The greatest ever?

Dotrel

aramush wrote: »

GIOVANNI TRAPATTONI

Hope you're still saying that a 9 days from now.

8-10

doomed wrote: »

Look what Clough won with journeymen. Under a lot of other managers Derby and Forrest would have been relegated. There is no other British manager who could have won the European Cup with Notts Forrest.

Mourinho's achievement winning the Champions league with Porto is greater than SAF winning it with MU or Pep doing it with Barca. Then he goes and does it again with Inter.

By that token managing to win a CL with players like Djimi Traore in the starting 11 would be a huge achievement?











(leaves thread)

ILikeBananas

dfx- wrote: »

Some good calls, I wouldn't have Ferguson in a top three or top ten worldwide as mentioned.

.....

Dario Gradi is another great shout. Seriously. Hitzfeld, Sacchi, Lobanovski, Clough, Guardiola, Wenger

Dario Gradi's achievements are greater than Alex Fergusons? Gtfo!

Lads, come on...



Look at that smile. Best ever hands down.

Dotrel

Deleted User wrote: »

Lads, come on...



Look at that smile. Best ever hands down.

Tactical genius. Deliberately losing 5-2 in embarrassing fashion to a minnow team in order to blow the group wide open was a gambling masterstroke. Picking amateur players in order to tap into the world class American talent pool is a move that should serve us well for generations to come. Kicking a bottle away to confuse 80million Germans. Truly he was a visionary who was ahead of his time.

Giruilla

Would put Clough as the coolest manager ever.. but Ferguson is obviously the best.

Pro. F

Zebra3 wrote: »

Ferguson is on the same amount of European Cups as Pep.

So far from the greatest ever.

The selection of Barca players that Pep found himself with is much better than any Ferguson has ever had. They are in fact one of the best collections of players ever. It's a stupid criticism of Fergie.

Lots of different managers could be called the greatest ever for lots of different reasons. Fergie clearly trumps everybody else when it comes to consistency of success. Other managers were more revolutionary and still others shone by winning with a low budget.
The choice of who is the greatest ever is very arbitrary, but anybody trying to say that Fergie wouldn't even be close is just making themselves look foolish.

doomed wrote: »

Is SAF the best ever? On the world stage? I doubt it. He is a great manager and has the longest reign and the most trophies in England but he is also managing a club that has consistently had the wealth and power to attract better players. Its impossible to compare.

I just want to point out that SAF has never had the top of the pile all to himself in terms of team quality and spending. There has always been rivals in the league who were spending similar to or more than United: Liverpool, Blackburn, Chelsea, Man City. It's true Ferguson in his time at United can't be credited with working on a shoe string like other managers can, but he also shouldn't be portrayed as having been able to buy the league at any time. All of his premiership titles have come when competing against a few teams of comparable quality/wealth at the top of the league.

doomed wrote: »

Look what Clough won with journeymen. Under a lot of other managers Derby and Forrest would have been relegated. There is no other British manager who could have won the European Cup with Notts Forrest.

Clough had quality all over the pitch thanks to the greatest scout that football has ever known in Taylor. Just because the players weren't recognised before they went to Derby and Forest doesn't mean they weren't good. I'm not saying he wasn't a class manager - I'd have the Clough/Taylor combo as one of the best ever - just pointing out he did have good players.

doomed wrote: »

Mourinho's achievement winning the Champions league with Porto is greater than SAF winning it with MU or Pep doing it with Barca. Then he goes and does it again with Inter.

Yeah Mourinho is definitely a strong candidate already and he still has a long career ahead of him.

steelcityblues

Del Bosque has to be up there.

tommyhaas

steelcityblues wrote: »

Del Bosque has to be up there.

He shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as any of the greats IMO, as he simply has not achieved anything that probably wouldn't have been expected given the group of players he's had

I'd rate David Moyes achievement of managing to keep Everton as a competitive Premier League side with no money in a higher regard then I would anything Del Bosque has achieved

steelcityblues

tommyhaas wrote: »

He shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as any of the greats IMO, as he simply has not achieved anything that probably wouldn't have been expected given the group of players he's had

I'd rate David Moyes achievement of managing to keep Everton as a competitive Premier League side with no money in a higher regard then I would anything Del Bosque has achieved

If Spain do it again next year - and add that to his R Madrid days - he is definitely one of the greatest all of the time. (NOTE: I didn't say 'the' greatest).

Winning at international level, without any money to buy/sell players, is a much tougher gig.

LOL at Moyes, he is not even ahead of Kendall if we are talking Everton.

flahavaj

tommyhaas wrote: »

He shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as any of the greats IMO, as he simply has not achieved anything that probably wouldn't have been expected given the group of players he's had

Given that successive Madrid managers have struggled to come anywhere near the success that he has had with them and that he has won 42 out of 48 games with Spain I think this is a bit harsh.

Dotrel

Dotrel wrote: »

Tactical genius. Deliberately losing 5-2 in embarrassing fashion to a minnow team in order to blow the group wide open was a gambling masterstroke. Picking amateur players in order to tap into the world class American talent pool is a move that should serve us well for generations to come. Kicking a bottle away to confuse 80million Germans. Truly he was a visionary who was ahead of his time.

Someone make this guy a mod, he knows the story.

tommyhaas

steelcityblues wrote: »

If Spain do it again next year - and add that to his R Madrid days - he is definitely one of the greatest all of the time. (NOTE: I didn't say 'the' greatest).

Winning at international level, without any money to buy/sell players, is a much tougher gig.

LOL at Moyes, he is not even ahead of Kendall if we are talking Everton.

Winning at international level without being able to buy or sell players is probably an advantage to Spain. When players like Reina, Fabregas, Torres and Mata weren't automatic starters during the world cup, it demonstrates just how strong their squad was

Regarding Moyes, obviously Kendall was more successful, however to manage what Moyes has in the current age, bearing in mind how long he went without spending any money what so ever, while all around him did, is in my mind a magnificent achievement, and one which I would imagine is far more difficult then winning the world cup with one of the most talented pools of players of all time

flahavaj wrote: »

Given that successive Madrid managers have struggled to come anywhere near the success that he has had with them and that he has won 42 out of 48 games with Spain I think this is a bit harsh.

Perhaps, however Barca were no where near the force then that they are now, and despite the players he had at Real, Rafa's Valencia beat him to the title. I don't know honestly how he did in Turkey as I don't follow Turkish football, I do know he get the sack fairly quickly though

Personally I don't think its possible to say who was the best of all time. It could be a manager like Ferguson who has created a dynasty, an innovator like Rinus Michels, a man who built a club like Shankly or a man who has achieved unrivalled success every where he's gone like Mourinho. But I certainly wouldn't include a man who has achieved more or less what a huge amount of people could have achieved in the jobs he's had with the likes of the above

steelcityblues

tommyhaas wrote: »

Winning at international level without being able to buy or sell players is probably an advantage to Spain. When players like Reina, Fabregas, Torres and Mata weren't automatic starters during the world cup, it demonstrates just how strong their squad was

Are you not applying the same thinking as saying well Fergie had Rooney, Ronaldo, Scholes, Keane, Cantona, Giggs, Van Nistelrooy, Bruce, Pallister, Irwin, etc, etc, then it made his job easier?

For years before, Spain had talent like Raul, Morientes, Mendieta, Hierro, Nadal, Luis Enrique, but obviously certain managers lacked something to make this group into winners.

In the league, you can play terrible for a few games and still win it. In a World Cup or Euro, you will be out if you do that.

I think Del Bosque deserves a lot of credit, just like the players do.

tommyhaas

steelcityblues wrote: »

Are you not applying the same thinking as saying well Fergie had Rooney, Ronaldo, Scholes, Keane, Cantona, Giggs, Van Nistelrooy, Bruce, Pallister, Irwin, etc, etc, then it made his job easier?

For years before, Spain had talent like Raul, Morientes, Mendieta, Hierro, Nadal, Luis Enrique, but obviously certain managers lacked something to make this group into winners.

In the league, you can play terrible for a few games and still win it. In a World Cup or Euro, you will be out if you do that.

I think Del Bosque deserves a lot of credit, just like the players do.

Fergie brought in those players, it was hardly Del Bosque who was in control of player recruitment at Real. Fergie also organised a youth set up capable of scouting and bringing through talented young players. He didn't didn't just get handed a great team, he built it, and has done so time and time again

Raul, Hierro and Luis Enrique were excellent players, but they didn't ever have near the number of world class players they have now

I'm not trying to belittle Del Bosque's achievements, just putting into perspective that he hardly achieved anything that was particularly unlikely

whatawaster

Best ever imo.

I'll qualify that statement by saying I know much more about British football than I do about football elsewhere.

steelcityblues

tommyhaas wrote: »

Fergie brought in those players, it was hardly Del Bosque who was in control of player recruitment at Real. Fergie also organised a youth set up capable of scouting and bringing through talented young players. He didn't didn't just get handed a great team, he built it, and has done so time and time again

Raul, Hierro and Luis Enrique were excellent players, but they didn't ever have near the number of world class players they have now

I'm not trying to belittle Del Bosque's achievements, just putting into perspective that he hardly achieved anything that was particularly unlikely

How was it not particularly unlikely?

At domestic level, he had to overtake a great Barcelona dynasty, which was started by Cruyff, and carried on by Van Gaal. he still had to make the right signings, to make it work.

At international level, he was up against formidable German and Dutch sides.

You make it sound like he was facing a bunchof San Marino's and Liechtenstein's all the time.

tommyhaas

steelcityblues wrote: »

How was it not particularly unlikely?

At domestic level, he had to overtake a great Barcelona dynasty, which was started by Cruyff, and carried on by Van Gaal. he still had to make the right signings, to make it work.

At international level, he was up against formidable German and Dutch sides.

You make it sound like he was facing a bunchof San Marino's and Liechtenstein's all the time.

I mean it was not particularly unlikely given that he had the best team in Europe at Real, and the best team in the world with Spain

Barca back then were not a patch on what they are now. They went through a number of bad years. At times they weren't even the second best team in Spain. I doubt he had control over many of the signings either. What I would give him credit for however is making things work at Real, with out having control over transfers

The point is though that he managed a Real side and a Spanish side that were favourites for each competition they entered. Yes there was good competition, but none with the quality of players his sides had. He obviously done well with these sides, but I certainly wouldn't class his achievements as being near the greatest of all time

flahavaj

tommyhaas wrote: »

I mean it was not particularly unlikely given that he had the best team in Europe at Real, and the best team in the world with Spain

Barca back then were not a patch on what they are now. They went through a number of bad years. At times they weren't even the second best team in Spain. I doubt he had control over many of the signings either. What I would give him credit for however is making things work at Real, with out having control over transfers

The point is though that he managed a Real side and a Spanish side that were favourites for each competition they entered. Yes there was good competition, but none with the quality of players his sides had. He obviously done well with these sides, but I certainly wouldn't class his achievements as being near the greatest of all time

He won the CL twice with Madrid in three years - then they sacked him and haven't been near winning it since. Not a major co-incidence surely. he seems to hev been the only manager of the past decade to somehow manage to juggle the many plates it takes to run the basket case that madrid is. Getting rid of him was an error they're still paying for now. Sure, he was well backed in the transfer market and has some top players but thats still an extraordinary achievement in its own right.

Bodhisopha

I just don't think his European returns warrant the tag of GOAT. The luckiest CL win ever against Bayern, a draw against Chelsea and one schooling followed by an utter humiliation a couple of years later at the hands of Pep's Barca.

I'd like to have seen something more definitive from Fergie.

Hannibal

tommyhaas wrote: »

Winning at international level without being able to buy or sell players is probably an advantage to Spain. When players like Reina, Fabregas, Torres and Mata weren't automatic starters during the world cup, it demonstrates just how strong their squad was

Regarding Moyes, obviously Kendall was more successful, however to manage what Moyes has in the current age, bearing in mind how long he went without spending any money what so ever, while all around him did, is in my mind a magnificent achievement, and one which I would imagine is far more difficult then winning the world cup with one of the most talented pools of players of all time

Off the top of my head I can list:
Fellaini - £15m plus add on's
Yakubu - £11.5m
Bilyaletdinov - £9m
Johnson - £8.6m
Heitinga - £7m
Baines - £6m
Distin - £5m
Kroldrup - £5m

If Moyes wasn't British he'd have been flung out of Everton a long time ago, he's doing an alright job but nothing special.

tommyhaas

flahavaj wrote: »

He won the CL twice with Madrid in three years - then they sacked him and haven't been near winning it since. Not a major co-incidence surely. he seems to hev been the only manager of the past decade to somehow manage to juggle the many plates it takes to run the basket case that madrid is. Getting rid of him was an error they're still paying for now. Sure, he was well backed in the transfer market and has some top players but thats still an extraordinary achievement in its own right.

I would argue that Real have been better under both Mourinho and Pelligrini (sp?) then Del Bosque. Both would have won the league in their only full season's probably every other year. They were just unlucky that they came up against one of the best sides of all time

Perhaps I'm being unduly critical of Del Bosque, but I certainly would rank Mourinho winning the CL with both Porto and Inter as a greater achievement then winning it with Real

Del Bosque obviously deserves credit for his achievements, but winning the CL with what was the best club side in the world, and the world cup with the best side in the world hardly merits him being discussed among the all time greats. It could also be argued that in the one job in which he didn't have the best group of players, he failed. As I said, I don't know much about his time in Turkey though

Blatter

Dotsey wrote: »

Off the top of my head I can list:
Fellaini - £15m plus add on's
Yakubu - £11.5m
Bilyaletdinov - £9m
Johnson - £8.6m
Heitinga - £7m
Baines - £6m
Distin - £5m
Kroldrup - £5m

If Moyes wasn't British he'd have been flung out of Everton a long time ago, he's doing an alright job but nothing special.

It's all about the net spend.

Moyes has done an outstanding job at Everton and they're lucky to have him.

steelcityblues

Most of those big money signings were flops too.

Moyes isn't a bad manager, but he won't be able to cut it at one of the elite clubs.

Hannibal

Bob Paisley hasnt been mentioned much.

9 seasons as Liverpool manager.

6 League titles.
3 European Cups (only manager in history to win 3)
1 UEFA Cup
3 League Cups
1 Euro Super Cup

flahavaj

tommyhaas wrote: »

I would argue that Real have been better under both Mourinho and Pelligrini (sp?) then Del Bosque. Both would have won the league in their only full season's probably every other year. They were just unlucky that they came up against one of the best sides of all time

Perhaps I'm being unduly critical of Del Bosque, but I certainly would rank Mourinho winning the CL with both Porto and Inter as a greater achievement then winning it with Real

Del Bosque obviously deserves credit for his achievements, but winning the CL with what was the best club side in the world, and the world cup with the best side in the world hardly merits him being discussed among the all time greats. It could also be argued that in the one job in which he didn't have the best group of players, he failed. As I said, I don't know much about his time in Turkey though

I don't really disagree about any of this. But I do think that you were over harsh on him earlier - he deserves consideration on here as well as the likes of Jose etc. If he repeats the trick of World Cup success at the Euros he has a very strong claim.

tommyhaas

Dotsey wrote: »

Off the top of my head I can list:
Fellaini - £15m plus add on's
Yakubu - £11.5m
Bilyaletdinov - £9m
Johnson - £8.6m
Heitinga - £7m
Baines - £6m
Distin - £5m
Kroldrup - £5m

If Moyes wasn't British he'd have been flung out of Everton a long time ago, he's doing an alright job but nothing special.

ANot a chance IMO. Very few could have Everton challenging the way that they have been with those sort of funds

The sales of Arteta, Lescott, Beattie and Rooney alone add up to more then all of the above cost. Prior to deadline day, he hadn't spent a penny in something like two years. I'd be fairly confident too that transfer wise, he's received more then he's paid since he came

Hannibal

Blatter wrote: »

It's all about the net spend.

Moyes has done an outstanding job at Everton and they're lucky to have him.

Liverpool fans mentioned net spend when Rafa Benitez was there and everyone laughed at them, he had a net of £60m in 6 years yet managed to keep them in contention in Europe and twice managed over 80 points in the league.

Everton amaze me, they've two billionaires who own shares in the club and Goodison holds over 40,000. Moyes for me has done a good job, I wouldn't say outstanding.

Blatter

Moyes definitely deserves a shot at a bigger club.

I wouldn't be against him taking the reigns at OT once SAF eventually goes, I do rate him that highly. I think he's in the top three favorites for the job actually.

flahavaj

Dotsey wrote: »

Liverpool fans mentioned net spend when Rafa Benitez was there and everyone laughed at them, he had a net of £60m in 6 years yet managed to keep them in contention in Europe and twice managed over 80 points in the league.

We weren't laughing at them because they were on about net spend.:pac:

Everton amaze me, they've two billionaires who own shares in the club and Goodison holds over 40,000. Moyes for me has done a good job, I wouldn't say outstanding.

So you reckon they're pretending to be broke?

flahavaj

Blatter wrote: »

Moyes definitely deserves a shot at a bigger club.

I wouldn't be against him taking the reigns at OT once SAF eventually goes, I do rate him that highly. I think he's in the top three favorites for the job actually.

I rate him extremely highly as well but he has shown that he's much better at making low cost signings than when he has had to spend big which would worry me a little.

Hannibal

Blatter wrote: »

Moyes definitely deserves a shot at a bigger club.

I wouldn't be against him taking the reigns at OT once SAF eventually goes, I do rate him that highly. I think he's in the top three favorites for the job actually.

I think it's unlikely as not managing in Europe could count against him.

Paul Scholes has tipped Ryan Giggs to take over from Fergie, could be interesting. Liverpool done that with Dalglish in 1985 and didn't drop in standards

flahavaj

Dotsey wrote: »

I think it's unlikely as not managing in Europe could count against him.

Paul Scholes has tipped Ryan Giggs to take over from Fergie, could be interesting. Liverpool done that with Dalglish in 1985 and didn't drop in standards

Has to be Jose for me as the number one choice. You could get the continuity by having Giggs in his coaching team.

Throwing a rookie manager in would be very risky for a job of the magnitude of United's.

Hannibal

flahavaj wrote: »

We weren't laughing at them because they were on about net spend.:pac:


So you reckon they're pretending to be broke?

Well two European Cup finals, two Semi finals and as I said two points finishes above 80 in the league is nothing to laugh at considering he was competiting against a free spending Chelsea, an already dominant United and an established Arsenal then in his latter years Spurs and obviously City were spending a lot of money.

I don't know about pretending to be broke but they've got resources within the club there to certainly push on. They run the club to break even rather than investing and possibly achieving something.

Blatter

flahavaj wrote: »

I rate him extremely highly as well but he has shown that he's much better at making low cost signings than when he has had to spend big which would worry me a little.

Yeah, it's hard to know how good he'd be at United in terms of what he'd do in the transfer market.

I do think he's worthy of a shot at some big club though.

Dotsey wrote: »

I think it's unlikely as not managing in Europe could count against him.

Paul Scholes has tipped Ryan Giggs to take over from Fergie, could be interesting. Liverpool done that with Dalglish in 1985 and didn't drop in standards

I think it would be unlikely for Giggs to take over. I think Fergie has gone on record saying that the next manager will need to have experience.

My money will be on Mourinho anyway, but it will all depend on who's available at the time.

flahavaj

Dotsey wrote: »

Well two European Cup finals, two Semi finals and as I said two points finishes above 80 in the league is nothing to laugh at considering he was competiting against a free spending Chelsea, an already dominant United and an established Arsenal then in his latter years Spurs and obviously City were spending a lot of money.

Rafa was a good manager. This is a thread about great ones.

Hannibal

flahavaj wrote: »

Has to be Jose for me as the number one choice. You could get the continuity by having Giggs in his coaching team.

Throwing a rookie manager in would be very risky for a job of the magnitude of United's.

It could be risky but as I said Liverpool maintained dominance by using Dalglish who worked with Paisley and Fagan.

Barca went that route with Guardiola who was familiar with Cruyff and Rexach.

Milan with Ancelotti.

You can't buy someone with knowledge of the club and I don't think Mourinho's head would fit inside Old Trafford plus I think United would be looking at someone who will stay there longer than 2 or 3 years

Blatter

I'd agree that United will be looking for someone to stay for more than 2 or 3 years, and that could be the deal breaker with Mourinho.

Afaik, Mourinho has said himself he would like to settle down and build a legacy at a club sometime. He always says he wants to go back to England eventually and enjoyed his time there the most, I'd say he will want the United job.

Hannibal

Blatter wrote: »

I'd agree that United will be looking for someone to stay for more than 2 or 3 years, and that could be the deal breaker with Mourinho.

Afaik, Mourinho has said himself he would like to settle down and build a legacy at a club sometime. He always says he wants to go back to England eventually and enjoyed his time there the most, I'd say he will want the United job.

Mourinho also said before he took the Chelsea job that he didn't want to join a club with no history and that buys success.

flahavaj

Dotsey wrote: »

It could be risky but as I said Liverpool maintained dominance by using Dalglish who worked with Paisley and Fagan.

Barca went that route with Guardiola who was familiar with Cruyff and Rexach.

Milan with Ancelotti.

You can't buy someone with knowledge of the club and I don't think Mourinho's head would fit inside Old Trafford plus I think United would be looking at someone who will stay there longer than 2 or 3 years

I think you need someone with Jose's ego to tae ovr after 25 years of Fergie. Its a massive massive job.

The fact that Jose likes to move on so fast from clubs would be a worry, though he regulalrly speaks of his love for England and I think if he got the right job he'd stay for a long time. Maybe United could be that job.

tommyhaas

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't really disagree about any of this. But I do think that you were over harsh on him earlier - he deserves consideration on here as well as the likes of Jose etc. If he repeats the trick of World Cup success at the Euros he has a very strong claim.

Perhaps I was, and of course he deserves massive credit if Spain win the Euro's, but I still don't think that any of his achievements rank close to those whom I would consider to be the greatest

Dotsey wrote: »

Liverpool fans mentioned net spend when Rafa Benitez was there and everyone laughed at them, he had a net of £60m in 6 years yet managed to keep them in contention in Europe and twice managed over 80 points in the league.

Everton amaze me, they've two billionaires who own shares in the club and Goodison holds over 40,000. Moyes for me has done a good job, I wouldn't say outstanding.

In keeping with the Rafa theme, these are the fachts

Everton's wage bill is one of the lowest in the Premier League, far lower then their league position would suggest

They may have a relatively big stadium, but their gate receipts are quiet low. Less then half of what Liverpool get

They're turnover is on a par with that of Blackburns

The board have admitted that their strategy, while they look for a buyer is to survive on the basis that they have a manager who can buy and sell smarter then the majority of others

They went two years without paying cash for a player

This to me demonstrates that Everton are a club entirely dependent upon the managers ability to bring through and buy/sell players profitably in order to stay in the division. The fact Moyes has had them challenging for Europe is credit to him

Blatter

Dotsey wrote: »

Mourinho also said before he took the Chelsea job that he didn't want to join a club with no history and that buys success.

Maybe he means what he says this time.:p

Where else would he go after Manchester United though?

The Portugal job would be the obvious one. He hates Italy and you can rule out Barcelona right now:pac:

Hannibal

tommyhaas wrote: »

Perhaps I was, and of course he deserves massive credit if Spain win the Euro's, but I still don't think that any of his achievements rank close to those whom I would consider to be the greatest



In keeping with the Rafa theme, these are the fachts

Everton's wage bill is one of the lowest in the Premier League, far lower then their league position would suggest

They may have a relatively big stadium, but their gate receipts are quiet low. Less then half of what Liverpool get

They're turnover is on a par with that of Blackburns

The board have admitted that their strategy, while they look for a buyer is to survive on the basis that they have a manager who can buy and sell smarter then the majority of others

They went two years without paying cash for a player

This to me demonstrates that Everton are a club entirely dependent upon the managers ability to bring through and buy/sell players profitably in order to stay in the division. The fact Moyes has had them challenging for Europe is credit to him

I agree about Del Bosque, most of Spains groundwork is done at Barcelona.
He isn't in the same class as Clough, Shankly, Paisley, Busby and Ferguson who for me are the five best in England in the last 50 years. Difficult to say who the best is as they all have a valid shout with different eras, challenges and obstacles.



Everton have the 8th highest turnover in the league behind:
Arsenal, Man United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man City, Spurs, Villa (Blackburn are 15th)

Wages as a % of turnover is the 8th best, behind:
Arsenal, Man United, Wolves, Spurs, Fulham, Liverpool, Birmingham

Gate receipts and matchday income is the 8th best behind:
Man United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, Spurs, Villa, Newcastle

Net debt is also the 8th lowest.

So predictably they are on course for coming 8th or in around every year as that's what they're budgeted for

flahavaj

Dotsey wrote: »

I agree about Del Bosque, most of Spains groundwork is done at Barcelona.
He isn't in the same class as Clough, Shankly, Paisley, Busby and Ferguson who for me are the five best in England in the last 50 years. Difficult to say who the best is as they all have a valid shout with different eras, challenges and obstacles.



Everton have the 8th highest turnover in the league behind:
Arsenal, Man United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man City, Spurs, Villa

Wages as a % of turnover is the 8th best, behind:
Arsenal, Man United, Wolves, Spurs, Fulham, Liverpool, Birmingham

Gate receipts and matchday income is the 8th best behind:
Man United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, Spurs, Villa, Newcastle

Net debt is also the 8th lowest.

So predictably they are on course for coming 8th or in around every year as that's what they're budgeted for

Where are these figures from as a matter of interest?

Hannibal

flahavaj wrote: »

Where are these figures from as a matter of interest?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/may/19/football-club-accounts-debt

tommyhaas

Dotsey wrote: »

I agree about Del Bosque, most of Spains groundwork is done at Barcelona.
He isn't in the same class as Clough, Shankly, Paisley, Busby and Ferguson who for me are the five best in England in the last 50 years. Difficult to say who the best is as they all have a valid shout with different eras, challenges and obstacles.



Everton have the 8th highest turnover in the league behind:
Arsenal, Man United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man City, Spurs, Villa (Blackburn are 15th)

Wages as a % of turnover is the 8th best, behind:
Arsenal, Man United, Wolves, Spurs, Fulham, Liverpool, Birmingham

Gate receipts and matchday income is the 8th best behind:
Man United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, Spurs, Villa, Newcastle

Net debt is also the 8th lowest.

So predictably they are on course for coming 8th or in around every year as that's what they're budgeted for

You should probably check the dates figures are based on. For a start, Everton did have a turnover of £79m one year. That would be the year that they only lost £3m, however had they not sold Lescott, they'd have lost £25m

Regarding the wage bill. Arteta was their highest earner, he's gone. Lescott was on big money, he's gone. Their wage bill is far lower now

You're figures are no longer relevant, and the one's you have chosen to post don't in any way accurately reflect the situation

Hannibal

tommyhaas wrote: »

You should probably check the dates figures are based on. For a start, Everton did have a turnover of £79m one year. That would be the year that they only lost £3m, however had they not sold Lescott, they'd have lost £25m

Regarding the wage bill. Arteta was their highest earner, he's gone. Lescott was on big money, he's gone. Their wage bill is far lower now

You're figures are no longer relevant, and the one's you have chosen to post don't in any way accurately reflect the situation

The summer they sold Lescott they bought Bilyaletdinov, Heitinga and Distin for roughly £21m. Lescott was sold for £22m rising to £24m if City win the league etc so they're breaking even.

Everton's accounts in them figures are for the year ending May 31 2010, so they're as recent as what's available

tommyhaas

Dotsey wrote: »

The summer they sold Lescott they bought Bilyaletdinov, Heitinga and Distin for roughly £21m. Lescott was sold for £22m rising to £24m if City win the league etc so they're breaking even.

You mentioned turnover, not profit. Obviously the figure did not accurately reflect their turnover if there was a once off sale included in the figures which accounted for approx' 25% of the total turnover

Either way, they managed to break even, and had a slight profit from transfers while still maintaining their league position. Credit to Moyes for managing that

tommyhaas

Hang on a second. Why am I defending Everton? Moyes out, bring back Mike Walker :pac:

Pro. F

Bodhisopha wrote: »

I just don't think his European returns warrant the tag of GOAT. The luckiest CL win ever against Bayern, a draw against Chelsea and one schooling followed by an utter humiliation a couple of years later at the hands of Pep's Barca.

I'd like to have seen something more definitive from Fergie.

My bollocks.

United have been regularly winning with late goals for the twenty years I've been watching football. When it happens that often it is obviously not down to luck.