Mourinho might be a tactician, but take away his multi-million dollar players and give him your average salary-capped MLS line-up and then see what he does. Better yet, have him coach an English 4th division side like Plymouth Argyle or Tranmere Rovers (I always liked teams with Rovers or Wanderers in their names) and see where his tactical acumen takes you.
Mourinho has more or less been successful at every single club he's coached, what on earth makes you think his tactical acumen is somehow reduced by coaching at a place with less money? A winner is a winner no matter where they are, and most of those winning coaches started at some small club with limited resources and worked their way up. I doubt very much that Mourinho would all of a sudden forget how to get the most out of his players because he was suddenly working with a $4 Million payroll instead of a $140 Million dollar one. Your logic s full of fallacies.
As usual, nobody thinks about what I posted before jumping on their internet high-horse. Mourinho might be a very successful coach, but, I don't think it has as much to do with his tactical acumen as it does coaching for a team that can spend butt loads of money on players. Winning with a team full of Lionel Messis or Christian Ronaldos is not the same as winning with a team of nobodys (Hey, have you seen that new striker from Watership Down, El Ahrairah?). You see this all the time in sports. Coach A wins the championship with Team A. Deep Pockets Owner B, wants his team, Team B, to win the championship and figures that if he pays Coach A lots 'o cash to coach Team B, it will win the championship. Unfortunately, Coach A is unable to replicate his success with Team B, even when Coach A has the ability to buy all the players that he wants. Now, if Coach A was as good of a coach as everyone says, Team B would have won the championship. Instead, Team B doesn't win the championship and people wonder if Coach A was all that good of a coach after all. Ergo, is Mourinhio's success due to his tactical acumen or just because he is lucky enough to have a bunch of Lionel Messis on his team?
The link above shows Mourinho won the UEFA Champions League with Porto of the Portuguese league. He also did well with Uniao de Leiria, taking them to their highest finish ever in the Portuguese league and the Portuguese Cup.
Like I said, I would like to see him in a salary-capped leagues like the MLS to see what how good he really is. Maybe he could have helped Freddie Adu realize his potential.
Because I'm sure Uniao de Leiria was breaking the bank on transfers. If he wasn't doing good, he never would've moved on to better coaching gigs.
A bunch of Lionel Messi's? Do you honestly even known Mourinho's history AT ALL?! The dude won the UEFA Champions league with FC Porto for crying out loud! FC Porto did not, nor has ever had, a bunch of Lionel Messi's. Even before FC Porto, Mourinho was winning as a coach. And after FC Porto he certainly did not stop winning, taking Inter to a UEFA Champions League title. He's won with small salaries, he's won with big salaries. Your logic is completely flawed in this argument. Yes, there are examples of coaches who have done well with clubs that have small salaries and not done well with clubs with bigger salaries. And vice versa. But to say you "see it all the time in sports" is mostly a load of shit.
Gave whole new meaning to "park the bus", but it worked. And Mourinho got them to execute the gameplan to perfection.
Umm best is debatable, but a team with Eto'o, Maicon, Sneijder, and Milito (among others) is by no means a weak team. That Inter team was actually a VERY strong team with probably the best defense around at the time. As for the debate I'm in the middle. Mourinho is obviously a good coach. You aren't given the opportunity to coach big name clubs if you aren't. They don't just pick up random people to do this. I do think he is overrated in that I wouldn't say he is better than other top coaches and his nickname "the special one" makes me roll my eyes. Elha-blah-blahs point is still, to an extent, valid in that even a Barcelona without a coach is going to beat Aston Villa coached by Mourinho 9 out of 10 times. I just disagree because you have to be good to have the opportunity to coach these high profile clubs. I'd still say he's overrated though.
Um, so which is it? A load of shit or something you see all the time since your example doesn't jive with your final conclusion of a load of shit. Here's an example of a coach who was able to win championships in one era and nothing in another era. During the 80's, the Washington Redskins (yay!) had a coach named Joe Gibbs. He guided them to three Super Bowl titles (XVII, XXII and XXVI). Then he decided to retire in 1992. After he retired, the Redskins when to "shite" and in 2004 he was brought back to work his magic again. Unfortunately, the second time around, the Redskins kinds of sucked and he didn't really win anything (he did get to the playoffs a couple of more times). Now, what changed between Gibbs first stint at the Redskins and his second? Lots of things changed, but the major change was the NFL adopted a salary cap in 1994. Now coaches had to worry about cap space and getting the biggest bang for the buck. Mourinho has shown that he can win in an environment where money is no object to assembling a good team, but what if he was limited by a salary cap? How would his team do then? I like the was the MLS has approached the salary cap, so would his teams be as dominate if he stuck Lionel Messi on the pitch surrounded by players making the MLS league minimum salary? I think that would be a much better indication of his coaching skills instead of the Champions League's millionaires vs millionaires.
You're ignoring the fact that he started out small, and worked his way up. It's not like he's just been throwing around cash his entire career. Honestly, I think he'd do fine in MLS. I think a fair amount of top coaches in the world would be fine. You're talking about beating other MLS teams + shooting for a good run in the CCL. You act like he's supposed to take an MLS team and make them able to consistently beat Bayern and Barcelona.
All of this is why Bruce Arena is a genius coach. No joke, that guy works wonders at building the rest of a team and getting it to employ his tactics to near perfection.
He might have started out small and worked his way up, but he's surrounded by millionaire players on his teams. I think he has probably forgotten what it takes to actually coach a team not populated by primadonnas and divas.
That's a pretty big assumption (and you know what they say about assumptions, well maybe you don't so you should probably google that saying), that's the last I'm going to say about this ridiculous argument.
Gawd! Why am I not surprised. If he comes, that will answer better than any of our pissing contests if he has what it takes to coach here. If I was Coach Kreis, he had better win championships or his deep-pocketed owners will open the bank for Mourinho.
They should rename the Champion's League the Millionaire's League. It used to be interesting, now it's just boring.
I swear the laziest way to manufacture news in the UK is to ask <someone> "would you ever consider MLS?" and it usually goes from something innocuous to some awfully presumptive headline.
And Dallas steps on the neck of a weak opponent in a way we failed to. I'm already resenting both our stolen point and the 3 points we gaffed away with an October level of loathing.
dude, it's Dallas they do this EVERY year. You look at their early results and are baffled how they haven't won SS for the last 6 seasons