Pep Guardiola on winning his 6th Premier League trophy in 7 years with Man City: "We are like the 1990s Chicago Bulls"

[Tracymcgoaty]

Every team Pep has managed has always had the monopoly of talent to the point of being absurd compared to other teams in the same league.

In Barca he arguably had the GOAT assembled.

In Bayern it was a joke the talent level compared to other teams

and now City it's the same story.

You ask me the fact that he only won one champions league ever since leaving Barcelona he's underachieved.

And the fact that his current team has 115 charges against shows how absurd this is.

Coaches like Diego Simeone are miracle achievers and rightfully when all is said and done should have a statue when he retires. The achievement Simeone has done with that Atletico Madrid team imo is incredible.

[Baz]

Pep went through one GK, Claudio Bravo, before buying Ederson for cheap who was practically an unknown in England. Pep hasn't put much of a foot wrong when it comes to signings so this is a strange argument actually. The only major dud I'd say was Nolito. Most of his signings find great success under him and aside from Jack Grealish, he has never really spent a great amount on a single signing.

& if we are talking about what Pep said, what about what Klopp said?

Klopp: "Whatever happened at City with the 115 charges, Pep Guardiola is the best manager in the world. Put any other manager in the world at that club, they do not win the league four times in a row!"

I apologize, I thought Hart was his first keeper.

As to never spending a great amount on a single signing, are you kidding?

- John Stones for £47.5M in 2016
- Benjamin Mendy for £52M in 2017
- Kyle Walker for £45M in 2017
- Aymeric Laporte for £57M in 2018

Today, those look like above average transfer fees. But in those years... mind-boggling amounts.

I would also say Kalvin Phillips was a flop, especially for £45M in 2022.

Listen, Guardiola is a fantastic manager. I respect the heck out of his style of play and tactics. I do believe, however, he's been a charmed manager, meaning he's only been at clubs where finances are not restricted (Barcelona, Bayern Munich and Manchester City).

All of those signings provided decent return at the very least, & yeah Philips was a flop too. But that's 2 major flops I can think of in 8-9 years of management with countless successful signings. Pretty good scouting, I'd say. And if you look at the most expensive transfers, Man City are certainly on the list, but not the most guilty party. United wasted 200m alone on Lukaku and Pogba. Chelsea bought a keeper who was a flop for 80m. Liverpool have been a lot smarter with their signings, but paid high prices too.

[Frank Dux]

But only 1 champions league title with that team...

the trophy that truly matters.

[Baz]

Lots of haters here.
The FFP charges are dead serious and will need some type of punishment, but let's not act like if United or Chelsea can't spend at will (and to a lesser extent, Arsenal bought Declan Rice for 131M$. Darwin Nunez costs 100M $+ to Liverpool. Haaland cost 63M$ to City. Let's not act like Gunners and Reds are small clubs. 2/3 of Premier league is CRAZY RICH compared to the rest of Europe).
Like it or not, City has been brilliant when it comes to building a roster, mixing acquisitions with homegrown talent like Foden. They play one of the most beautiful football in Europe and Guardiola is one of the best coaches in the world right now (you can argue for Klopp or Ancelotti, I don't mind, but he's Top 5 at WORST). Players like Doku, who was running joke in France, is having a career year. City plays football the right way and, on a domestic level, their success can ABSOLUTELY be compared to the 90's Bulls.

Where the comparison falls apart is they've won 1 CL while outspending everyone on transfers and wages (with money from extremely questionable source). Money doesn't automatically mean success as you've pointed out, but it's also true that without money (from extremely questionable source), they would be nothing.

Also Doku had a few nice games, but he is someone who cost 60M euros and scored 3 goals in the season. This level of return would be laughed at in other clubs, but you have meh signings like Doku and Grealish coast and be called great because they can continue to spend money.

So would any other mammoth European team, no? No doubt Man City won the football lottery by being bought out, & questions can be asked about where that money has come from - but contrary to what somebody said in this thread, it is real money, & it is being invested into the city of Manchester. They have built a state of the art facility that breeds some of the best young players in England, where even Man United greats have their children go & play. Other clubs built their wealth in more 'organic' ways, which is another way of saying they had success on the pitch at the most opportune period, & have had a constant stream of revenue because of that.

Man City is run with absolutely lethal precision. The other traditionally elite clubs have been passed by, & are furious that an outsider club got a seat at the big table, so are hanging their hopes on pinging Man City on FFP charges because they aren't smart enough to use their own overwhelming wealth & power effectively.

People can scoff about 1 UCL, but more will likely come, & you can't deny Man City have had some pretty horrendous luck in multiple UCL campaigns over the years. The NBA uses the 7-game series which stamps out most luck. The better team wins 99% of the time, whereas in a cup tie, teams can get through to the next stages on moments alone. I think comparing the Bulls titles to the EPL titles is not accurate, but it is more accurate than UCL to be honest, given league titles usually the best team wins, in a cup competition, not always & not even usually.

[Ferulci]

Every team Pep has managed has always had the monopoly of talent to the point of being absurd compared to other teams in the same league.

In Barca he arguably had the GOAT assembled.

What a disingenuous take. Barca locker room was on the verge of exploding when Guardiola arrived. The roster was very talented, but the moves he did (showing Ronaldihno/Deco the way out, promoting Busquets, tiki taka, repositioning Messi at 9) were hugely important. And if you think the Liga was a cakewalk, you might want to have a look at Real roster.

and now City it's the same story.

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/story/_/id/38304925/chelsea-spend-1-billion-euros-players-three-transfer-windows
https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/38897040/rating-billion-dollars-man-united-signings-2018
Why don't they get the same results? In fact, Chelsea best player comes from City youth system.

[rapstarter]

Every team Pep has managed has always had the monopoly of talent to the point of being absurd compared to other teams in the same league.

In Barca he arguably had the GOAT assembled.

What a disingenuous take. Barca locker room was on the verge of exploding when Guardiola arrived. The roster was very talented, but the moves he did (showing Ronaldihno/Deco the way out, promoting Busquets, tiki taka, repositioning Messi at 9) were hugely important. And if you think the Liga was a cakewalk, you might want to have a look at Real roster.

and now City it's the same story.

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/story/_/id/38304925/chelsea-spend-1-billion-euros-players-three-transfer-windows
https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/38897040/rating-billion-dollars-man-united-signings-2018
Why don't they get the same results? In fact, Chelsea best player comes from City youth system.

Money doesn't always equal success, but it's also true that Guardiola's always had great squads and money.

Also, Chelsea, for all their trouble, have won just as many CLs as City since Guardiola joined City. That's also true if you extended Guardiola's time to include his Bayern stint (which he started off by inheriting a dominant treble winning side).

[Tracymcgoaty]

Every team Pep has managed has always had the monopoly of talent to the point of being absurd compared to other teams in the same league.

In Barca he arguably had the GOAT assembled.

What a disingenuous take. Barca locker room was on the verge of exploding when Guardiola arrived. The roster was very talented, but the moves he did (showing Ronaldihno/Deco the way out, promoting Busquets, tiki taka, repositioning Messi at 9) were hugely important. And if you think the Liga was a cakewalk, you might want to have a look at Real roster.

and now City it's the same story.

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/story/_/id/38304925/chelsea-spend-1-billion-euros-players-three-transfer-windows
https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/38897040/rating-billion-dollars-man-united-signings-2018
Why don't they get the same results? In fact, Chelsea best player comes from City youth system.

Money doesn't always equal success, but it's also true that Guardiola's always had great squads and money.

Also, Chelsea, for all their trouble, have won just as many CLs as City since Guardiola joined City. That's also true if you extended Guardiola's time to include his Bayern stint (which he started off by inheriting a dominant treble winning side).

Im not saying he's a bad coach though. Pep is a great coach there is no doubt. He's also inherited great squads as well. Him revamping the Barca team and creating tiki taka lead to some amazing football which i thoroughly enjoyed. He also had what i considered to be a ridiculous amount of talent as well.

[doogie_hauser]

Hoping Pep's Magic and good luck rubs off on Joe Mazz and the Celtics:)



I support Leeds United in English Football (Soccer)
but there is little doubt in my mind he is the greatest manager in the history of that noble sport, certainly gone past Whiskey Face (Sir Alex Ferguson)

[Astaluego]

Every team Pep has managed has always had the monopoly of talent to the point of being absurd compared to other teams in the same league.

In Barca he arguably had the GOAT assembled.

In Bayern it was a joke the talent level compared to other teams

and now City it's the same story.

You ask me the fact that he only won one champions league ever since leaving Barcelona he's underachieved.

And the fact that his current team has 115 charges against shows how absurd this is.

Coaches like Diego Simeone are miracle achievers and rightfully when all is said and done should have a statue when he retires. The achievement Simeone has done with that Atletico Madrid team imo is incredible.

Guardiola makes his teams recognizable, they play the most beautiful football possible and are competitive, he is not on the field and the fact of winning or not does not depend 100% on him... not even on the players... luck Referees play a role...he is undoubtedly one of the greatest coaches in history...Simeone man, he has merit but a football that is much more difficult to admire and more focused on making the rival game difficult than elevating his team.

[UglyBugBall]

This is like being the number one seed 6 out of 7 years and thinking it means something. Lol. Champions League is the equivalent of the NBA championship. How many of those have you won lately pep?

[Joao Saraiva]

While I don't think the comparison is very accurate why are people treating it like it's easy?

Man United spent a ton of money and finished 8th. PSG spends a ton of money and doesn't look as good in Europe.

You can talk about the champions league all you want but City has been competent to say the least. Even against Real the result was very unfair. So what?

They're the best because they have money but are very competent using it and because Guardiola's system is very good. It's not all about the money, otherwise Chelsea would be on top too and they didn't even qualify for european competitions.

It's easier to succeed with more money, but you still have to be very good to do what City is doing.

[Sedale Threatt]

Pep went through one GK, Claudio Bravo, before buying Ederson for cheap who was practically an unknown in England. Pep hasn't put much of a foot wrong when it comes to signings so this is a strange argument actually. The only major dud I'd say was Nolito. Most of his signings find great success under him and aside from Jack Grealish, he has never really spent a great amount on a single signing.

& if we are talking about what Pep said, what about what Klopp said?

Klopp: "Whatever happened at City with the 115 charges, Pep Guardiola is the best manager in the world. Put any other manager in the world at that club, they do not win the league four times in a row!"

I apologize, I thought Hart was his first keeper.

As to never spending a great amount on a single signing, are you kidding?

- John Stones for £47.5M in 2016
- Benjamin Mendy for £52M in 2017
- Kyle Walker for £45M in 2017
- Aymeric Laporte for £57M in 2018

Today, those look like above average transfer fees. But in those years... mind-boggling amounts.

I would also say Kalvin Phillips was a flop, especially for £45M in 2022.

Listen, Guardiola is a fantastic manager. I respect the heck out of his style of play and tactics. I do believe, however, he's been a charmed manager, meaning he's only been at clubs where finances are not restricted (Barcelona, Bayern Munich and Manchester City).

You forgot Gvardiol, AKA the most expensive defender in football history.

I do agree on Pep. Only a select handful of managers have the special sauce, and he's one of them. You look at how United has utterly crashed and burned since Ferguson retired ... I'm not saying City will be even remotely that dire whenever Pep leaves -- which he seemingly hinted could be after next season -- but there's no way they will continue this run of success without him. He is truly great and he's proven that over and over again.

But you can give him his propers while also recognizing the very strong likelihood, given the sheer bulk of charges against them (that's a whoooooole lot of smoke) and how hard they've fought to obstruct the PL's investigation (not exactly the sign of an organization eager to clear its name) there have been some extremely high-level shenanigans with the financial ledgers.

It's not even about bulk. United, in fact, have spent more on transfers and wages over the past 10 years, and look what they have to show for it. It's about funneling cash to make up for the revenue you're not making in order to spend at a rate you need to win at that level. The numbers (allegedly) don't add up, so they're (allegedly) making them add up.

More than anything, I blame the Premier League. It just seems like a chicken sht outfit that has no real control over its membership. (I've been reading about some of the stuff Chelsea pulls to get around FFP as well, and whoo boy.) It looks so bad when you let something like this drag on for as long as it has while going after clubs like Forest and Everton with such immediacy. Which, hey, if they're breaking rules, then fine. But it looks like gross favoritism and/or complete impotence.

I mean, look at this sht (all allegations):

* For nine years to 2017, City did not provide accurate financial information about their revenue

* From 2009 to 2013, they didn’t give full details of how much they were paying their manager

* From 2010 to 2016, they didn’t give full detail around payments to players

* From 2013 to 2018, they didn’t comply with UEFA FFP regulations

* From 2015 to 2018, they didn’t comply with the Premier League’s PSR rules

* From 2018 onwards, they did not co-operate with the Premier League’s inquiry

Some of these allegations are 15 years old, at which point you've been completely asleep at the wheel.

[lessthanjake]

The closest analogue to Pep in the NBA is Phil Jackson. They both have won a lot on multiple teams. They both have a certain playstyle they adhere to (the triangle and possession-heavy positional play). And they both have coached teams with huge amounts of talent, which some use to downplay their achievements. To me, Phil Jackson was more impressive though, for the simple reason that Pep has only won the Champions League three times, which isn’t really a dramatic number given that his teams have always been like top 3 contenders for it every year, since 2009.

[Loneshot]

Jordan >> Lebron

A double three peat is just insane

Those Bulls teams couldn't do it today. Jordan would have to work overtime on both ends of the court. No way he sustains that streak against the offensive juggernauts today.

[Rust_Cohle]

Jordan >> Lebron

A double three peat is just insane

Those Bulls teams couldn't do it today. Jordan would have to work overtime on both ends of the court. No way he sustains that streak against the offensive juggernauts today.

The warriors were an amazing team. But Jordan would average 40-50 ppg with how inflated scoring became over the last 5 years. This year towards the playoffs Silver has thankfully put a stop to it. But Jordan would’ve gotten 15 free throws a game with how soft the refs had been calling fouls.

Lebron played on an era where the league had more talent, but he also played in a significantly easier conference where in Jordan’s day the east and west was much more balanced.

[Rust_Cohle]

The closest analogue to Pep in the NBA is Phil Jackson. They both have won a lot on multiple teams. They both have a certain playstyle they adhere to (the triangle and possession-heavy positional play). And they both have coached teams with huge amounts of talent, which some use to downplay their achievements. To me, Phil Jackson was more impressive though, for the simple reason that Pep has only won the Champions League three times, which isn’t really a dramatic number given that his teams have always been like top 3 contenders for it every year, since 2009.

True, he should have more than 3 CL’s, but unlike a best of 7 series or a 38 week soccer season, CL is way more open to flukier results and luck plays a far bigger role. I’d take CL over any domestic trophy for the glamour, but look at how many times Madrid won CL when they weren’t even the best team in Spain during half of those runs.

[Rust_Cohle]

While I don't think the comparison is very accurate why are people treating it like it's easy?

Man United spent a ton of money and finished 8th. PSG spends a ton of money and doesn't look as good in Europe.

You can talk about the champions league all you want but City has been competent to say the least. Even against Real the result was very unfair. So what?

They're the best because they have money but are very competent using it and because Guardiola's system is very good. It's not all about the money, otherwise Chelsea would be on top too and they didn't even qualify for european competitions.

It's easier to succeed with more money, but you still have to be very good to do what City is doing.

Yup, they have a ton of money but their scouting is phenomenal. They are the best run organization in all of football even if there are some shady happenings behind the scenes.