Next Arsenal Manager ~ General Discussion and Rumours

[Power n Glory]

Rafa...I wouldn't mind but why over Ancelotti? He tinkers a lot a more and has a much colder personality which might not work in a time where we're low on confidence and need to bring the players together. That's probably my main concern with Rafa. His stock is quite low as well because he's now in China and before that he was with Newcastle.

Because Ancelotti has only had success with the biggest clubs in their respective leagues who were able to buy whoever they wanted. Rafa has not, he has performed well at Valencia, turned Liverpool into real title contenders and performed near miracles at relegation threatened Newcastle over and over with no money.

Rafa has the battling qualities we need here at Arsenal, thats why I would take Rafa any day over the likes of Ancelotti.

At the moment, I'm looking for a coach that can get us top 4 football. I believe Rafa and Ancelotti could possibly do that. But I favour Ancelotti over Rafa for reasons already stated.

But the part Ancelotti only winning because of the top clubs he has managed, if true, you should take a closer look at Rafa's record. Inter Milan were the reigning champs in Serie A and Champions League winners. Rafa coached them as was sacked in 6 months. Despite having a title winning team, he was complaining publicly about needing new signings when results were going south.

He also managed Real Madrid. He followed on from Ancelotti and was sacked just after 6 months as well. He wasn't a popular figure around the camp and people were questioning his overly defensive approach which is another concern I have.

People tend to underestimate the skill it takes to manage characters and big personalities. Whoever comes in faces a tough situation. Taking a cold clinical approach may work but it could also backfire and that's partly why I think he hasn't lasted long at Inter, Chelsea and Real Madrid. Rafa has managed his fair share of big clubs but hasn't won a league title or CL with any of them. In fact, there aren't many manager out there with 3 CL titles. Besides the trophy haul, Ancelotti has slotted into various club set ups and tends to be a popular figure. From a club perspective, he's not the type that will demand players to win titles. He's able to work with what he has and try to get the best out of them.

Worth a read. The respect he earns around football is just another reason why I think the players may respond to him positively.

https://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/26/foot ... index.html

The section I highlighted is exactly why I don't think Ancelotti is good for us. The teams he came in and managed to trophies could all manage themselves, he didn't have to do anything at all !! I don't remember a team he went to that he turned into winners - who were not already winners. and its not like he did a Pep and turned an already top team into a record breaking team - Pep did that 3 times at 3 different clubs !!

You can criticise Rafa because he got sacked, but he knows how to win, he has won trophies at every club he has managed apart from Real Madrid - because the stint was too short. He even won a trophy at Newcastle - the Championship title winners. He rebuilt a Liverpool team in heavy decline and turned them into CL winners, in fact he got them to 2 CL finals, winning one of them.

A top coach shouldn't be penalised for managing top clubs and building a solid reputation. It's like saying no to wanting Pep here because he hasn't managed a smaller club. I'm not just criticising Rafa for getting the sack , I'm making a point to what you've said about it being easy to win with top clubs. If so, explain why Rafa didn't win anything with Inter or Real Madrid? That's two Champions League winning teams he's taken over and didn't win anything with. They never took to him at Chelsea either.

But back to Ancelotti, he built that Milan team. Serie A wasn't a one league team. Juve, Inter and Roma were also top teams. Real Madrid hadn't won the Champions League in over 10 years before Ancelotti won it. Chelsea hadn't won the title in 3 seasons after Mourinho and finished 3rd before Carlo was appointed. He spent less than £30m in the transfer window and won the league in his first season. If it were easy, Rafa would have done it and it worries me that he's taken jobs with Newcastle and over in China. Having a preference for Rafa is cool but if we're looking at achievements it doesn't make sense to dismiss Ancellotti on that basis.

[Salibatelli]

Rafa...I wouldn't mind but why over Ancelotti? He tinkers a lot a more and has a much colder personality which might not work in a time where we're low on confidence and need to bring the players together. That's probably my main concern with Rafa. His stock is quite low as well because he's now in China and before that he was with Newcastle.

Because Ancelotti has only had success with the biggest clubs in their respective leagues who were able to buy whoever they wanted. Rafa has not, he has performed well at Valencia, turned Liverpool into real title contenders and performed near miracles at relegation threatened Newcastle over and over with no money.

Rafa has the battling qualities we need here at Arsenal, thats why I would take Rafa any day over the likes of Ancelotti.

At the moment, I'm looking for a coach that can get us top 4 football. I believe Rafa and Ancelotti could possibly do that. But I favour Ancelotti over Rafa for reasons already stated.

But the part Ancelotti only winning because of the top clubs he has managed, if true, you should take a closer look at Rafa's record. Inter Milan were the reigning champs in Serie A and Champions League winners. Rafa coached them as was sacked in 6 months. Despite having a title winning team, he was complaining publicly about needing new signings when results were going south.

He also managed Real Madrid. He followed on from Ancelotti and was sacked just after 6 months as well. He wasn't a popular figure around the camp and people were questioning his overly defensive approach which is another concern I have.

People tend to underestimate the skill it takes to manage characters and big personalities. Whoever comes in faces a tough situation. Taking a cold clinical approach may work but it could also backfire and that's partly why I think he hasn't lasted long at Inter, Chelsea and Real Madrid. Rafa has managed his fair share of big clubs but hasn't won a league title or CL with any of them. In fact, there aren't many manager out there with 3 CL titles. Besides the trophy haul, Ancelotti has slotted into various club set ups and tends to be a popular figure. From a club perspective, he's not the type that will demand players to win titles. He's able to work with what he has and try to get the best out of them.

Worth a read. The respect he earns around football is just another reason why I think the players may respond to him positively.

https://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/26/foot ... index.html

The section I highlighted is exactly why I don't think Ancelotti is good for us. The teams he came in and managed to trophies could all manage themselves, he didn't have to do anything at all !! I don't remember a team he went to that he turned into winners - who were not already winners. and its not like he did a Pep and turned an already top team into a record breaking team - Pep did that 3 times at 3 different clubs !!

You can criticise Rafa because he got sacked, but he knows how to win, he has won trophies at every club he has managed apart from Real Madrid - because the stint was too short. He even won a trophy at Newcastle - the Championship title winners. He rebuilt a Liverpool team in heavy decline and turned them into CL winners, in fact he got them to 2 CL finals, winning one of them.

Benitez went to Inter after Mourinho when they were league, CL and cup holders and had a nightmare to be honest, with a formidable team that Mourinho had built and he didn't last at Real either, the stint at Chelsea was far from great either, I remember they didn't look like much of a side whilst he was there, I'm not sold on him either.

[Power n Glory]

Benitez went to Inter after Mourinho when they were league, CL and cup holders and had a nightmare to be honest, with a formidable team that Mourinho had built and he didn't last at Real either, the stint at Chelsea was far from great either, I remember they didn't look like much of a side whilst he was there, I'm not sold on him either.

Exactly my point. Also, my other worry is the tinkering and his cold persona with the players. I don't want another coach that's going to try to shake things up by benching and tinkering with the team with no explanation behind it. The coach that comes in has to try and bring this team together and not cause further discord. If we're winning it works and it's fine. But if losing the wheels can fall off quickly.

I'd only want Rafa till the end of the season if we're stuck on choices or if the club are seriously thinking of taking a complete gamble on someone far worse.

[theHotHead]

The Inter thing is easy to explain, Mourinho had set up his usual siege mentality at the club, everyone hates us, Benitez had to break that and the players loved Mourinho, not an easy thing for any manager to do.

As for Real Madrid, the fans didn't want him in the first place and with him being a more defence minded coach and the club being attack minded, that was never going to be a success in my opinion.

[Holdini]

more comical defending.

which proves my point even more.

NO MORE ATTACKING MANAGERS.

[StLGooner]

So then what? We get a defensive manager and then can't attack?

People just assume that if a manager has an attacking philosophy that he won't employ a good defense. Weird that!

[Marsbar100]

Attacking is a good form of defense though, you can't concede when you have the ball, we don't keep the ball well enough

[Holdini]

So then what? We get a defensive manager and then can't attack?

People just assume that if a manager has an attacking philosophy that he won't employ a good defense. Weird that!

we have the perfect players for counter attacking football. sit back and hit teams on the counter, maximising the transitions to full effect.

ive had ENOUGH of attacking managers coming in and leaving us wide open. 10 f*cking years of embarrassing defensive mistakes, enough is enough.

give me an allegri or simeone any day of the week. some f*cker that would come in and actually focus on the defence and drill defensive positioning into them.

[StLGooner]

So then what? We get a defensive manager and then can't attack?

People just assume that if a manager has an attacking philosophy that he won't employ a good defense. Weird that!

we have the perfect players for counter attacking football. sit back and hit teams on the counter, maximising the transitions to full effect.

ive had ENOUGH of attacking managers coming in and leaving us wide open. 10 f*cking years of embarrassing defensive mistakes, enough is enough.

give me an allegri or simeone any day of the week. some f*cker that would come in and actually focus on the defence and drill defensive positioning into them.

Or just a good manager in general. Shouldn't matter if they're attacking or defensive, as long as they apply their philosophy to both sides of the ball. By your logic an attacking manager will never have a good defense and vice versa. When that simply isn't true.

[Holdini]

Attacking is a good form of defense though, you can't concede when you have the ball, we don't keep the ball well enough

our defenders can't play out from the back and our players aren't comfortable on the ball. an attacking manager will not suit us. you lot still think it's 2009 prime wengerball era.

that era is dead. gone. adios.

[Holdini]

So then what? We get a defensive manager and then can't attack?

People just assume that if a manager has an attacking philosophy that he won't employ a good defense. Weird that!

we have the perfect players for counter attacking football. sit back and hit teams on the counter, maximising the transitions to full effect.

ive had ENOUGH of attacking managers coming in and leaving us wide open. 10 f*cking years of embarrassing defensive mistakes, enough is enough.

give me an allegri or simeone any day of the week. some f*cker that would come in and actually focus on the defence and drill defensive positioning into them.

Or just a good manager in general. Shouldn't matter if they're attacking or defensive, as long as they apply their philosophy to both sides of the ball. By your logic an attacking manager will never have a good defense and vice versa. When that simply isn't true.

either you're slow or ignoring the reasons im giving on purpose

[StLGooner]

So then what? We get a defensive manager and then can't attack?

People just assume that if a manager has an attacking philosophy that he won't employ a good defense. Weird that!

we have the perfect players for counter attacking football. sit back and hit teams on the counter, maximising the transitions to full effect.

ive had ENOUGH of attacking managers coming in and leaving us wide open. 10 f*cking years of embarrassing defensive mistakes, enough is enough.

give me an allegri or simeone any day of the week. some f*cker that would come in and actually focus on the defence and drill defensive positioning into them.

Or just a good manager in general. Shouldn't matter if they're attacking or defensive, as long as they apply their philosophy to both sides of the ball. By your logic an attacking manager will never have a good defense and vice versa. When that simply isn't true.

either you're slow or ignoring the reasons im giving on purpose

I think you're the slow one here buddy.

[Angelito]

more comical defending.

which proves my point even more.

NO MORE ATTACKING MANAGERS.

We just had a lame-ass defensive coach. What's your point?

[Holdini]

So then what? We get a defensive manager and then can't attack?

People just assume that if a manager has an attacking philosophy that he won't employ a good defense. Weird that!

we have the perfect players for counter attacking football. sit back and hit teams on the counter, maximising the transitions to full effect.

ive had ENOUGH of attacking managers coming in and leaving us wide open. 10 f*cking years of embarrassing defensive mistakes, enough is enough.

give me an allegri or simeone any day of the week. some f*cker that would come in and actually focus on the defence and drill defensive positioning into them.

Or just a good manager in general. Shouldn't matter if they're attacking or defensive, as long as they apply their philosophy to both sides of the ball. By your logic an attacking manager will never have a good defense and vice versa. When that simply isn't true.

either you're slow or ignoring the reasons im giving on purpose

I think you're the slow one here buddy.

you're suggesting there's no difference between a defensive and attacking manager

one of the dumbest things ive ever read on this forum

[DiamondGooner]

Attacking is a good form of defense though, you can't concede when you have the ball, we don't keep the ball well enough

our defenders can't play out from the back and our players aren't comfortable on the ball. an attacking manager will not suit us. you lot still think it's 2009 prime wengerball era.

that era is dead. gone. adios.

Sorry but what players do you think we have in defence or the team for us to be a defensive power house?

All our talent are in our offensive players so that is where we'll win games.

How are we going to build a team around Luiz and Mustafi ffs??

Also attacking managers do win, Klopp's 4-3-3 is very offensive, Rodgers Leicester is as well, in fact name me one top team in the league who's winning playing defensive football?