One of the things I've noticed following football, is that most successful managers tend to fall into two broad categories of managerial styles, idealists and pragmatists. Now, I'm not saying here that all coaches are either one type or the other, because of course there are many sub-categories within these two types.
However, I do feel that these two groups are transparent enough to explore further, and perhaps to compare the successes of both types. I'll do this by looking at their ability in the transfer market, how effectively they handle the media, the brand of football they get their team playing, how well they organise their teams defensively and success in terms of trophies and league positions.
However, I do feel that these two groups are transparent enough to explore further, and perhaps to compare the successes of both types. I'll do this by looking at their ability in the transfer market, how effectively they handle the media, the brand of football they get their team playing, how well they organise their teams defensively and success in terms of trophies and league positions.
The Idealists
Firstly, there are the idealists. These managers tend to place as much emphasis on encouraging their team to get accustomed to playing their preferred style of football, as ensuring that the team gets the required results. They are often prepared to give youth a chance, always have their eye on the next hidden gem who they can sign young for a snip price or develop through the academy. People of ambition, when they are appointed manager of a club, their targets are generally geared more towards long-term greatness, than basic short-term success.
Arsene Wenger
Arsene Wenger is the perfect example of this and very much characterizes the idealist manager within modern football. Stubborn in his own approach, he's succeeded just enough for the majority of Arsenal fans to back him, yet there are elements within his idealist nature that are arguably preventing Arsenal from glory.
Transfer judgement: I would say this depends on whether the lack of spending is the board's decision due to the building of the Emirates, or Wenger's stubbornness in principle, or indeed a combination of both. Wenger is notorious for his desire to sign players young and cheap, rather than splashing the cash on proven stars, but to his credit the majority of players he's signed for rarely more than £5 million have flourished at Arsenal in the long-term. I for one admire that, so I'd give him 8/10.
Style of football: at times Arsenal have been very enjoyable to watch. If I'm separating the style of football category from end results, Arsenal have few weaknesses. However, this 'perfect football' ideology is certainly flawed to some extent. Barcelona - who Wenger appears to be trying to emulate with Arsenal's style of football - can get away with playing this way because they have incredible players, but in a lot of matches if they don't get their goal early, Arsenal often lack that plan B. 8/10
Organisation: dreadful. This is a key piece of the arguments made by Wenger's critics, because Arsenal haven't won a trophy since Vieira left in 2005 and that's no coincidence in my book. Wenger had tried to economize by signing Song and Flamini to replace him on cheap deals, who had been playing okay, but simply not at Vieira's standards. Arsenal badly need someone at the back or an anchor man, who is a leader and an organiser, Wenger has seemingly ignored this. 2/10
Motivating & media-handling: he has a habit of saying: "I didn't see the incident" in post-match press conferences when an Arsenal player has cheated. Like it or not, this seems to have been an effective, 'get off scott free' technique, because he then doesn't need to address the case and people forget about it. That may have an indirect influence on refeering decisions for the long-term in Arsenal's favour, because if Wenger said: "I know Cazorla would never dive", people would see the replay later and know Wenger had lied. If he said: "yes, he dived", people, including referees, would always remember it. I hate this media-handling technique that Wenger often employs, but it is unquestionably an effective one. 7/10
Motivating & media-handling: he has a habit of saying: "I didn't see the incident" in post-match press conferences when an Arsenal player has cheated. Like it or not, this seems to have been an effective, 'get off scott free' technique, because he then doesn't need to address the case and people forget about it. That may have an indirect influence on refeering decisions for the long-term in Arsenal's favour, because if Wenger said: "I know Cazorla would never dive", people would see the replay later and know Wenger had lied. If he said: "yes, he dived", people, including referees, would always remember it. I hate this media-handling technique that Wenger often employs, but it is unquestionably an effective one. 7/10
Results & success: well, what do you define as success? In my opinion, playing in the Champions League every season since 1996 is good, and I know I'd prefer that to winning one of the domestic cups. A lot of people think that 7 years without a trophy isn't good enough, I'm not sure I agree, but it is a factor that prevents him from gaining a higher score. Rightly or wrongly, trophies are what a manager is judged on 5/10
Overall: I don't believe that many managers could have done what Wenger has for Arsenal. Having taken them through the expensive building of the Emirates on cheap, youth signings, he's kept Arsenal in the top four every season. Not having won a trophy in 7 years unjustly tarnishes this in my opinion, but one can't help but think that it wouldn't be the case if Wenger was prepared to compromise his philosophy of how football should be played, by simply doing what it takes to win matches. 7/10
Pep Guardiola
Although I reckon he's the best man to replace Ferguson at Man United, (once he's had a few years now with Bayern Munich) I'm also of the opinion that Pep is an ounce overrated as a manager. Though he won 3 La Liga titles and 2 Champions Leagues in 4 years in charge of Barca and the change in tactics admittedly played a part in that, he also did so with extraordinary players and he quit after 4 seasons. I'm not trying to discredit him for what he's done, yet I don't believe Barca's success had as much to do with him as people think. The recent successes of Tito Vilanova as his replacement supports that argument.
Transfer judgement: virtually irrelevant- the vast majority of Barcelona's players had come through the youth system. The expensive signing of Ibrahimovic didn't work out in the long-term due to injuries, but Pep took the brave decisions to get rid of stars like Ronaldinho, Eto'o and Deco which created the clean slate for Messi to take centre stage. 5/10
Style of football: simply wonderful, and Vilanova has made a good decision to change little of what Pep has done tactically. People who think Barcelona are boring have clearly never had a Birmingham City season ticket- they can close teams down so quickly to make them panic and lose the ball which is partly what makes Barca so effective, but the touch, vision and passing ability some of their players have on offer, combined with their movement, is a joy to watch. The one minor flaw in this system (which is probably worth the cost) is that like with Arsenal, when teams shut up shot against them like Inter and Chelsea did in previous Champions League semi-finals, they struggle. At times, Barca can lack the ability to change the system and go direct to give the opposition defence something different to think about, but it's a very small disadvantage given the bigger picture. 9/10
Organisation: rarely necessary. Barca have always had so much possession and an ability to score 3 or 4 goals in a game, that it doesn't really matter if they let in the odd one. Their success isn't notoriously based on defensive organisation, but with the likes of Messi and Iniesta in their team, I don't think Pep will have minded too much. 5/10
Motivating & media-handling: he rarely looks to use the media to gain an advantage. He has a 'turn the other cheek' mentality, and is often very composed. It's not his style to play mind-games, which, in a way is a mind-game in itself. He believes so much in the quality of his team, that he doesn't see it as a necessary measure, and that air of confidence could indirectly have an impact on the opposition's mindset. 6/10
Results & success: it stands to be seen. 3 La Liga titles and 2 Champions Leagues in 4 seasons is fantastic, and I'm surprised Pep decided to leave which is perhaps the only thing to mark him down on. He had the opportunity to create a footballing dynasty with Barcelona. 8/10
Overall: a fantastic tactician, though the three things that I'm going to mark Pep down on here are: he had the luxury of working with a fantastic generation of talent, he's still a young manager without success over a prelonged period of time yet, and he quit at Barca. It's a decision that you can respect though, and I'd fancy him to win the Champions League with Bayern Munich. 8/10
Andre Villas-Boas
I believe Andre Villas-Boas has the potential to become a good Champions League manager, perhaps even with Tottenham Hotspur. I think he's learnt from his failure at Chelsea, when he tried to alter their squad and style of football too radically, plus he has the experience of working with Jose Mourinho, which I would expect to help him succeed as a manager in future.
Transfer judgement: mixed. You'd have to say that the signings of James Rodriguez (£5 mil) and Joao Moutinho (£10 mil) were good buys for Porto, especially when you think that both are considered to be worth £20 mil each now. Juan Mata has been brilliant for Chelsea, but most of the signings out of his £80 million war chest at the West London club are young and yet to prove their worth. £18-odd million was a lot to pay for youngster Lukaku, and Raul Meireles probably has hardly been inspirational before his transfer away. On balance, I would say that his transfer nous hasn't been quite good enough, given that his main managerial strengths supposedly lie in tactical knowledge more than motivating. 5/10
Style of football: likes to encourage creative, passing football, yet his choice of formations have changed since he joined Tottenham. With Porto, he played Falcao as the central striker, who was flanked by Varela and Hulk providing width. At Chelsea, he use a similar tactic with Drogba as the front man. However, at Tottenham he's noticed the change in trends in football and incoporated a very modern 4-2-3-1 formation, with which the likes of Man City, Dortmund and Real Madrid have all been successful. It looks to be a tactic which the Spurs team have taken some time to adjust to, but one that promises much for the future. 8/10
Organisation: hasn't managed to transfer his ability to organise teams from Portuguese football to England. He established a formidable defence in his one season at Porto, when his side conceded just 16 goals in 30 games- the best defensive record for a team in that league for 3 seasons. However, in his brief spell as Chelsea manager, they conceded an average of 1.2 goals per game, that's with the likes of Cole and Terry fit. Since he joined Spurs, their defensive record has become the 3rd worst of all the teams in the top half of the table, with 28 goals conceded in 23 games. 4/10
Motivating & Media-handling: this is an area where he's fallen down quite a bit. A few years ago, he formed the perfect management partnership with Mourinho at Porto, Chelsea and Internazionale. It worked because AVB was the shy tactical genius, who would scout and analyse the tactics and strengths/weaknesses of the opposition, Mourinho was the charismatic motivator, who could deal with the press and instantly command the respect of his team. The perfect combo. However, since AVB has decided to go into management alone, his inexperience has cost him in press conferences and he failed to gain the players' support at Chelsea, as Mourinho was able to. 3/10
Results & Success: I think you'd have to give him a reasonably generous score here. He kept Academica up easily in his first job in club management, then won the treble with Porto in his only season there. I would calculate that he's on his way to winning a few trophies with Tottenham, so the only real criticism you can hand him is his short and unfruitful spell with Chelsea, given the financial backing he had. He perhaps tried to change that club over in terms of personnel and style of football too radically, yet you can also argue that he needed much more patience from Abramovich for the transition to ever work. 7/10
Overall: I do have a soft spot for AVB, and he's still a young manager at 35. I think he'll succeed in future, particularly if he can improve his media-handling skills, because he's a very good tactician. However, the fact that he's young means that he hasn't yet got a well developed enough managerial CV to rate him too highly. 6/10
Jurgen Klopp
I don't think you can overestimate what Klopp has done at Borussia Dortmund. He took them from the outskirts of relegation and increasing debt in 2008 to winning back-to-back Bundesliga titles, and thriving in the Champions League this season. In my opinion, he's the most underrated manager in the world, and certainly one of the best.
Transfer judgement: because of the clubs debt, which originated from Dortmund trying to compete financially with Europe's finest, Klopp was forced to change their splash-the-cash approach and attempt to find hidden gems, which he did very well. Granted lot of players in Dortmund's Bundesliga winning team, such as Schmelzer and Gotze came through the academy, but Klopp managed to bring in centre-back pairing Hummels and Subotic for nominal fees. He signed Shinji Kagawa for £200k before making a £24-million profit on him through Manchester United, and a connection in Poland helped him find talented trio Piszczek, Lewandowski and Blaszczykowski. Don't worry, I've turned spellchecker off whilst writing this. 8/10
Style of football: youthful mobility has been the basis of this Dortmund team. Klopp seems to love working with younger players, so the tactic he's employed has been to try and run the opponents into the ground with a frenetic energy. Though this has proved to be a very effective style of play, one can't help but think this has more to do with the age of players - an average age of 22 - due to the club's use of the academy, than necessarily a plan of Klopp's. It's an additional benefit of having a young team. 6/10
Organisation: fairly impressive. The 2010-11 Dortmund side held the best defensive record of any Bundesliga team in previous 3 years at the time, which is an impressive feat given the apparent lack of experience. Mats Hummels has been instrumental defensively, and recently signed a new contract citing a repayment of Klopp's faith in him as the reason behind it. His long-term partnership with Neven Subotic will prove crucial in any further success Dortmund can have. 7/10
Motivation & Media-handling: in translated videos of him in press conferences I've seen, Klopp has taken a casual and relaxed approach. He's displayed an open body language and often has a smile on his face, which emits a lot of confidence. This mentality may have had a positive impact on Dortmund's performances in the big games, because in their last 5 matches against rivals Bayern Munich, they've won 4 and drawn 1. 7/10
Results & Success: indisputable. I don't think Klopp could have done any more for Dortmund. To take them from the brink of relegation, and possibly administration to Bundesliga winners twice, and once with a highest ever points tally, is sensational. Add to that, he's overseen them demolish Bayern Munich 5-2 in the German cup final to win the double one year and many are tipping Dortmund to go far in the knockout phases of the Champions League this season. 10/10
Overall: people talk about the likes of Guardiola and Mourinho as the best managers in the world, but when they arrived at their clubs they inherited a squad jam-packed with talent and in Mourinho's case, great financial support. However, that was nothing like the case when Klopp took over at Dortmund yet he's achieved similar amounts of success- I find it surprising that he's not being talked about in the same bracket. 9/10
The Pragmatists
Fabio Capello
An orthodox disciplinarian, Capello has a track record not dissimilar to Mourinho and Heynckes. In his 26 year post-playing career, he's filled 13 different managerial roles, spending an average of 2 years in each and is currently manager of Russia.
Pep Guardiola
Although I reckon he's the best man to replace Ferguson at Man United, (once he's had a few years now with Bayern Munich) I'm also of the opinion that Pep is an ounce overrated as a manager. Though he won 3 La Liga titles and 2 Champions Leagues in 4 years in charge of Barca and the change in tactics admittedly played a part in that, he also did so with extraordinary players and he quit after 4 seasons. I'm not trying to discredit him for what he's done, yet I don't believe Barca's success had as much to do with him as people think. The recent successes of Tito Vilanova as his replacement supports that argument.
Transfer judgement: virtually irrelevant- the vast majority of Barcelona's players had come through the youth system. The expensive signing of Ibrahimovic didn't work out in the long-term due to injuries, but Pep took the brave decisions to get rid of stars like Ronaldinho, Eto'o and Deco which created the clean slate for Messi to take centre stage. 5/10
Style of football: simply wonderful, and Vilanova has made a good decision to change little of what Pep has done tactically. People who think Barcelona are boring have clearly never had a Birmingham City season ticket- they can close teams down so quickly to make them panic and lose the ball which is partly what makes Barca so effective, but the touch, vision and passing ability some of their players have on offer, combined with their movement, is a joy to watch. The one minor flaw in this system (which is probably worth the cost) is that like with Arsenal, when teams shut up shot against them like Inter and Chelsea did in previous Champions League semi-finals, they struggle. At times, Barca can lack the ability to change the system and go direct to give the opposition defence something different to think about, but it's a very small disadvantage given the bigger picture. 9/10
Organisation: rarely necessary. Barca have always had so much possession and an ability to score 3 or 4 goals in a game, that it doesn't really matter if they let in the odd one. Their success isn't notoriously based on defensive organisation, but with the likes of Messi and Iniesta in their team, I don't think Pep will have minded too much. 5/10
Motivating & media-handling: he rarely looks to use the media to gain an advantage. He has a 'turn the other cheek' mentality, and is often very composed. It's not his style to play mind-games, which, in a way is a mind-game in itself. He believes so much in the quality of his team, that he doesn't see it as a necessary measure, and that air of confidence could indirectly have an impact on the opposition's mindset. 6/10
Results & success: it stands to be seen. 3 La Liga titles and 2 Champions Leagues in 4 seasons is fantastic, and I'm surprised Pep decided to leave which is perhaps the only thing to mark him down on. He had the opportunity to create a footballing dynasty with Barcelona. 8/10
Overall: a fantastic tactician, though the three things that I'm going to mark Pep down on here are: he had the luxury of working with a fantastic generation of talent, he's still a young manager without success over a prelonged period of time yet, and he quit at Barca. It's a decision that you can respect though, and I'd fancy him to win the Champions League with Bayern Munich. 8/10
Andre Villas-Boas
I believe Andre Villas-Boas has the potential to become a good Champions League manager, perhaps even with Tottenham Hotspur. I think he's learnt from his failure at Chelsea, when he tried to alter their squad and style of football too radically, plus he has the experience of working with Jose Mourinho, which I would expect to help him succeed as a manager in future.
Transfer judgement: mixed. You'd have to say that the signings of James Rodriguez (£5 mil) and Joao Moutinho (£10 mil) were good buys for Porto, especially when you think that both are considered to be worth £20 mil each now. Juan Mata has been brilliant for Chelsea, but most of the signings out of his £80 million war chest at the West London club are young and yet to prove their worth. £18-odd million was a lot to pay for youngster Lukaku, and Raul Meireles probably has hardly been inspirational before his transfer away. On balance, I would say that his transfer nous hasn't been quite good enough, given that his main managerial strengths supposedly lie in tactical knowledge more than motivating. 5/10
Style of football: likes to encourage creative, passing football, yet his choice of formations have changed since he joined Tottenham. With Porto, he played Falcao as the central striker, who was flanked by Varela and Hulk providing width. At Chelsea, he use a similar tactic with Drogba as the front man. However, at Tottenham he's noticed the change in trends in football and incoporated a very modern 4-2-3-1 formation, with which the likes of Man City, Dortmund and Real Madrid have all been successful. It looks to be a tactic which the Spurs team have taken some time to adjust to, but one that promises much for the future. 8/10
Organisation: hasn't managed to transfer his ability to organise teams from Portuguese football to England. He established a formidable defence in his one season at Porto, when his side conceded just 16 goals in 30 games- the best defensive record for a team in that league for 3 seasons. However, in his brief spell as Chelsea manager, they conceded an average of 1.2 goals per game, that's with the likes of Cole and Terry fit. Since he joined Spurs, their defensive record has become the 3rd worst of all the teams in the top half of the table, with 28 goals conceded in 23 games. 4/10
Motivating & Media-handling: this is an area where he's fallen down quite a bit. A few years ago, he formed the perfect management partnership with Mourinho at Porto, Chelsea and Internazionale. It worked because AVB was the shy tactical genius, who would scout and analyse the tactics and strengths/weaknesses of the opposition, Mourinho was the charismatic motivator, who could deal with the press and instantly command the respect of his team. The perfect combo. However, since AVB has decided to go into management alone, his inexperience has cost him in press conferences and he failed to gain the players' support at Chelsea, as Mourinho was able to. 3/10
Results & Success: I think you'd have to give him a reasonably generous score here. He kept Academica up easily in his first job in club management, then won the treble with Porto in his only season there. I would calculate that he's on his way to winning a few trophies with Tottenham, so the only real criticism you can hand him is his short and unfruitful spell with Chelsea, given the financial backing he had. He perhaps tried to change that club over in terms of personnel and style of football too radically, yet you can also argue that he needed much more patience from Abramovich for the transition to ever work. 7/10
Overall: I do have a soft spot for AVB, and he's still a young manager at 35. I think he'll succeed in future, particularly if he can improve his media-handling skills, because he's a very good tactician. However, the fact that he's young means that he hasn't yet got a well developed enough managerial CV to rate him too highly. 6/10
Jurgen Klopp
I don't think you can overestimate what Klopp has done at Borussia Dortmund. He took them from the outskirts of relegation and increasing debt in 2008 to winning back-to-back Bundesliga titles, and thriving in the Champions League this season. In my opinion, he's the most underrated manager in the world, and certainly one of the best.
Transfer judgement: because of the clubs debt, which originated from Dortmund trying to compete financially with Europe's finest, Klopp was forced to change their splash-the-cash approach and attempt to find hidden gems, which he did very well. Granted lot of players in Dortmund's Bundesliga winning team, such as Schmelzer and Gotze came through the academy, but Klopp managed to bring in centre-back pairing Hummels and Subotic for nominal fees. He signed Shinji Kagawa for £200k before making a £24-million profit on him through Manchester United, and a connection in Poland helped him find talented trio Piszczek, Lewandowski and Blaszczykowski. Don't worry, I've turned spellchecker off whilst writing this. 8/10
Style of football: youthful mobility has been the basis of this Dortmund team. Klopp seems to love working with younger players, so the tactic he's employed has been to try and run the opponents into the ground with a frenetic energy. Though this has proved to be a very effective style of play, one can't help but think this has more to do with the age of players - an average age of 22 - due to the club's use of the academy, than necessarily a plan of Klopp's. It's an additional benefit of having a young team. 6/10
Organisation: fairly impressive. The 2010-11 Dortmund side held the best defensive record of any Bundesliga team in previous 3 years at the time, which is an impressive feat given the apparent lack of experience. Mats Hummels has been instrumental defensively, and recently signed a new contract citing a repayment of Klopp's faith in him as the reason behind it. His long-term partnership with Neven Subotic will prove crucial in any further success Dortmund can have. 7/10
Motivation & Media-handling: in translated videos of him in press conferences I've seen, Klopp has taken a casual and relaxed approach. He's displayed an open body language and often has a smile on his face, which emits a lot of confidence. This mentality may have had a positive impact on Dortmund's performances in the big games, because in their last 5 matches against rivals Bayern Munich, they've won 4 and drawn 1. 7/10
Results & Success: indisputable. I don't think Klopp could have done any more for Dortmund. To take them from the brink of relegation, and possibly administration to Bundesliga winners twice, and once with a highest ever points tally, is sensational. Add to that, he's overseen them demolish Bayern Munich 5-2 in the German cup final to win the double one year and many are tipping Dortmund to go far in the knockout phases of the Champions League this season. 10/10
Overall: people talk about the likes of Guardiola and Mourinho as the best managers in the world, but when they arrived at their clubs they inherited a squad jam-packed with talent and in Mourinho's case, great financial support. However, that was nothing like the case when Klopp took over at Dortmund yet he's achieved similar amounts of success- I find it surprising that he's not being talked about in the same bracket. 9/10
The Pragmatists
The pragmatists always ingrain a 'win-at-all-costs' mentality into their teams, and are prepared to do whatever is necessary to achieve short-term success. Though they impose a system often designed to get the best out of their top players, their main strengths lie in their charisma and motivational skills. In press conferences, each of the following managers have their unique way of instantly capturing everyone's attention, and this aura seems to help them gain the respect of their players. Interestingly though, each of the managers have been generally known to spend a couple of years at a club before moving on for their next challenge, rather than laying down a foundation stone at their current club.
Jose Mourinho
I've developed a great disdain for his childish touchline antics, but there's certainly no arguing with 'the special one's track record. The number of trophies he's won in 4 different countries clearly proves that he's amongst the best managers in the world.
Transfer judgement: particularly when managing Chelsea and Real Madrid, he's had a bottomless pit of money at his disposal, with which you can't help but think that most managers would do a good job. It would be unwise therefore to rate his transfer judgement skills too highly, but signing Didier Drogba at Chelsea and Sami Khedira at Madrid were good pieces of business. He got the best out of his lavish transfer funds, but had he not done so, he would arguably have been heavily criticized. 6/10
Style of football: he's varied his standard formation choice at each club he's managed at to suit the players at his disposal, which highlights his pragmatist mentality. However, like Andre Villas-Boas, he's spotted the rise of the 4-2-3-1 formation in the modern game and has implemented that at Madrid. He's got the galacticos playing direct, high-tempo football in which Ronaldo plays a key role drifting inside from the left wing. 6/10
Organisation: he established a good defensive record with Porto and in his first season in charge of Chelsea, they conceded just 15 Premiership goals- that's half the number they had let in the season before under Claudio Ranieri. However, his sides's scoring records since then suggest that he has put more emphasis on attack after he joined Inter. Madrid have been struggling at the back this season.7/10
Motivating & Media-handling: outstanding. Alex Ferguson is normally regarded as the master of mind-games, but not whilst Jose was in England, because United only beat Chelsea once in ten matches whilst Mourinho was manager. I've read 'Mourinho- anatomy of a winner' by Patrick Barclay, and the Portuguese has a great skill for motivating his team. In his last match in charge of Benfica, he lied to his team that the opposition were so confident of a win that they had neglected preparation for the match and had been watching tennis all week, when in fact Mourinho only saw the opposition at the tennis once. He spun the tale to his advantage to motivate his side, later confessing to doing so, having won that match 3-0. However, with him being so notoriously cunning in his use of them, one wonders for how long these mind-game tricks will work for Mourinho before people begin to mistrust him. Will they continue to work for him in the long-term? 9/10
Results & Success: if you base success on ability to succeed at a range of different clubs, in different countries (rather than long-term success at one club), then Mourinho is the best manager in the world. No other manager compares on that score. He's won 15 different trophies including the Champions League twice in 10 years since he became manager of Porto. 10/10
Overall: there is no doubting what Mourinho has achieved, yet I would question whether he will succeed in future. Everything he's done so far has all been geared towards short-term success with the club he's at. However, a growing feeling may eventually develop that he's not going to settle down at one club, and this could be unsettling for his players. Furthermore, his mind-games and motivating tactics have worked a treat for him as far, but surely eventually people will wisen up to them and begin to take his words with a pinch of salt? Whether he will continue to win things whilst hopping between clubs in future is up for debate, but there's certainly no denying what he's achieved thus far. 9/10
Style of football: he's varied his standard formation choice at each club he's managed at to suit the players at his disposal, which highlights his pragmatist mentality. However, like Andre Villas-Boas, he's spotted the rise of the 4-2-3-1 formation in the modern game and has implemented that at Madrid. He's got the galacticos playing direct, high-tempo football in which Ronaldo plays a key role drifting inside from the left wing. 6/10
Organisation: he established a good defensive record with Porto and in his first season in charge of Chelsea, they conceded just 15 Premiership goals- that's half the number they had let in the season before under Claudio Ranieri. However, his sides's scoring records since then suggest that he has put more emphasis on attack after he joined Inter. Madrid have been struggling at the back this season.7/10
Motivating & Media-handling: outstanding. Alex Ferguson is normally regarded as the master of mind-games, but not whilst Jose was in England, because United only beat Chelsea once in ten matches whilst Mourinho was manager. I've read 'Mourinho- anatomy of a winner' by Patrick Barclay, and the Portuguese has a great skill for motivating his team. In his last match in charge of Benfica, he lied to his team that the opposition were so confident of a win that they had neglected preparation for the match and had been watching tennis all week, when in fact Mourinho only saw the opposition at the tennis once. He spun the tale to his advantage to motivate his side, later confessing to doing so, having won that match 3-0. However, with him being so notoriously cunning in his use of them, one wonders for how long these mind-game tricks will work for Mourinho before people begin to mistrust him. Will they continue to work for him in the long-term? 9/10
Results & Success: if you base success on ability to succeed at a range of different clubs, in different countries (rather than long-term success at one club), then Mourinho is the best manager in the world. No other manager compares on that score. He's won 15 different trophies including the Champions League twice in 10 years since he became manager of Porto. 10/10
Overall: there is no doubting what Mourinho has achieved, yet I would question whether he will succeed in future. Everything he's done so far has all been geared towards short-term success with the club he's at. However, a growing feeling may eventually develop that he's not going to settle down at one club, and this could be unsettling for his players. Furthermore, his mind-games and motivating tactics have worked a treat for him as far, but surely eventually people will wisen up to them and begin to take his words with a pinch of salt? Whether he will continue to win things whilst hopping between clubs in future is up for debate, but there's certainly no denying what he's achieved thus far. 9/10
Jupp Heynckes
Transfer judgement: the €22 million signing of Manuel Neuer from Schalke 04 has proved to be a great piece of business. Neuer is now regarded by many as the best goalkeeper in the world, he has made some terrific saves and has contributed to Bayern's great defensive record. However, Heynckes will never be reknowned for his ability in the transfer market as few of his signings, Neuer aside, have proved to be stars- he's been more one to develop and work with the players he already has at his disposal. 5/10
Style of football: in a similar way to Mourinho, he's changed the type of tactics that he's implementing to suit his players. He used a 4-5-1 with attacking wingers, convertible to a 4-3-3, at Bayer Leverkusen but changed to the popular 4-2-3-1 when he went to Munich. He's unlikely to come to a club with a new system, a new philosophy in mind. 4/10
Organisation: I've calculated the average defensive record of all of the teams who have played under Heynckes. His sides, put together, have conceded an average of 1.2 goals per game. Considering that he's managed some of the top clubs, including three stints at Bayern Munich, I did expect that record to be better, but it's also noticeable how his defensive record has gradually improved throughout his career. Although his Borussia Monchengladbach side finished bottom in 2007, they also held the best defensive record of a team to be relegated in 11 years. Bayern Munich had the best 'goals against' record in the Bundesliga last season and more impressively this year, they've conceded just 7 goals from 19 games, which is the best defensive record in Europe. 7/10
Motivating & media-handling: a fairly shy character in the face of the media, it's been rare for Heynckes to speak out in public and he seems to interact with his team internally. However, by all accounts he's a strict man manager, and has been dubbed 'osram' (a German lighting manufacturer) by the media, in reference to his reddening face when agitated! 5/10
Results & Success: mixed. With an 11 point lead with Bayern now at the top, we can bet that Heynckes is onto his third Bundesliga title, but could he have won more? In his 33 year managerial career with 13 spells as a manager, he has his success with Bayern and winning the Champions League with Real Madrid to show for it (though he was sacked from Madrid after doing so). Tarnishing these successes though, are brief and unfruitful stints for a year or so at Bilbao, Frankfurt, Tenerife, Benfica, Bilbao again and Monchengladbach. 5/10
Overall: You have to look at his managerial career as a whole and say that although it's had it's moments, Heynckes hasn't been able to sustain his successes in the longer term. He's a journeyman manager who can come into a club and immediately gain the respect of the players. However, like Mourinho he could be described as a 'quick fix', who prioritizes immediate results over attempting to leave a legacy with a club. 6/10
Sam Allardyce
You may wonder why I've decided to include Sam Allardyce in amongst the Guardiolas and the Mourinhos of the world. Depending on how you rate them, I think Allardyce is within the top 10 managers in England. If you have him as your manager, you're in a great position to stabilize yourself as a Premier League club, because Allardyce is yet to relegate a team in a full season as a manager.
Transfer judgement: quite impressive, particularly at Bolton. Most would describe Allardyce as the classic wheeler and dealer, spending just £2.7 million on transfers per season in his 8 years at Bolton, and signing no fewer than 40 players there on a free transfer. Stelios, Kevin Davies, Okocha and Ivan Campo, who became key players for the club, were all signed for no transfer fee. However, a lot of his buys at Bolton were more as a result of a 'smash and grab' mentality than long-term planning. He averaged 9 signings per season at the north-west club, many of which came and went. Aside from the transfers he made at Bolton, the signing of Kevin Nolan for West Ham in the Championship, who at the time was captain of Premiership Newcastle, was a massive statement of intent and helped West Ham to promotion in 2012. 7/10
Style of football: direct, often route-one football. At Bolton, the plan was to hoof the ball high for Kevin Davies to spearhead attacking moves and have the likes of Okocha or Nolan pick up his flick-ons and knock-downs. Not always the prettiest or most enjoyable to watch, but the effect was there. At West Ham, the gameplan has been similar, but with a little more emphasis on getting the ball to the flanks to provide width- but he still uses a target man with Carlton Cole in the Kevin Davies role. 2/10
Organisation: Allardyce has managed very physical teams in West Ham and Bolton, which has made them hard to beat, especially at home. The reason Arsenal had a poor record at the Reebok whilst he was manager there, was perhaps that the young guns couldn't find the strength to break them down, and that's been the case with a lot of teams. He has a solid defensive record behind him. 8/10
Motivating & media-handling: quite open. The fact that he's never managed a big club perhaps distances him somewhat from the mind-games that go on at the top. In exclusive interviews I've read that have involved him, he's highlighted the importance of "treating people how you'd like to be treated" and building personal relationships with his staff. It may be this that have made Bolton and West Ham such hardworking teams. 6/10
Results & Success: after a very successful season managing in Ireland, Allardyce had an unlucky few years. He did a great job as caretaker manager of Preston, keeping them up and definately deserved to get the job full-time, he was then very unfairly sacked by Blackpool, after failing to attain promotion with them by a point and arrived at Notts County too late to save them from relegation. However, he got them promoted back at the first time of asking with a 19 point gap and was to have 8 successful years, mainly in the Premiership, with Bolton. The one damp spot on his CV is his disappointing stint at Newcastle, but looks to be in the process of stabilizing West Ham in the Premiership as he did with Bolton. 7/10
Overall: you can't quite call Allardyce a great manager because he hasn't, and probably will never manage a top club. However, wherever he goes he always seems to create very hardworking teams that look motivated to play for him, and he always makes his teams hard to beat which is a crucial part of helping clubs stay in the Premier League. 6/10
Fabio Capello
An orthodox disciplinarian, Capello has a track record not dissimilar to Mourinho and Heynckes. In his 26 year post-playing career, he's filled 13 different managerial roles, spending an average of 2 years in each and is currently manager of Russia.
Transfer judgement: Capello can be credited for the signing of Roberto Carlos in his first spell at Real Madrid, but he's made few high-profile signings for clubs other than that. He looks to have operated a policy of bringing in the best young players, finding Walter Samuel at Roma and spotting the talent in Gonzalo Higuan and Marcelo, who are now shining at Real Madrid. 6/10
Style of football: a rigid 4-4-2 formation has been his favourite system throughout his managerial career. However, this pragmatic approach wasn't approved of by club president Ramon Calderon, who wanted a continuation of the tradition of beautiful football at Madrid. Because of this, and despite him winning Madrid their first La Liga title in 4 years, Capello was sacked. 3/10
Organisation: before going into management, Capello wrote a research article called: 'the zonal marking system', and he's always favoured this. He's led England to 16 clean sheets from 42 games and his Milan team conceded an average of 0.6 goals per game. He's fantastic at turning his teams into ones that know how to grind out results. 9/10
Motivating & media-handling: he has a certain aura about him. Whenever he walks into a press conference room he has that ability to make everyone sit up and take notice of him, which I'm sure is a skill he transfers into the dressing room. He has been known to also take a strict and unforgiving approach even to his best players, which is a rare policy. He's never been afraid to stamp his authority on his team. 8/10
Results & Success: he's succeeded almost everywhere he's been. 5 Serie A titles in 6 years at Milan is some feat, he then took Roma to a Serie A title which was to be the third in their history, and a title at Juventus, though this was later stripped off them due to the Calciopoli scandal. Very unfairly sacked at Real Madrid, but his main career disappointment has been England's poor performance at the 2010 World Cup. 9/10
Overall: his CV proves that his disciplinarian approach and rididly defensive strategy, both of which have been criticized, can translate into success. In my opinion England are years of youth development programmes away from getting anywhere near the World Cup final, and the disappointment of the world cup cannot rest with Capello. I rate the Italian as one of the best managers in the world. 8/10
Conclusion
So, which of these types of managers bear the most success?
Idealists
Wenger: 7/10
Guardiola: 8/10
AVB: 6/10
Klopp: 9/10
Apart from Wenger, none of the idealists go into press conferences with too much of an agenda. Guardiola and Klopp often take a fairly laid-back approach, which seems to have an unexpectedly positive impact, because it emitts a certain confidence in their team.
Neither Klopp, Guardiola or Wenger have spent much money, but they've been able to make up for the lack of funding by being at their respective clubs for several years and creating a stable environment for the players.
Each of these idealists have a philosophy for attractive, passing football. Particularly in Arsene Wenger's case, this importance seems to come even before getting the results. All of these managers have a lot of faith in youth, which has paid off for Guardiola and Klopp due to the fantastic youth academies at Barca and Dortmund. However, AVB's dramatic overhaul of young players at Chelsea worked against him and Wenger has sometimes failed to balance the talent of Arsenal's academy graduates with enough experience.
Average success rating: 7.5
Pragmatists:
Mourinho: 9/10
Heynckes: 6/10
Allardyce: 6/10
Capello: 8/10
All of these managers, maybe Allardyce to a lesser extent, have developed a habit of spending a couple of years at a club winning trophies, before moving onto their next job. As far, they've all been successful, yet I worry in this climate of rich, young, impatient chairmen, that these 'quick fix' managers will become more popular. I would actually question whether the likes of Mourinho will continue to be successful if he continues to spend rarely longer than 2 or 3 years at a club, because eventually players will question whether he'll be there for the long-term, and that may become unsettling.
I did expect this 'pragmatist' breed of managers to be heavy-spenders, but it's only Mourinho has had massive financial backing. Capello has favoured signing players young and cheap and Allardyce has had to work with an average transfer budget of under £3 million a year. Heynckes too hasn't exactly employed a splash-the-cash policy in the transfer market.
Average success rating: 7.25
Comparing the two, I've come to the conclusion that the idealist managers have been the more successful. This is mainly because of their ability to make up for a lack of funding, by creating a comfortable, stable environment for the players and developing cheap talent.
However, I believe it's possible to merge the best of these two styles, and Alex Ferguson is proof of this. He's an exception to my idealist/pragmatist categories, because he doesn't fit into either entirely. He's spent 25 years at Old Trafford, trusts his young players and gets his teams playing exciting football which suggests he has a few characteristics of the idealist.
On the other hand, he has a presence in press conferences with his mind-games, he has been known to deal with his players in a strict way and ingrains a 'win-at-all-costs' mentality into his team. So, in my next article, I'm going to talk about how Alex Ferguson blurs the lines between idealism and pragmatism to be probably the greatest manager to have ever graced the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment