have some more insightful criticisms I haven't seen made to look at. So without further ado, let's go!
Nothing Revolutionary
When has Pep Guardiola done the unexpected. At the beginning he was at Barca B. He won the fourth division of Spanish football. This was a division they hadn't been in for over a quarter of a century, and like Fulham in the Championship they were expected to win. And can anyone honestly tell me that the likes of Ralph Hasenhuttl, Graham Potter or even Steve Bruce couldn't win the Spanish fourth division with the best team in the division. And you might say "Oh, he was a new manager! He had no experience!" The likes of Mikel Arteta and Scott Parker would do the job easily!
He went to the Barcelona 1st team and won quite a bit. He did well! But they weren't exactly minnows. He exceeded expectations, yes, but no more than Claudio Ranieri at Leicester, Thomas Tuchel at Chelsea or Hansi Flick at Bayern. Again, Jurgen Klopp did better at Meinz, Dortmund and Liverpool. And before you say he brought through young talent, he had players from La Masia. Ronald Koeman has done similar with Pedri and Ansu Fati, and he isn't considered in the same bracket as Sir Alex or José Mourinho.
At Bayern he also did well, but Bayern were expected to do well. Jupp Heynckes and Niko Kovac did the same. Again, he did well, but Brendan Rodgers or Rafa Benitez would likely have righted the ship and kept it going correctly, just as he did. It isn't like he won the Champions League or anything and he was a bit underwhelming considering that he was more successful at Barca. The team had recently won the treble, so with the extensive funds he received expectations weren't exceeded.
And finally, Manchester City. I will get onto his sugar-daddy requirements, but generally he has been pretty ok, winning 3/4 seasons in which City were the favorites. However, returning to Jurgen Klopp comparisons, he has not been that impressive. He was the one to inherit a brilliant team with world-class attacking talent at the richest club in the world, not mid-table once-brilliant sludge stuffed half-way down the table. And yet Klopp has the Champions League and wrestled the Premier League away from Pep after a few seasons despite spending less than a third of the money spent by City.
One-Dimensional Career-Ender
So here we will be looking at three closely-linked criticisms, two of which are completely original: he destroys players, can only use one system and requires more funding than anyone else. I think these are very important and need to be addressed, particularly when you look at how he effected football as a whole.
Firstly, I have heard so many people say he "made" so many players. They say "Look at Pique, look at Busquets. They were made by Guardiola!". And what about Joe Hart and Yaya Touré. Both (particularly the latter) where generational talents who's careers Pep destroyed. Starting at Barcelona, he quickly kicked the versatile and talented Touré to the curb for not fitting his system, preferring to bring in Busquets and sign other worse players. And again at City he banished Touré as well as up-and-coming England number 1 Joe Hart. I think Touré would now be regarded as one of the best players ever, and Hart one of the best keepers ever, if it wasn't for Guardiola, his stiff playing style and his disregard for helping those players hurt football. Many managers would have helped those players find a good option elsewhere, but with him if you don't quite fit he will destroy your potential and your career. This unkind ruthlessness stole from the footballing world certain generational talents.
Pep is also a one trick pony. If you are a top club and allow him to buy players, he will do an excellent job, but he could never do the jobs Chris Wilder and Eddie Howe did at Sheffield United and Bournemouth respectively. He never did anything brilliant, he merely kept teams good. Those kind of jobs are arguably harder to do, and why should you be more respected for keeping City, a team with ample resources and an amazing academy, at the top of the table than doing what someone like Sean Dyche does, keeping Burnley, a club with meagre supplies and a rubbish academy, in the division. More people could do what Pep did! Jurgen Klopp and Thomas Tuchel had to rough it out with Mainz, Carlo Ancelotti proved himself with Parma. Pep only did what you would be expected to do with the top teams.
And finally, financials. Pep Guardiola has always been the richest. At Barca B, Barca, Bayern and City he had the richest team in the league, inherited the best players in the league. Unlike the best managers in the world he can only function in this environment. He demands to be handed tools that these people don't need to become the best. He, unlike Klopp, Tuchel or Mourinho could not do a job at Burnley or Palace or Celta Vigo or Parma. If he is only one of the best with top clubs and nowhere near that with the smaller ones, he is simply not the best manager. Period.
I think it is important here for this to gain some traction. I think this is one of the most important posts I have ever made and I would really appreciate it if you shared it amongst your friends and family. I am really hoping to make this a career and I think I have the ability to achieve this if I had your help. So yeah, please check out my other posts, I hope you enjoyed, and I will see you guys later. Noah ¯\(°_o)/¯
Comments
Post a Comment