lalaboi: Well. . Mourinho wanted to be like citeh! outscore your opponents even if you conceed alot. That did not work out too well. \

More emphasis have been placed on the Defence because of the recent Horrow shows! It has paid off and everyone has stepped up thier game a bit. I prefer the Defend and take your chances if you ask me, Chelsea players are not suited for the attack attack attack and outscore your opponents

nateevs:


In my opinion, too many assumptions.

* Mourinho wanted to be like City. JM did not choose to be like City. Muourinho's choice will never be attacking football. This is the mandate he has been given. And that's why he keeps repeating in the press that he will default to defensive football.
* That didn't work out too well. Only because JM does not know how to set up a to attack.
* Chelsea players are not suited for attack attack. . . . This is unfounded when you factor in the fact that we have Oscar, Mata, Willian, Hazard et al. What do you think folks like Martinez, Pochettinno, Laudrup will do if they could afford all of the talent we have?

These guys have only a fraction of the talent we have yet managed to get and sustain attacking football from their mediocre players. At the Bridge, folks say we don't have the players.


Defensive football is easy. Attacking football is very difficult to teach, implement and sustain. You either know how to or you don't.

1025:

if u don't conceed, nobody will win u. if nobody wins u, then u a great side. if mourinho does not know how to attack, how did he get the record of the highest number of goals scored in a season in la liga? .

nateevs: Everyone refers to the Chelsea of yore but never remember to mention that along with that success came over £600m worth of non stop spending. JM will not achieve that without the spending.

Without spending huge
amounts, you will never win
anything.

nitlad:
Mourinho is not the culprit for Italy's bankruptcy, yet he took Inter to the highest peak possible in football. He didn't have hundreds of millions to spend before he desecrated European football sanctuaries en route to lifting the CL with Porto.
All the "JM gats spend plentiful to succeed" yarnings nor get footing cos Mourinho's greatest success came at Inter where greenbacks nor dey nyanfu nyanfu.

nitlad:



Mourinho is not the culprit for Italy's bankruptcy, yet he took Inter to the highest peak possible in football. He didn't have hundreds of millions to spend before he desecrated European football sanctuaries en route to lifting the CL with Porto.

All the "JM gats spend plentiful to succeed" yarnings nor get footing cos Mourinho's greatest success came at Inter where greenbacks nor dey nyanfu nyanfu.

El Guapo: And how Nateevs would think in line with a whimsical Dayo is shocking!

Mourinho has always shown tactical flexibility, i refuse to embrace the notion that big spending is his forte and a chief factor that has had him churn out results and play more attacking footie

Before Jose, the likes of Carvalho, Deco, Maniche, Costinha etc were mostly nobodies - either run-of-the-mill players in a decent porto side, or players plucked from unfashionable clubs in the Liga Sagres - Paulo Ferreira from Vitoria de Setubal.

He had them mutated into world beaters, repeated it in Chelsea, Inter and Madrid.

It took Jose's ingeniuty to have his innovative Chelsea triangle replaced with a double midfield-holding pivot in Khedira and Alonso, they dictated the game. An unproven Ozil occupied the hole and appeared to be the creativity hub. Took a powerful Didier who occupies two markers and replaced him with Ronaldo. And he won the league in style.

GustavoFring: I agree with Guapo: JM has always shown tactical flexibility in the past, along with a great ability to read the game and ring the required changes when needed.

But has his lot been helped by throwing millions into the locker rooms? yes.

It could be argued that big spending is a requirement to stay at the top level, but it could also be argued that big spending can paper over the cracks left by a less-than-astute-tactician.

Except for his stint Porto (who had a pretty easy run to the CL final), JM has had the luxury of working with huge warchests and exceptional players.

Now that he(seemingly) has not been allowed to spend big, Nateevs is only asking if our recent underperformance is due to a lack of tactical nous and/or a possible inability to throw money at the problem.

A valid question IMO.

GustavoFring: Now that he(seemingly) has not been allowed to spend big, Nateevs is only asking if our recent underperformance is due to a lack of tactical nous and/or a possible inability to throw money at the problem.

A valid question IMO.

El Guapo: See gbese o, when Jose come sign Andre Schurrle ni?

wonlasewonimi: But, Mancini had bottomless pit with Man city what did he achieve?

dayokanu: Jose Mourinho is clueless when it comes to attacking football, But in his elements with counter attacking or parking the Bus.

Jose Mourinho told us all that its easier to play defensive than to play attacking

He tried attacking everywhere he went any small hiccup he automatically defaults back to his defensive football

Thats why he would always be inferior to pep Guardiola his lord and master

dayokanu:

Mancini achieved at City the same thing Mourinho achieved at real Madrid

1 league, I super cup, one FA cup

trophyless in final season

mancinis own was even a bigger achievement because this was the first time City was winning and had no winning culture in them compared to madrid

El Guapo: You chat piss n' shiit like to say attacking footie underlines tactical ingeniuty.

Jose is not scared of any challenge, he takes them by the horn. He's got balls than your lord Pep who would resort for already structured teams in weak leagues.

Pep had the chance of moving to the EPL, why would he chicken out?

I love your gaffer though but mate, he's a weakling that dreads stern challenges.

Ofcourse its easier to defend than to attack, do you need Smith's tutorials at Harvard to grasp that simple notion?

If only most of you had the chance to step into a pitch, some debates here would be uncalled for.

wonlasewonimi: Uncle, it's not fair to judge him based on his performance in La liga. Even when Barcelona is struggling they are still on top of the league. Let Pep come and do the hard graft not the treble winning clubs he has been lucky to have.

ritchboy: Nonsense... Which grounds were desecrated? Porto's UCL win is a classic example of "luck of the draw", United were the only decent side they faced and they needed help from the officials to progress.

Inter spent shitloads of money when JM was there...

nateevs: Inter Milan's spending, £53m in 08/09 and £82m in 09/10 says you are wrong.

And where's the team he built only 3/4 years ago?

Plus like Ritchie said, check out the fixtures Porto en route the final.

dayokanu:

When both Pep and Jose were in the la Liga what was their head to head?

Why should Pep come to EPL? Its only football illiterates that talk those kind of gibberish Did Del Bosque, Marcelo Lippi, Hitzfeld, Arrigo Sacchi Jurgen Klopp, Van Gaal etc ever step into the EPL so why should Pep?

Pep saw a team that matched his ideology, Not a Sugar daddy team, not a park the bus team and he opted to join

Tell us Pep vs Mourinho head to head to show who is the better gaffer. Joses worst defeat was handed to him by Pep.

Since 2005 that Jose landed in Chelsea tell us how many players he has groomed. Pep in 5yrs would point at Sergio Busquets, Pedro etc

Jose always opts for the easy way out which is defending. Jose not scared of anything? Let him take Hull City, Eintracht Braunsweig, Almeria, and Livorno to win their local leagues first

I hope I have cleared your doubts about Schurrle and Mourinho

GustavoFring: 135 mill over 2 years is a budget job?

I fear your extravagance...

El Guapo: Oga get your stats right, Chelsea had already made enquiries about Andre and lounged in bids before Jose's arrival.

The board were busy with some signings and scouting that had nothing to do with Mou.

Epl wasn't tough under the days of Sacchi, Capello, Lippi etc, as it is now. Those days there was hardly a competition, it was Manure ruling the roost. So i understand why those great names never made a move.

Pep managed this Pep managed that - total prate talks!. A fella that had templates to work on made available by his predecessors - which made his work easier.

Pep had a better team than Jose during their days in Spain yet the latter putted up great fights, stopped him in a season and won the league convincingly.

Had already stopped him with Inter!

You dont fück with a gladiator Dayokanu.

Jose is a gladiator!

nitlad:

Yes it is in comparison to the relentless spending he could afford at Chelsea and Madrid.