I think he is a good/ OK manager. He can get almost anyone he wants, and even despite that he has acheived league positions of 5th and 3rd. Not exactly incredible considering the 200million + they spent in each of those years.
-----------------------------------
Firstly, City haven't spent £200m plus in each of those years.
Secondly, in the season in which we finished 5th, Mancini was only in charge for half the season. And during that season Mancini's only money signing was Adam Johnson (for £7m).
In his first full season in England (last season), he guided the club to a 3rd place finish, level on points with 2nd place Chelsea, and City won the FA Cup.
Yes Mancini benefits from being in a position to spend lots of money, but by the very same token I lost count of the number of times I heard people say "money doesn't guarantee success", or "money doesn't buy you a "team", or indeed "money will result in City imploding because of all the big ego's that the players the club has signed have".
The bottom line of such comments being it takes more to build a successful team and manage the egos that come with such high-profile players. Mancini is doing rather nicely in both regards. Even in light of all the problems that Tevez has caused us - itself a symptom of the point about big egos - City have not been affected where it really matters. That being on the pitch. On the contrary, since the events in Munich, City have played 8 games and won them all.
Personally, I think Mancini deserves more credit than some people are prepared to give him.
RipleysCat (U1862)
I sometimes think people write deluded comments and believe it like you.
If I was shiekh Mansour I would expect to win every trophy. Remember no team has spent as much as city in the history of football, not real madrid not even chelsea.
Heck, the owners spent more on wages then how mhch it cost to buy the club and nearly twice as much on players. £1bn spent in 3 years is crazy.
You think I write deluded comments?
LIke what exactly?
The amount that City have spent has to be judged in a relative sense. Think about that for a moment.
"£1b spent in 3 years." Ok, you've played your hand. You clearly think you know the figure. So explain it.
Secondly, in the season in which we finished 5th, Mancini was only in charge for half the season. And during that season Mancini's only money signing was Adam Johnson (for £7m).
..............................................
That was delusion. By your logic if SAF went to real madrid only spent £7m considering Man city already had spent £272.75m under hughes and Mancini since spent another £243.75mm
http://www.tribalfootball.com/articles/sheikh-mansour-spends-915000-a-day-taking-man-city-summit-2005311
That was delusion
-----------------------
No, that was fact. It is a fact that Mancini was not in charge for the entirety of that season. And it is a fact that during when Mancini was in charge for that season, City's only money signing as Adam Johnson.
What City spent after that season (which naturally couldn't have had any bearing upon that season) is irrelevent. The spending prior to his arrival obviously has some bearing (never suggested otherwise). What he spent after that season however, well, unless Mancini is a time-traveller...
Anyway, I asked you a question. You stated a figure of £1b in three years. Your reply to me ignored that question. So I ask again, explain this £1bn figure that YOU mention.
tribalfootball????
Have I just read that correctly?
I have no interest in crappy websites. When I ask for facts, figures, accounts, or otherwise, I expect in return a link to an official site.
For only then will I regard such figures spouted by the likes of you to be relevant.
Understand?
http://www.asiaplatetv.net/readnews.php?title=Sheikh+Mansour+spends+%A3915%2C000+A+DAY+taking+Man+City+to+summit
Anyway
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/managers-comparisons.html
Look at where sir alex ferguson wenger moyes etc are. Only villa boas is a mistake but shows you money doesn't always buy success.
I'm sorry, but what part of "official links" did you not understand?
But let's entertain the point you're trying to make.
Transfer fees, wages, bonuses, etc etc etc.
Apply the very same criteria to every single club.
So go on, tell me, what are the wages, bonuses, transfer fees, etc, for , oh I don't know, West Brom, just to pluck a name out of a hat?
I don't think hafijur really understands the business model that our owners adopted when they came in, otherwise he wouldn't make pointless comparisons to clubs like United who are already well established in the European elite.
"If I was shiekh Mansour I would expect to win every trophy. Remember no team has spent as much as city in the history of football, not real madrid not even chelsea."
It's comments like that which really don't do the lad any favours.
comment by dependabledennis (U2272)
posted 19 hours, 20 minutes ago
One of the staff is a red and last week he reminded me that a year ago I told him I wouldn't swap Mancini for Mourinho.
He admitted at the time he thought I was mental, but says now he is beginning to see why.
----------------
I really don't like Joes very much, but he's done it in Portugal, England, Italy and soon Spain, if (A massive IF) he does go on to do it here for a few years than then in three other countries, then he might be as good, but he's a massive way off that yet.
----------
Fully accept this, my point 12 months ago (and still now) is that should Mourinho become available tomorrow and start begging to be given the City job, it would not interest me in the slightest.
This might seem kind of obvious now as we are doing well so there is no need to replace Mancini. However, this time last year, things weren't quite so rosy and the media and other clubs fans were enjoying stirring it up and trying to put RM under pressure.
This is actually how my original 'debate' with the the red at the hotel began - 'you'll never win anything with Mancini in charge - he's too negative' (a statement I haven't heard much recently)
City fans were split on RM admittedly but many I know were of the same opinion as me that, Mancini is and will prove himself to be a top draw manager, I use the Mourinho comparison to highlight just how highly I rate RM, not to claim that he is neccessarily a better manager (yet)
"We don't wanna start sounding like liverpool fans, or other 'big' clubs that are still living off past glories x"
Past glories? It was 6months ago ffs, get real.
"Yes his side has done well this season, but we'll be in a better position to judge his managerial abilities at the end of it."
Yeah right, even if we win the league by a record number of points Mancini will get no credit from the bitters who will claim he bought it or that it was easy when he bought so many great players. The same players that everyone said would never gel and he could never manage so many ego's.
It does not matter what we do or don't do by the end of the season because the wums will be all over our board with their bitter comments either way, but you know what? I could not care a jot, i'm loving it, title or not.
comment by gratedbean (U4885)
I don't mind the glazers policy but if they osld another team and paid off the loan they would save so much on interest. Anyway Man city are the same as chelsea in the way they have gone about it. Theres no excuse of city highest finish being 8th as an excuse before the money as they are coming from a long way back. Didn't tottenham finish 4th from a long way back the year before.
Theres investment and then theres being able to buy any player on the market at any fee. If ronaldo came on sale for lets say £80m abramovich goes in for him then man city bid £100m and £1m a week wages which to them is pocket change real madrid would sell to man city.
ManCityMan - yes it was 6 months ago (in the past), and the FA Cup is definitely a glory
All I'm saying is if (and that is a big IF) City end the season potless, you won't find me saying, "Yeah but we won the FA Cup last year."
Essentially every team is only as good as their last game (except for League Cup, Charity Shield, and friendly games ) x
Essentially every team is only as good as their last game (except for League Cup, Charity Shield, and friendly games ) x
........................................
That is not true unless you put youngsters from your academy in those games. If you play 6 or 7 of your first team they will want to win as much but will have more quality.
Sign in if you want to comment
Why is Mancini so underated
Page 2 of 2
posted on 9/11/11
I think he is a good/ OK manager. He can get almost anyone he wants, and even despite that he has acheived league positions of 5th and 3rd. Not exactly incredible considering the 200million + they spent in each of those years.
-----------------------------------
Firstly, City haven't spent £200m plus in each of those years.
Secondly, in the season in which we finished 5th, Mancini was only in charge for half the season. And during that season Mancini's only money signing was Adam Johnson (for £7m).
In his first full season in England (last season), he guided the club to a 3rd place finish, level on points with 2nd place Chelsea, and City won the FA Cup.
Yes Mancini benefits from being in a position to spend lots of money, but by the very same token I lost count of the number of times I heard people say "money doesn't guarantee success", or "money doesn't buy you a "team", or indeed "money will result in City imploding because of all the big ego's that the players the club has signed have".
The bottom line of such comments being it takes more to build a successful team and manage the egos that come with such high-profile players. Mancini is doing rather nicely in both regards. Even in light of all the problems that Tevez has caused us - itself a symptom of the point about big egos - City have not been affected where it really matters. That being on the pitch. On the contrary, since the events in Munich, City have played 8 games and won them all.
Personally, I think Mancini deserves more credit than some people are prepared to give him.
posted on 10/11/11
RipleysCat (U1862)
I sometimes think people write deluded comments and believe it like you.
If I was shiekh Mansour I would expect to win every trophy. Remember no team has spent as much as city in the history of football, not real madrid not even chelsea.
Heck, the owners spent more on wages then how mhch it cost to buy the club and nearly twice as much on players. £1bn spent in 3 years is crazy.
posted on 10/11/11
You think I write deluded comments?
LIke what exactly?
The amount that City have spent has to be judged in a relative sense. Think about that for a moment.
"£1b spent in 3 years." Ok, you've played your hand. You clearly think you know the figure. So explain it.
posted on 10/11/11
Secondly, in the season in which we finished 5th, Mancini was only in charge for half the season. And during that season Mancini's only money signing was Adam Johnson (for £7m).
..............................................
That was delusion. By your logic if SAF went to real madrid only spent £7m considering Man city already had spent £272.75m under hughes and Mancini since spent another £243.75mm
posted on 10/11/11
http://www.tribalfootball.com/articles/sheikh-mansour-spends-915000-a-day-taking-man-city-summit-2005311
posted on 10/11/11
That was delusion
-----------------------
No, that was fact. It is a fact that Mancini was not in charge for the entirety of that season. And it is a fact that during when Mancini was in charge for that season, City's only money signing as Adam Johnson.
What City spent after that season (which naturally couldn't have had any bearing upon that season) is irrelevent. The spending prior to his arrival obviously has some bearing (never suggested otherwise). What he spent after that season however, well, unless Mancini is a time-traveller...
Anyway, I asked you a question. You stated a figure of £1b in three years. Your reply to me ignored that question. So I ask again, explain this £1bn figure that YOU mention.
posted on 10/11/11
tribalfootball????
Have I just read that correctly?
I have no interest in crappy websites. When I ask for facts, figures, accounts, or otherwise, I expect in return a link to an official site.
For only then will I regard such figures spouted by the likes of you to be relevant.
Understand?
posted on 10/11/11
http://www.asiaplatetv.net/readnews.php?title=Sheikh+Mansour+spends+%A3915%2C000+A+DAY+taking+Man+City+to+summit
Anyway
posted on 10/11/11
http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/managers-comparisons.html
Look at where sir alex ferguson wenger moyes etc are. Only villa boas is a mistake but shows you money doesn't always buy success.
posted on 10/11/11
I'm sorry, but what part of "official links" did you not understand?
But let's entertain the point you're trying to make.
Transfer fees, wages, bonuses, etc etc etc.
Apply the very same criteria to every single club.
So go on, tell me, what are the wages, bonuses, transfer fees, etc, for , oh I don't know, West Brom, just to pluck a name out of a hat?
posted on 10/11/11
I don't think hafijur really understands the business model that our owners adopted when they came in, otherwise he wouldn't make pointless comparisons to clubs like United who are already well established in the European elite.
"If I was shiekh Mansour I would expect to win every trophy. Remember no team has spent as much as city in the history of football, not real madrid not even chelsea."
It's comments like that which really don't do the lad any favours.
posted on 10/11/11
comment by dependabledennis (U2272)
posted 19 hours, 20 minutes ago
One of the staff is a red and last week he reminded me that a year ago I told him I wouldn't swap Mancini for Mourinho.
He admitted at the time he thought I was mental, but says now he is beginning to see why.
----------------
I really don't like Joes very much, but he's done it in Portugal, England, Italy and soon Spain, if (A massive IF) he does go on to do it here for a few years than then in three other countries, then he might be as good, but he's a massive way off that yet.
----------
Fully accept this, my point 12 months ago (and still now) is that should Mourinho become available tomorrow and start begging to be given the City job, it would not interest me in the slightest.
This might seem kind of obvious now as we are doing well so there is no need to replace Mancini. However, this time last year, things weren't quite so rosy and the media and other clubs fans were enjoying stirring it up and trying to put RM under pressure.
This is actually how my original 'debate' with the the red at the hotel began - 'you'll never win anything with Mancini in charge - he's too negative' (a statement I haven't heard much recently)
City fans were split on RM admittedly but many I know were of the same opinion as me that, Mancini is and will prove himself to be a top draw manager, I use the Mourinho comparison to highlight just how highly I rate RM, not to claim that he is neccessarily a better manager (yet)
posted on 10/11/11
"We don't wanna start sounding like liverpool fans, or other 'big' clubs that are still living off past glories x"
Past glories? It was 6months ago ffs, get real.
posted on 10/11/11
"Yes his side has done well this season, but we'll be in a better position to judge his managerial abilities at the end of it."
Yeah right, even if we win the league by a record number of points Mancini will get no credit from the bitters who will claim he bought it or that it was easy when he bought so many great players. The same players that everyone said would never gel and he could never manage so many ego's.
It does not matter what we do or don't do by the end of the season because the wums will be all over our board with their bitter comments either way, but you know what? I could not care a jot, i'm loving it, title or not.
posted on 10/11/11
comment by gratedbean (U4885)
I don't mind the glazers policy but if they osld another team and paid off the loan they would save so much on interest. Anyway Man city are the same as chelsea in the way they have gone about it. Theres no excuse of city highest finish being 8th as an excuse before the money as they are coming from a long way back. Didn't tottenham finish 4th from a long way back the year before.
Theres investment and then theres being able to buy any player on the market at any fee. If ronaldo came on sale for lets say £80m abramovich goes in for him then man city bid £100m and £1m a week wages which to them is pocket change real madrid would sell to man city.
posted on 10/11/11
ManCityMan - yes it was 6 months ago (in the past), and the FA Cup is definitely a glory
All I'm saying is if (and that is a big IF) City end the season potless, you won't find me saying, "Yeah but we won the FA Cup last year."
Essentially every team is only as good as their last game (except for League Cup, Charity Shield, and friendly games ) x
posted on 10/11/11
Essentially every team is only as good as their last game (except for League Cup, Charity Shield, and friendly games ) x
........................................
That is not true unless you put youngsters from your academy in those games. If you play 6 or 7 of your first team they will want to win as much but will have more quality.
Page 2 of 2