FanNation - The Republic of Sport

j11forbes said 07/07, 04:17 PM
If we were looking at best coaches since the 80s, it would be hard to argue with Sir Alex. Still, his most impressive year was 1999, just outside the area of our discussion. And he has had phenomenal resources at his disposal his entire time as manager of Man. U.

I have to go with Jose Mourinho. Finally getting Chelsea to win a major trophy is an impressive enough accomplishment, but like Alex Ferguson, he had great resources at his disposal which finally allowed Chelsea to compete on equal footing with Man. U. What I find most impressive is his Champions League Trophy with Porto. Winning a Champions League is difficult enough as a manager. To do it with an underfunded squad like Porto is simply jaw-dropping.

Mourinho has accomplished a phenomenal amount in the past 8 years:

2 Portuguese SuperLiga titles
2 EPL titles
2 League Cups
1 FA Cup
1 UEFA Cup
1 Champions League win
1 Portugese Cup

He won league titles 4 consecutive years in a row. He's done it in 2 different leagues. He's even taken a nothing squad like Leiria to a European competition. He truly is the Special One.

And am I the only one hoping Inter meets both Man. U. and Chelsea in the Champions League?

j11forbes said 07/07, 05:01 PM
He didn't finish second to Sir Alex this year. Avram Grant did.

In the end, success is what matters. Not staying with one team, not what crazy stuff he does, just winning. Mourinho has done that more impressively. And if Chelsea was spending ridiculous amounts of money, so was Man U. But it didn't stop them from being eliminated by Porto on Mourinho's way to a Champions League title. Advantage: Jose.

In the three full seasons where they coached against each other in the EPL, Mourinho won 2 titles while Sir Alex won once. In those three years, Chelsea won 2 English League Cups, 1 FA Cup, and two league titles. Man U. won a league cup, a FA cup, and one title. Advantage: Jose.

None of this is to discount Sir Alex's work. 5 EPL titles in 9 years is impressive. But it's not enough to win best coach on its own.

You can discount the Portuguese titles all you want, but the Portuguese league is way tougher than you think it is. Jose has simply had more success in Europe. The UEFA Cup is still an impressive trophy, and winning a Champions League with Porto is infinitely more impressive than winning one with Man. U. Again, advantage: Jose.

j11forbes said 07/07, 05:56 PM
I don't give it the same weight. I do weigh winning the EPL trophy more. But I don't think it's right to discount those titles entirely, as you seem to be doing. You surely don't mean to argue he should be given no credit for those wins? And your argument ignores that he won the Champions League with that Porto squad, which certainly creates an argument that the team would have been just as successful as an EPL.

During the time when both we're in the Premiership, Jose won more than Sir Alex Ferguson. Period. When competing in the same competitions, Jose has a better performance record. Period. He's won more trophies in a shorter period of time, since he didn't coach last season really and he didn't really start his coaching career until 2001.

Jose has more hardware. He's won with an insane amount of money and with comparatively little money. He accomplished the equivalent of winning the World Series with a AAA club. He's adapted his style to suit different countries and a larger variety of players. His clubs have never given him the stability available at Man. U. And still, the man does nothing but win. And that's what the best do.