Current Top 5 Managers in the World

Though I suppose this question is difficult to answer for any 'monogamous' manager. What would Ferguson have won at a club with fewer resources? What would Wenger have won if he went to Real? How would Guardiola do without the best team in the world? We can never really know.

Christopher, agreed on the Alex Ferguson front. Also, I really don't get the "inheriting" argument. Giggs was really the first to break through in 1992, and Ferguson had already been at Man U for 6 years by then. Indeed, Giggs was only 13 when he took over, and people like Beckham, Scholes, Gary Neville were even younger. Others, like Roy Keane, Bruce, Pallister, Cantona he bought. Sounds like Ferguson was totally instrumental in building that side.

1- Guardiola
2- Fergie
3-Klopp
4- Mourinho
5-Óscar Tabárez

Stephen Mitchell wrote:Christopher, agreed on the Alex Ferguson front. Also, I really don't get the "inheriting" argument. Giggs was really the first to break through in 1992, and Ferguson had already been at Man U for 6 years by then. Indeed, Giggs was only 13 when he took over, and people like Beckham, Scholes, Gary Neville were even younger. Others, like Roy Keane, Bruce, Pallister, Cantona he bought. Sounds like Ferguson was totally instrumental in building that side.

There is undeniably an element of luck. Getting such a good batch of youngsters through, who were very marketable individually and collectively at the exact time the commercialism of the Prem was starting was lucky. Getting Eric Cantona from Leeds on the back of an enquiry from Howard Wilkinson about one of Ferguson's players was lucky (especially so cheap) as Cantona was the key catalyst in United's revolution, that was also lucky. He was lucky to keep his job in the 80s and indeed wouldn't have were it not for winning the 1990 FA cup which allowed him the ensuant Cup Winners' Cup.

So he had his breaks in his early United career. But management, and indeed life in general, is contingent upon an element of luck. There is not a successful person anywhere who has never got a lucky break at some point, regardless of how talented they are.

And none of the above obviates his incredible success prior to Man Utd: wrestling 3 titles from the auld firm and winning a European trophy with Aberdeen is remarkable in itself.

Christopher Flanagan wrote:

Stephen Mitchell wrote:Christopher, agreed on the Alex Ferguson front. Also, I really don't get the "inheriting" argument. Giggs was really the first to break through in 1992, and Ferguson had already been at Man U for 6 years by then. Indeed, Giggs was only 13 when he took over, and people like Beckham, Scholes, Gary Neville were even younger. Others, like Roy Keane, Bruce, Pallister, Cantona he bought. Sounds like Ferguson was totally instrumental in building that side.

There is undeniably an element of luck. Getting such a good batch of youngsters through, who were very marketable individually and collectively at the exact time the commercialism of the Prem was starting was lucky. Getting Eric Cantona from Leeds on the back of an enquiry from Howard Wilkinson about one of Ferguson's players was lucky (especially so cheap) as Cantona was the key catalyst in United's revolution, that was also lucky. He was lucky to keep his job in the 80s and indeed wouldn't have were it not for winning the 1990 FA cup which allowed him the ensuant Cup Winners' Cup.

So he had his breaks in his early United career. But management, and indeed life in general, is contingent upon an element of luck. There is not a successful person anywhere who has never got a lucky break at some point, regardless of how talented they are.

And none of the above obviates his incredible success prior to Man Utd: wrestling 3 titles from the auld firm and winning a European trophy with Aberdeen is remarkable in itself.

My point is that its talked aboutike he is the most successful manager ever because he done everything...as you said it was lucky all those kids came through at almost the same time...combine that with a club that wants to spend every penny and more it has..you get a very successful reply...he did do well at Aberdeen granted...he was lucky to keep his job aswell...had a huge run of bad results or average..however you want to call it....

Christopher Flanagan wrote:Though I suppose this question is difficult to answer for any 'monogamous' manager. What would Ferguson have won at a club with fewer resources? What would Wenger have won if he went to Real? How would Guardiola do without the best team in the world? We can never really know.

This is a point to chris..how would any half decent manager have done if placed at the helm of united at that time....I think credit is due he has done well...
Just don't think it's as well as a lot of people think..a friend of mine (the lucky manc) agreed with my look on fergies status after I told him about the page on our forum...his answer 'was he has done well for united..but I am sure an average manager could have too'.

There are plenty of average managers who have failed at big clubs, though. Ferguson is not one.

Yes this true make it no fuss tho Chris..I am saying fergie is a good manager just in mine and a few others eyes 'quite lucky' you catch my drift

Lol whilst on the call of luck...nearly dropped my signed framed arsenal shirt after cleaning it this morning...talk about clench...lol

Arsene is my top manager for sure. Others are critical of him for things i admire him for. Arsenal was the first team i began following because of the style he introduced. I believe he puts the game ahead of winning as well and while for many that's a heresy, it's not for me. He has all the values you want in a manager of a team and for the preservation of quality football. Money has poisoned the game, and he has resisted the temptation to join the chorus of massive overspending. Arsenal will likely never be heavily in debt for howver long he stays in charge, but we will always be in contention because he makes smart buys and focuses on player development. he is tops in my book fo sho.

For me there is no top spot....you could say a 3 select all hold a top slot for different reasons,

If it was to be on just trophies...
1. Pep + fergie
2.trappatoni
3.Mourniho

I don't understand how that is solely luck, though? Surely you could argue that Ferguson played at least a small role in making Beckham, Giggs etc... the players they are? Whilst there is luck involved to an extent, the fact that they became the players they did has to be down to Ferguson, at least in part?

Stephen Mitchell wrote:I don't understand how that is solely luck, though? Surely you could argue that Ferguson played at least a small role in making Beckham, Giggs etc... the players they are? Whilst there is luck involved to an extent, the fact that they became the players they did has to be down to Ferguson, at least in part?

I do say he did have a small part in the development..but what I was saying is that he is spoken of like he did everything for that club...take away those players and the money and would he have been as good? We will never know....fergie in one way has been successful because he delt with one thing and one thing only...the team...Wenger seams to be taking it all on...fair play to him it seams a part of his big idea...but I would like it if Wenger would take a leaf out of fergies book and just deal with the team...
Fergie should be praised for what he has done no doubt about it..but I just don't praise him in the same light as some fans...

Fergie transformed a club, Wenger changed football

Chris Chan wrote:Fergie transformed a club, Wenger changed football

A very good way to sum it up Chris...for me changing the game is more of the beauty...

In terms of PL managers I really rate Martin O'neil, I've always wondered how he'd do at a top four club...

Ed Spence wrote:In terms of PL managers I really rate Martin O'neil, I've always wondered how he'd do at a top four club...

Really, I always thought he was a horrible manager. His team ending up playing boring football and even the club's fans start hating on him
I really like how Brendan Rodgers has done but Roberto Martinez should get some plaudits for sowing the seeds at Swansea. But once again I am not sure if they could manage at a big club. Just look at Rafa Benitez and his legacy, very few people think he was a good manager all we can remember is that he brought some shit players to play at Liverpool !!

Jenson Pais wrote: Just look at Rafa Benitez and his legacy, very few people think he was a good manager all we can remember is that he brought some shit players to play at Liverpool !!

He didn't want some of those players. And was against the sale of Alonso. The board did it. Bought some shit players, sold Alonso. If Rafa was given all the rights to deal with transfers I believe Pool would easily be a title challenging side.

Samritpal Singh wrote:

Jenson Pais wrote: Just look at Rafa Benitez and his legacy, very few people think he was a good manager all we can remember is that he brought some shit players to play at Liverpool !!

He didn't want some of those players. And was against the sale of Alonso. The board did it. Bought some shit players, sold Alonso. If Rafa was given all the rights to deal with transfers I believe Pool would easily be a title challenging side.

Didn't he go after Barry when he had Alonso?

Jenson Pais wrote:

Ed Spence wrote:In terms of PL managers I really rate Martin O'neil, I've always wondered how he'd do at a top four club...

Really, I always thought he was a horrible manager. His team ending up playing boring football and even the club's fans start hating on him
I really like how Brendan Rodgers has done but Roberto Martinez should get some plaudits for sowing the seeds at Swansea. But once again I am not sure if they could manage at a big club. Just look at Rafa Benitez and his legacy, very few people think he was a good manager all we can remember is that he brought some shit players to play at Liverpool !!

I guess we'll have to see how he gets on at Sunderland, but I think he did alright at Villa. Say what you want about their style of play but I think he did a lot with the resources he had. Brendan Rogers is a quality manager, but we'll have to see if he can keep the swans up. He's loved in Swansea though...

I maybe out of my depth in this discussion but i have always rates David Moyes. Thoughts on him?

OsamaMahfooz wrote:I maybe out of my depth in this discussion but i have always rates David Moyes. Thoughts on him?

David has done a good job over the years...it's a shame in a way they have never had a bit of money to add to the squad of say 2 seasons ago....but for what he had...done well,of course they have managed some decent signings...just a shame they could not gone up another level...

Samritpal Singh wrote:

Jenson Pais wrote: Just look at Rafa Benitez and his legacy, very few people think he was a good manager all we can remember is that he brought some shit players to play at Liverpool !!

He didn't want some of those players. And was against the sale of Alonso. The board did it. Bought some shit players, sold Alonso. If Rafa was given all the rights to deal with transfers I believe Pool would easily be a title challenging side.

Part of his success at Valencia was put down to the fact that he was not in charge of transfers. He made some good signings at Liverpool but he was too negative at times and he couldn't get enough out of the lesser players to support the better ones.

"I guess we'll have to see how he gets on at Sunderland, but I think he did alright at Villa. Say what you want about their style of play but I think he did a lot with the resources he had. "

O'Neill spent loads of money at Villa! Absolutely tonnes.