Thread: 2007/08 English Premier League Season

Originally Posted by redxalonso

Coming from a guy who actually thinks Lampard is a box to box player and that Benitez is overrated, of course it doesn't make sense to you.

Benitez is overrated by many Liverpool fans which has was my point.

Even now, Liverpool fans are clamoring of this great fluid attack. Yea they've looked good, but I'll be more impressed when they do it against better sides than some French squad and Derby. Reading 'Pool fans thoughts from various message boards and you'd think this version of the squad is '74 Holland.

The fact is, Benitez is overrated by many 'pool fans. I don't think he can be considered in the upper echelon of managers until he wins a few league titles. Mourinho's resume is far more impressive than Benitez's at this point.

You've shown a clear bias against Frank Lampard. Why would anyone want to believe your argument. I at least have a neutral opinion on the matter. Reading your posts is as if Lampard ****ed your sister.

Go ahead and start your rant on box to box players covering every blade of grass rant. I've heard it before, it entertains me every time.

Originally Posted by redxalonso

Because you made it sound like a fair amount of skill/creativity(which is how I interpret taking chances with the ball) is not needed to win.

There you go putting words in my mouth again. You enjoy seeing what you want to see in other posts then going on these rants to make yourself sound like some soccer guru. I respect your opinion and all and it is a good soccer one. But these rants although entertaining bring very little to the discussion.

This whole thing started with me saying you don't need to play pretty football to win. Then you go on this rant

Nobody ever criticizes the World Cup winning Brazilians or Argentinians, or their star players for taking too many chances with the ball. Ditto Zidane, Thierry Henry, Dennis Bergkamp or George Best etc.

If you're confident about what you're doing, and are not afraid to TRY, then there's no such thing as taking chances. In other words, only a bunch of p*ssies and defeatists would stay away from "taking chances".

for no apparent reason. I never criticized Brazillian players. Or Argentine players, etc.

What are these points for. There are many ways to skin a cat.

Also regarding this point.

Because you made it sound like a fair amount of skill/creativity(which is how I interpret taking chances with the ball) is not needed to win.

It some cases a fair amount of skill and creativity is NOT needed. Tactics and some luck do just fine. Obviously it's not the ideal way of going about things but it works. See Greece 2004 in Portugal.

Originally Posted by ASUcruz

There you go putting words in my mouth again. You enjoy seeing what you want to see in other posts then going on these rants to make yourself sound like some soccer guru. I respect your opinion and all and it is a good soccer one. But these rants although entertaining bring very little to the discussion.

I said "you made it sound like", doesn't mean I am 100% sure you meant it, so in that respect I wasn't putting words in your mouth.

As for the rest of the paragraph...you're being a hypocrite.

Originally Posted by ASUcruz

The fact is, Benitez is overrated by many 'pool fans.

I doubt that's true, but even if tens of thousands of pool fans around the world out of millions thinks Benitez is overrated, that's still not many.

I don't think he can be considered in the upper echelon of managers until he wins a few league titles. Mourinho's resume is far more impressive than Benitez's at this point.

Far more impressive? If you think Mourinho's 2 EPL title means he's a better manager than Benitez, then you have a very simple mind.

Mourinho is a capable manager, but if you think money isn't factor, then here's what he had to say after the loss to Villa.

The Chelsea boss said: 'There has been a big input by teams outside of the top four so it will become more normal for the big teams to lose matches and points.

'The other teams have spent lots of money and brought players in to bolster their teams. Villa are one example but you can find a lot of other examples
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/st...459933&cc=4716

You've shown a clear bias against Frank Lampard. Why would anyone want to believe your argument. I at least have a neutral opinion on the matter. Reading your posts is as if Lampard ****ed your sister.

It's not difficult if they're intelligent.

Originally Posted by redxalonso

I doubt that's true, but even if tens of thousands of pool fans around the world out of millions thinks Benitez is overrated, that's still not many.

Even Chu Gar agreed with me last year when this came up.

Originally Posted by chu gar

But, yeah, I think us Liverpool fans over rate him, but soon enough that will no longer be the case.

Originally Posted by redxalonso

Far more impressive? If you think Mourinho's 2 EPL title means he's a better manager than Benitez, then you have a very simple mind.

Plus an Champion's League with a small club at Porto. Look at my post Mourinho's "resume"is far more impressive than Benetiz's. I think that fact is pretty clear.

I would agree that Mourinho has done more with less, undoubtedly the Porto Champions League puts him over the top. The again, that's when Deco was playing off his ass!!!

Originally Posted by ASUcruz

Even Chu Gar agreed with me last year when this came up.

No disrespect to Chu gar, but I do not need validation from other Liverpool fans.

Why don't you look at Ferguson's first 4 years at ManUtd instead of Mourinho's before calling Benitez overrated. I use Ferguson he also had to overhaul.

Ferguson had money to spend at United when he got there and still regressed to 11th and 13th in the league for two seasons, and was about to get fired. Yet when this came up you were so quick to look past all the statistics and point to other problems United had during that time.

Plus an Champion's League with a small club at Porto. Look at my post Mourinho's "resume"is far more impressive than Benetiz's. I think that fact is pretty clear.

And you think winning La Liga 2 out of three years is a small feat? You're ****ing pathetic.

You think Real Madrid have been after Benitez for the past 3 seasons because they're bored?

Winning Champions League 2005 by going through Juventus, Chelsea, and AC Milan when Gerrard and Alonso were out for 2-3 months in the middle of the season, Kewell out almost the entire season. Not that Cisse was any good, but remember his broken leg? I list their names because Liverpool HAD no depth.

Luck, coincidence, fatigue, or whatever excuse Mourinho wants to make, the reason why he hasn't been back to the CL finals is because of Benitez.

you are using the term "far more" too lightly.

Originally Posted by Mr. Irreverent

I would agree that Mourinho has done more with less, undoubtedly the Porto Champions League puts him over the top. The again, that's when Deco was playing off his ass!!!

Nuno Valente, Costinha, Postiga, Maniche, Carvalho, Deco, and Ferreira were on the Portugal team that went to the finals in Euro 2004. The core of Porto was solid and credit to Mourinho for putting them together.

But they didn't have the injury crisis Liverpool had that year. It's one thing to have injuries, but Liverpool had no ****ing depth, especially after Owen left for Real Madrid.

Take Porto's top striker and break his leg(Cisse), take Deco and break is ankle for three months(Alonso), take another starting midfielder and let him sit out injured for two months(Gerrard), let Djimi Traore and Jerzy Dudek, and if they still make it to the CL finals and come back from 3-0 down to beat a AC Milan team that are much stronger than the Monaco team, then that's doing more with less.

Benitez had to use Salif Diao against Juventus for pete sake. Salif Diao is the most useless player, ever.

Look what's happening to ManUtd without C. Ronaldo and Rooney? 3 goals in 5 games. Look at them when Rio and Vidic were both injured late last season?

Chelsea were no match for Liverpool last season when Carvalho, Terry and Cech were out all out at the same time.

Originally Posted by redxalonso

.

Why don't you look at Ferguson's first 4 years at ManUtd instead of Mourinho's before calling Benitez overrated. I use Ferguson he also had to overhaul.


.

Comparing the debuts of 2 managers seems like a good idea except when one guy debuted in the 1980s and the other guy debut in the 2000s. That kind of comparison is ludicrious. Different eras, different situations, I don't see very many similarities in the comparison.

Especially seeing as how the United team, Ferguson inherited was nearly RELEGATED. Yes, Man U were almost relegated. Now as mediocre as Liverpool were before Benetiz arrived, they were never in that dire of a situation. Liverpool were still big club. Obviously not a big spending one but with plenty of talent and some spending power.

United were almost RELEGATED. I can't stress that point enough.

Originally Posted by Redxalonso

Ferguson had money to spend at United when he got there and still regressed to 11th and 13th in the league for two seasons, and was about to get fired.

When you say money to spend, what are you referring to. Clearly you are not comparing the spending ways of Man U back then to the spending ways of Man U now. Again two completley different situations.

Originally Posted by redxalonso

Yet when this came up you were so quick to look past all the statistics and point to other problems United had during that time.

This old argument was awhile back. Show me when I looked passed these statistics to other problems. You mean problems like they were almost RELEGATED. Again two completely different situations.

Originally Posted by redxalonso

And you think winning La Liga 2 out of three years is a small feat? You're ****ing pathetic.

Hey everyone, I'm pathetic because I have a differing opinion!

Again, show me where I said wining 2 La Liga's was a small feat. Valencia aren't Real Madrid or Barcelona but they are not Real Betis or anything. They are a big club. Benitez inherited some major league talent when he took over Valencia. Ayala, Baraja, Albeda, Canizares, I could be forgetting more. Vincente I'm sure. Let's not kid ourselves, Valencia was had plenty of star power. They weren't minnows or anything.

Chelsea won 2 titles back to back under Mourinho. Not exactly an easy feat. Yes, I freely admit(never doubted really) that money plays a huge role in who wins the title. But Arsenal was just coming off a season where they were undefeated and Man U had a very powerful team as well. And Chelsea blew everyone out of the water. Money helps but it doens't alone build champions. Otherwise Ranieri would still be there.