First off hats off to him for getting us to win 3 on the bounce, still not totally convinced by our performances but great response to the shambles at OT.
Ok regarding his future its a tough one, if we finish 2nd this year and considering everything he acheived last season it would only seem fair to give him another year to put things right.
The problem for me is this current squad is in need of a huge overhaul and
I feel Pellegrini is just too old to build a new team, he only has a year left on his contract and then a new man will come in and change things after that and possibly put us in transition and another season of setbacks.
Personally i hope we go all out for Klopp he's young, hungry and passionate and it may give us an advantage on signing Reus, putting all our eggs in one basket on the hope that Guardiola comes to us could backfire big time.
Big decision in the summer for the owners, what are everyone else thoughts on the future?
Pellegrini
posted on 4/5/15
Put it this way -
Does a manager reach the top of his profession by giving team-talks that consist of "OK, you XI lads go out there in your favourite positions and try to win. If you look tired I'll send someone on so you can get a bit of rest, Oh, and if you want to chat I'm boiling the kettle in 45 mins"?
posted on 4/5/15
that's why it's an enigma
usually success is paired with a fairly easy to spot reason why. I think you're overplaying the media side of it. It's also all the other bits.
Pellegrini is a top top manager for City because.....
Some other club should try and poach him because....
I'm drawing a blank other than 'has won trophies'. Why does he win trophies though?
posted on 4/5/15
I think you're overplaying the media side of it
----------------
You're talking about his persona. What exactly are you basing your perception of him on (in the sense of him not being "colourful" ), if it's not his interaction with the media?
You say "it's also all the other bits".
Explain.
posted on 4/5/15
He doesn't have any trademarks that he's the 'best' at
He isn't known for any standout, distinctive tactics
He isn't known for any standout, distinctive style of play
He isn't known for introducing new things throughout a season or to change a match
He rotates, but not too much or too little
He doesn't get involved in mind games / influence off the pitch
He doesn't have some standout, distinctive transfer or youth plan
Maybe that's what it is. He's the king of keeping things extremely simple. 3 bears style. never too hot, never too cold, but always just right.
no controversy, no gambling, no distractions. just the basics done right.
posted on 4/5/15
Good post Kaisers.
I think in regards to a transfer plan or youth plan, that isn't his remit at City. He signed a 3 year contract and won't renew should he still be in charge at the end of it.
"He doesn't get involved in mind games"
He does a little. However, he's the kind of person who is unfazed by that side of things. It does get to him on occasion, and when it does he doesn't handle it too well in my opinion (which probably explains his reluctance to get involved in such shenanigans!)
"He isn't known for introducing new things throughout a season or to change a match"
He has a strong mindset - sometimes to his own detriment. I do know that he requires his subs to watch the game and focus on the players who, should the subs come on, they would be expected to exploit. He doesn't introduce subs in order to change tactics, he introduces subs in the hope that they will be able to exploit weaknesses in the opposition that players on the pitch weren't able to see.
"He isn't known for any standout, distinctive tactics
He isn't known for any standout, distinctive style of play"
He is. He was a breath of fresh air last season, introducing an attacking play to City's team that was lacking under the defensively-minded Mancini. The result was 158 goals scored!! City under Mancini and City under Pellegrini are two very different sides.
posted on 4/5/15
TBH (and I can feel hell freezing over) I kind of agree with TKT.
Or at least this is what I think (and I suspect might be TKT's view)
Pellegrini is a really good manager, you don't reach the level he has without being so.
When it comes to comparing his strengths and weaknesses to other managers rather than specific strengths or weaknesses he seems like more of an all rounder.
That is he is good at everything but in comparison to the other good managers he'll be weaker than their strengths but stronger than their weaknesses.
I think that is what TKT was getting at but all rounder seems a better (or nicer) way to put it than 'grey' or no particular strengths which can sound like an insult.
posted on 4/5/15
fair points, I was painting with a broad brush is all, not making always or never type statements (may not have come across that way in type)
I think we're somewhat in agreement that he isn't an 'extreme' manager in the way many of his peers are. That was meant to be the idea I was trying to get across anyway.
posted on 4/5/15
hell just froze over SAF
posted on 4/5/15
posted on 4/5/15
I think we're somewhat in agreement that he isn't an 'extreme' manager in the way many of his peers are. That was meant to be the idea I was trying to get across anyway.
-----------------------
Yeah, I get that now. And when put that way, it's hard to disagree.