or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 64 comments are related to an article called:

Best post war managers

Page 2 of 3

posted on 18/5/23

comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by KLS - Mick Lynch for prime minister (U1695)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by groovyduringthewar (U1054)
posted 24 minutes ago
You obviously didn't rate Arsene Wenger.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Was given half the French world cup winning team. So what was hard about what he achieved?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Turned an under performing winger in to one of the best strikers football has seen.

he did that!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

LOL, he had already won the world cup before he joined Arsenal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Does'nt change what Wenger did with him.

posted on 18/5/23

I'd also argue Stan Cullis as one of the greats.

You might say they were already a top team before the war, but it was only when Cullis took over as captain that their rise began. Before he established himself, they'd had the same manager for yonks and really hadn't been up to much. Knowing how much of a role captains played back then, I think it's quite likely that Cullis was already pulling the strings whilst still a player.

3 league titles, 9x top 3 finishes (3 more whilst still playing) and 2 FA Cup titles for a team like Wolves I think makes him deserving of a place.

posted on 18/5/23

None of them can hold a light to Juande Ramos, who by winning ENIC FC their only trophy performed a bonafide miracle.

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

Sensible posters only. Idiots will be deleted.

posted on 18/5/23

comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 46 minutes ago
Obvs Fergie
The Aberdeen stuff
Then the sustained success at United, rebuilding and still being successful

No one else has done that

Some have had short periods of success then got out when the team past it’s shelf life
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Not a competition mate. All mentioned were great managers.

posted on 18/5/23

comment by ●Billy The Spur● 20*21*22* ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 42 minutes ago
None of them can hold a light to Juande Ramos, who by winning ENIC FC their only trophy performed a bonafide miracle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair enough Billy, Ramos has been Spurs best manager of the last 20 years, because he won a trophy. But not in the Billy Nick class. Never took Dours from bottom to the Double in two seasons.

posted on 18/5/23

comment by it'sonlyagame (U6426)
posted 45 minutes ago
I'd also argue Stan Cullis as one of the greats.

You might say they were already a top team before the war, but it was only when Cullis took over as captain that their rise began. Before he established himself, they'd had the same manager for yonks and really hadn't been up to much. Knowing how much of a role captains played back then, I think it's quite likely that Cullis was already pulling the strings whilst still a player.

3 league titles, 9x top 3 finishes (3 more whilst still playing) and 2 FA Cup titles for a team like Wolves I think makes him deserving of a place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Stan Cullis had crossed my mind, and I was going to include him. But I think Wolves were in pretty good shape when he turned up. But stand to be corrected on that one. He did win three titles and the FA Cup in the 1950s, so may include him.

posted on 18/5/23

How can anyone do a list like this and ignore Stan Cullis ffs.

The CL came about thanks to what he and Wolves were doing in the 50s.

posted on 18/5/23

Why post war, why not ever. Aren't you the biggest proponent of football being a thing before 1992 when people mention record goalscorers like Shearer. And you missed Paisley.

posted on 18/5/23

WHAT ABOUT MOURINHO????

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

WHAT ABOUT MOURINHO????

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

Comment deleted by Article Creator

posted on 18/5/23

comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Bobby Dazzler (U1449)
posted 46 minutes ago
Obvs Fergie
The Aberdeen stuff
Then the sustained success at United, rebuilding and still being successful

No one else has done that

Some have had short periods of success then got out when the team past it’s shelf life
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Not a competition mate. All mentioned were great managers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair comment

posted on 18/5/23

Spurs were 2nd in 56/57, and 3rd in 57/58, so there was obviously a fundamentally good team struggling in 58/59 that needed to be revitalized by the right manager, so saying Billy Nicholson took over the team at the bottom in 58/59 is obviously misleading. One minute, Sandy wants you to think the players in Spurs '60/61 team were the bestest players ever: the next he wants you to believe they were a bunch of relegation fodder who were only driven to success by the genius of Billy Nicholson. Depending on the day's argument, issues must be skewed to fit the narrative.

posted on 18/5/23

And the notion that taking a team from the bottom to top is the only measure of greatness of a manager is dumb. Sustaining one's success is much harder. That's what makes the likes of Fergie greats of the game. And why the likes of Billy Nicholson aren't in that class.

posted on 18/5/23

comment by Sheriff John Brown - Arteta IN!!! (U7482)
posted 29 minutes ago
Spurs were 2nd in 56/57, and 3rd in 57/58, so there was obviously a fundamentally good team struggling in 58/59 that needed to be revitalized by the right manager, so saying Billy Nicholson took over the team at the bottom in 58/59 is obviously misleading. One minute, Sandy wants you to think the players in Spurs '60/61 team were the bestest players ever: the next he wants you to believe they were a bunch of relegation fodder who were only driven to success by the genius of Billy Nicholson. Depending on the day's argument, issues must be skewed to fit the narrative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

and 18th in 1958/59 the season Nicholson took over. Not very good on facts are you. Spurs were bottom at one point that season.

posted on 18/5/23

comment by Sheriff John Brown - Arteta IN!!! (U7482)
posted 25 minutes ago
And the notion that taking a team from the bottom to top is the only measure of greatness of a manager is dumb. Sustaining one's success is much harder. That's what makes the likes of Fergie greats of the game. And why the likes of Billy Nicholson aren't in that class.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Was much more competitive bsck in the 1960s. Eight different league winners, eight different FA Cup winners. Absolute impossible for one club to Hoover up trophies like in the modern era.

Page 2 of 3

Sign in if you want to comment