Official Football Thread

John said:
Yes it is, but not as strong as the Premiership - which is where Fergie has been immensely successful.

He has been indeed. And he had two of the best goalkeepers to help him!  :D  *ducks*
More seriously: Of course I do see that the Premiership is very strong, but we can't deny that Man U had some of the best players of that league. I think that the relative strength (of a club in relation to its league) of club A in league A is comparable with any other club winning any other league, no matter how weak or how strong that is. Maybe I don't express myself well but I find it too easy to judge coaches differently just because they play in different leagues.

PSV never had a fraction of the budget of Man U. Read on and learn how come the Premier League is so strong: http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news ... ub/422540/

Is it so hard to win with clubs of such budgets? But then again: PSV has had a higher budget than most other clubs.

John said:
If Hiddink starts to get Chelsea to dominate in the same way that Fergie has, then we will acknowledge that - but I don't know if Abromovich has the patience. He sacked Murinihio for what? Not doing that well in Europe (amongst other things).

Yes, but he is great friends with Hiddink who says he has immense respect for Abromovich because he helps to improve Russian football (and Hiddink's bank account).

John said:
So Grant gets them to the final of the Champions league and was a John Terry slip away from winning it. Then he was sacked. And now Scolari.

Yes. But they all stayed longer than 3 months or not? ;)

John said:
And yes, I do agree that Hiddink has done extremely well with the international sides he has coached.

And I have to beware that I am not getting too enthousiastic about him.  ;)
 
Forostar said:
I think that the relative strength (of a club in relation to its league) of club A in league A is comparable with any other club winning any other league, no matter how weak or how strong that is.
I sort of agree and I do see what you mean. No-one can belittle any club winning any league as it does require consistency throughout the season - no matter what league you are in. And a good manager can do this.

Like I've said before, I would have taken Hiddink over Maclaren any day for the England job, but perhaps not Capello (despite yesterdays result). I would not have taken Fergie for the England job at any time, though, simply because he is just too Scottish to lead an England side. ;)

And there is nothing wrong with getting enthusiastic about him - he does have a good track record.
 
What makes a manager so successful? Money must play a major part.Yes, Ferguson has been successful, but he has spent a fortune over the years.Yes I know Benitez, Houllier, Mourinho, etc have as well , but not in the same amount as Man U has.Think Rio Ferdinand, Wayne Rooney etc.The reason Man U are so successful is that they have been able to spend more on their fringe players(Nani, Anderson etc) Therefore they are able to absorb injuries better(we can only afford Lucas Leiva-hooora!)

Don't forget, Ferguson was a couple of games away from being sacked in his 1st year.It was only a deflected Mark Robbins goal(against forest I think)that saved him.

Would Ferguson have been as successful as Brian Clough with Nottingham Forest or Derby county.We'll never know,but I suspect not(yes I know Clough was the 1st manager to spend £1m on a player-but it was a much more level playing field then financially)

In my opinion the best coach at the moment is Wenger. If you saw Liverpool,Man U, Chelsea, or Arsenal playing at their very best, then, in my opinion, Arsenal would be the team I would prefer to watch.
If Benitez was to leave Liverpool, then Wenger would be my 1st choice, followed by Mourinho, then O'Neill
 
Kopfanatic said:
Would Ferguson have been as successful as Brian Clough with Nottingham Forest or Derby county.We'll never know,but I suspect not(yes I know Clough was the 1st manager to spend £1m on a player-but it was a much more level playing field then financially)

Remember he broke the Rangers/Celtic dominance for some years and managed to win the Scottish league with Aberdeen ... of course not equal to winning the European Cup with Forest, but still quite impressive methinks.
 
He also won a European trophy with Aberdeen - the Cup Winners Cup, I think.

Kopfanatic said:
If you saw Liverpool,Man U, Chelsea, or Arsenal playing at their very best, then, in my opinion, Arsenal would be the team I would prefer to watch.
For what it's worth, I prefer Man U's style of play over Arsenal. Arsenal seemingly only know how to play neat pretty football and score the perfect goal - which is why their players sulk when they are against teams that play ugly. Man U mix it up and can almost play any style and be effective. And I think fast counter attacking football is one the best spectacles in football - like the Dutch, Man U and the Forest under Clough. :D
 
... or the Russians under Hiddink recently.

I really don't think we should argue over whether Hiddink is a great manager or not. There is no doubt he is. Whether he will have success at Chelsea or not, time will show. There is no doubt he has the abilities that are needed.

By the way, Albie, Cup Winner's Cup is correct (1983, to be precise). So Ferguson have actually won European tournaments with 4 nearly completely different teams. Not many players were present in his United 11 both in 1991, 1999 and last year ... the only thing he has failed to accomplish, is to repeat success in Europe several times with the same players. Will he manage this time? Again, time will tell.
 
I don't think anyone is doubting that Hiddink has qualities as a manager, I have never said anything to the contrary. All I was arguing was that Ferguson's record at Old Trafford will probably never be beaten (and quite possibly not by Hiddink) for the factors that I have given. ;)

And yes, Fergie has had trouble being consistent in winning European trophies with the same team of players - however, he has been one of the most successful managers since the inception of the Champions League - only once has he failed to get past the group stages with Man U.
 
Albie, what's your view on supporting English teams in Europe? I've supported Liverpool or Man U on occasions in the past (usually if they're playing Chelsea ;)), but this year I can't say I want any of the four English teams to succeed in the next round - with the possible exception of Liverpool as I have equally ill feelings towards Real Madrid.

And EW and Foro, do you support clubs from your country even if you support a rival club?
 
Yes I sure do. It's good for Dutch football to see more teams going through. :)

Even Ajax. I know someone (a Feyenoord supporter like me) who really enjoys it when Ajax loses. "They become arrogant when they win", he says.

I might enjoy it a little bit, but I rather see them winning.

As I said before, I might be pretty nationalistic when it comes to sports, but it's quite innocent.  :D 
 
Would it be fair to say that Ajax has more Dutch players than Arsenal has English?
I think the reason I dislike Man U least out of the "big 4" in England is that they have a good number of English players in their side, especially Rooney.
 
You guys know I'm not into football, but still I'm happy to see that the only club I ever cared for -Hertha BSC- has the chance to top the Bundesliga today. I've even got the live ticker on in the background.
 
They used to be really shit. That's why everybody, and the Berliners most of all, are shocked that they are so good this season.
Well, here it is. A 2:1 victory over Bayern Munich, and Hertha is on top now. Let's hope it stays that way. ;)
 
I am for Hoffenheim, they are really the sensation of the season! But they lost their topscorer for the rest of the season. 

And I just saw they lost as hell, yesterday.
:(

@Nush: Ajax might have more Dutch indeed, but I never think much about that.
 
Hoffenheim are really only that sensational because a rich entrepreneur pumped all of his money into it. It's a tiny village and the club has no tradition and no real fans except for Mr Hopp's employees.
 
They are a sensation because they didn't play for ages in the highest liga.

What I have understood is that the owner did smart and not very expensive transfers (which is no difference with other clubs) and that a lot of money goes to the club itself, improving the youth training.

They are not on this list of 20 richest clubs, so if anyone dislikes them for their money, please take another look:

1 (1) Real Madrid 365.8 (289.6)
2 (2) Manchester United 324.8 (257.1)
3 (3) FC Barcelona 308.8 (244.4)
4 (7) Bayern Munich 295.3 (233.8 )
5 (4) Chelsea 268.9 (212.9)
6 (5) Arsenal 264.4 (209.3)
7 ( 8 ) Liverpool 210.9 (167.0)
8 (6) AC Milan 209.5 (165.8 )
9 (11) AS Roma 175.4 (138.9)
10 (9) Internazionale 172.9 (136.9)
11 (12) Juventus 167.5 (132.6)
12 (13) O. Lyonnais 155.7 (123.3)
13 (16) Schalke 148.4 (117.5)
14 (10) Tottenham 145.0 (114.8 )
15 (15) Hamburger SV 127.9 (101.3)
16 (19) O. Marseille 126.8 (100.4)
17 (14) Newcastle United 125.6 (99.4)
18 (n/a) VfB Stuttgart 111.5 (88.3)
19 (n/a) Fenerbahce 111.3 (88.1)
20 (n/a) Manchester City 104.0 (82.3)
 
Forostar said:
They are a sensation because they didn't play for ages in the highest liga.

To say that a 100 year old club has not tradition and fans sounds dumb in my ears.

They never played in the highest league. They are a small village club. Literally. Hoffenheim is a village of 3,272 people. They never had any fans other than those in the village. Then a rich entrepreneur came along and pumped his money into the club. In Germany, everybody considers them a test tube club. Please check your facts before claiming what I say is dumb.
The following quote from this website accurately sums up the sentiments Hoffenheim encounters within the country:

The Hoffenheim high-rolling model was always likely to draw fierce opposition from traditionalists. German soccer doesn't generally do mega-rich benefactors, traditionally preferring clubs run on democratic, bottom-up lines, where members call the shots. Go anywhere in the country and the criticism takes the same form. Hoffenheim is nouveaux riches interlopers/"corporate whores"/an artificial entity with no tradition or real fan base.

Whether the critics are pure footballing romantics or supporters of a team enduring a hand-to-mouth existence, the widespread feeling is that Hoffenheim represents unfair competition.

Hoffenheim is considered as commercialisation of the sport in its worst form. If you like the club, good for you, but you should be aware of what others think of it.
 
edit: Sorry, for the "sounds dumb" part. It had more to do with the more than century existence of the club and it had no personal purpose. I removed it before you posted, but just too late.
-------

I have no problems with villages being succesful. A club has to start and become succesful from somewhere. Villages do have supporters.

All the other clubs in the Bundesliga used money to get there, or wasted money if they didn't get anywhere.

These critics mostly come from people who can't stand it that their team can't do the same thing with more money. Hoffenheim is not the richest club. They don't have more foreigners than the average Bundesliga topclub.

Better read page 2 from your linked article. Check:

....Descriptions of Hoffenheim as Germany's Chelsea, with Hopp cast in the role of Roman Abramovich, were inevitable but not entirely accurate. Unlike the Russian oligarch, Hopp had to build a club from virtually nothing and knew full well that a patient, organic approach was the only way forward. He didn't appear on the scene determined to parachute in expensive players from higher leagues. For a long time, the main priority was getting the infrastructure in place; the club now has wonderful training facilities, a comfortable 6,000-capacity stadium, opened in 1998, and a number of youth academies.

Even now, bricks and mortar form an essential part of his master plan. A new $80 million, 30,000-capacity ground is under construction, with the opening scheduled for early next year. Until then, Hoffenheim is staging games in Mannheim, 32 miles away. Also in the pipeline is a state-of-the-art performance center at nearby Zuzenhausen.

Also, it was largely homegrown talent that propelled the club up as far as the third level of German soccer in '06. Only then did Hoffenheim start to spend serious money on recruits, and it's worth noting that alongside the deluxe signings, the club has snapped up many bargains as well. Of the current first team, center back Marvin Compper was bought from Gladbach for just $134,000, midfielder Tobias Weis cost $201,000 from Stuttgart, and Bosnian attacker Sejad Salihovic came in from Hertha Berlin for $322,000.

Hoffenheim is certainly a club for the He Who Must Not Be Named. Just as Hopp is the epitome of the outsider, head coach Ralf Rangnick, who arrived in the summer of '06 following spells at Ulm, Stuttgart, Hannover and Schalke, is still regarded with suspicion by many in the German footballing establishment. His team plays entertaining, attacking soccer, and he is an able organizer and tactician. But for many of the old school, he is "not one of us," tainted by his professorial, progressive image and the fact he never played at the highest level.

Rangnick is clearly proud to have led his young team from regional league to Bundesliga in double-quick time and takes exception to the critics.

"I'm irritated when I hear people say our success is all about money and that we somehow are not a real football environment," he says. "We've just sold 14,000 season tickets, which is a sensational figure. We have the same annual budget as [modest Bundesliga club] Energie Cottbus and our wage structure puts us in the bottom third of the league. Of course we haven't any tradition. We are only starting to write the club's history. But we've earned the right to walk out on to Bundesliga pitches and show what we can do. If participation in the Bundesliga was on the basis of a vote, you might as well call it a day."

Belief in youth
Contrary to what their detractors claim, Hoffenheim is a club of principles, and one of the most important planks in its philosophy is an unshakeable belief in youth.

In the past couple of years, it hasn't bought a single player older than 24 and the average age of the team that took to the field on the opening day of this season -- a 3-0 win at Cottbus -- was a mere 23.36 years.
The rising generations are well catered for, too, under the watchful eye of innovative head of youth development Bernhard Peters, the former coach of Germany's male hockey team whom Klinsmann tried and failed to have installed as the federation's technical director during his time as national-team coach.

Significantly, Hoffenheim claimed its first national junior title this year, the Under-17s bringing home the bacon.

"Our tradition is the future," Hopp says. He may be right.
 
national acrobat said:
And EW and Foro, do you support clubs from your country even if you support a rival club?

Well, I usually support Norwegian clubs in Europe. None of the local rivals are in the Norwegian Premier League (and had their golden years in ancient times) so that's not really an issue. However, I sometimes feel a little "schadenfreude" when one of the "big" Norwegian clubs lose to crappy opposition in the UEFA Cup qualifiers  :innocent:

As for the Bundesliga, I have a little sympathy towards Werder Bremen because one of my all-time favourite Norwegian players (Rune Bratseth) played there  :)

By the way, remarkable FA Cup results today - all four matches ended with draws  :eek: (EDIT: All four matches starting at 15:00, that is - Chelsea beat Watford in the late kick-off one).

Just watched the very entertaining 2nd half of Real Betis vs Barcelona. Ricardo did a great job in goal, had he been your average goalkeeper today, Barca would've won it easily.
 
Back
Top