Sir Alex Ferguson comes second in coach of the decade

Ferguson and Wenger

I raised an eyebrow when I read the Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger was voted coach of the decade ahead of Sir Alex Ferguson and Jose Mourinho. This doesn’t come from a person who doesn’t respect what Arsene Wenger has done for the North London club, but a sheer observation at how trophy shy the Emirates cabinet is compared to that of Old Trafford, Stamford Bridge and the San Siro.

Wenger has helped improve English football and Arsenal massively whilst incorporating an impressive brand of football – but can a manager who hasn’t won anything since 2005 be considered manager of the decade?


I think if there was an outright vote right now, Wenger would probably be placed behind Mourinho and Fergie, however the award was given on the basis of totaling up all of the votes from the past ten years – meaning that Wenger has been the most consistently placed manager since 2000. In this time Wenger has notched up the following trophies in comparison to Mourinho and Ferguson:

Wenger: 2002 Premier League, 2002 FA Cup, 2003 FA Cup, 2004 Premier League, 2005 FA Cup

Mourinho:2003 Portuguese Liga, 2003 Portuguese Cup, 2003 UEFA Cup, 2003 Portuguese Super Cup ,2004 Portugese Liga, 2004 Champions League, 2005 Premier League 2005 League Cup, 2006 Premier League, 2007 League Cup, 2007 FA Cup, 2009 Serie A, 2010 Serie A, 2010 Coppa Italia, 2010 Champions League

Ferguson: 2000 Premier League, 2001 Premier League, 2003 Premier League, 2004 FA Cup, 2006 League Cup, 2007 Premier League, 2008 Premier League, 2008 Champions League, 2009 League Cup, 2009 Premier League, 2010 League Cup

For all Wenger’s qualities as a coach and what he has done for Arsenal, in terms of trophies – both Ferguson and Mourinho have bettered the Frenchman. But is it all about trophies? Arsenal fans often speak of their net spend in comparison to United’s and Chelsea’s, which is far lower:

Premier League net spend
Source

I’m sure you’ve seen the graphic doing the rounds on the forums/blogs (RoM had a similar graph on there, although slightly inflated without the Ronaldo sale!), so I thought I would replicate it in this piece. United have spent, since the start of the Premier League £107million more than Arsenal, whilst Chelsea have spent £334million more than (stats up to 2010) Arsenal. It is something that UEFA president Michel Platini has spoken about in the past (talking about English clubs in 2008):

‘You can’t be buying players on credit and simply running up huge debts. Clubs are not competing on a level playing field and that is not right.’

Wenger has obviously had an impressive ROI on a number of players (including trophies) he bought for a fraction of the price (Anelka, Toure and Adebayor) and since moving to their new stadium has been quite cautious (although not as ‘tight’ as some might think with Vermaelen and Arshavin).

Now, in the past decade there have been some (as Danny Dyer may put it) some ‘right tear ups’ between United and Arsenal, with it coming to a head in the 2003/04 game at Old Trafford. The managers weren’t much better at times, which included a monumental row between the pair following the 2004/05 game at Old Trafford (where United ended Arsenal’s 49 game unbeaten domestic run). I do realise from doing blogs in the past (that mention Arsenal) that relations ‘aren’t too friendly’ – to put it mildly – but this honestly isn’t a dig at Wenger as a coach or his Arsenal team. He has developed a number of youngsters into superb players, whilst maintaining his footballing ethos. ‘Wenger is a gracious winner, but an awfully bad loser – which rubs off on some of his players at times’. I actually read that quote from physiologist (who works at Arsenal) who was talking to Champions magazine. I would generally agree with that and again that isn’t a criticism because if you think about it, who likes losing?

However, lets get to the real debate – is Wenger the coach of the decade? I think he has done a wonderful job at Arsenal (and couldn’t understand the fans calling for his head) on a tight budget and has overseen their move from Highbury to the Emirates. Having said that, football – at the end of the day – is about winning trophies. In terms of the big trophies, Ferguson has won one European Cup and six League Championships (in ten years) whilst Mourinho has won two Champions League trophies and won the League Championship in three different countries. Wenger has built an empire at Arsenal (and I do put the development of the new stadium down to his vision and ambition) and continues to promote good football – but does his two League Championships compare to that of Ferguson and Mourinho?

I’d like to think this is a balanced article that is generally offering an opportunity for a good old debate and I welcome all comments. Some of you may think that Mourinho and Ferguson have ‘bought’ their trophies, whereas some of you may claim that Wenger’s reluctance to spend is a mere excuse at the fact that his side hasn’t won anything since the 2005 FA Cup final. Tell you what, I reckon all comments should start with ‘[manager] is the coach of the decade because…..’ – I’ll go first.

Just for reference, here is the final result:

1. Arsene Wenger France 156
2. Sir Alex Ferguson Scotland 148
3. Jose Mourinho Portugal 135
4. Fabio Capello Italy 120
5. Guus Hiddink Holland 112
6. Carlo Ancelotti Italy 108
7. Luiz Scolari Brazil 101
Marcelo Bielsa Argentina 101
9. Rafael Benitez Spain 97
10. Marcello Lippi Italy 88

48 Comments on Sir Alex Ferguson comes second in coach of the decade

  1. Ferguson is my coach of the decade because he has won a European Cup and Six League titles whilst competing against the likes of Chelsea and Manchester City who have unlimited resources. He continues to evolve with the game and prove people wrong.

  2. Good article there but it has to be wenger for me still. Tight budget, continues to produce excellent players and are one of the best footballing sides in europe. Wenger is building towards something great IMHO….

  3. i cxan hardly bring myself to say it-but you have given for the most part a very fair unbiased article-i think the fifa/uefa voters obviously went on the first part of the decade & not so much the latter-the award appears to be ,as far as i can gather on the changes & inovations he has brought to enlgish football and doing it on a shoestring compared to the aforementioned clubs-if you were judjing it purely on a trophy hall,there is no debate,fergie wins it hands down.as far as i’m concerned”maureen”isn’t in the running.why?negative football,park the bus,whatever it takes,plus ,bar porto he’s been given a shed load of dosh werever he went….
    7on

  4. 2011-2020 will be arsenals trophy decade. All that wenger built in last five seasons will show in the next few seasons as i believe they are close to domination. They still have a very young side with most of their players yet to peak.

  5. I was surprised to see the result too. How do you judge one coach against another ? Given that the only way to prove that one coach is better than another completely fairly is to give them completely equal resources,(players, transfer budget, facilities etc.)which is practically impossible. So you have to do it with trophies, with success, with victories over the opposition, and therefore I would have imagined that most people would have voted for Ferguson or Mourinho. Of course with the new rules coming in soon concerning clubs spending, maybe this award will make more sense

  6. Building towards something great maybe, so maybe he’ll be coach of this decade but although there is a good argument for him to be coach of the last decade I struggle to see how he can be ahead of JM and SAF…I know it’s not all about trophies but even so…

  7. ”Having said that, football – at the end of the day – is about winning trophies.”

    Is it really all about trophies though? For example, Mourinho has had an unlimited budget and probably the ‘easiest’ jobs in football the past decade. Spending around half a billion pounds kinda gives you an advantage over others. Winning the CL with Porto in 2004 was probably his best achievement, and even then he was extremely lucky in doing so. Before anyone says anything, I think he’s a great manager, but you have to take into account ALL aspects of management, not just a trophy count.

    I’d still go with Wenger.

  8. I am not sure how this fits, but it does: If football was only about winning trophies then why do all the supporters of the hundreds of clubs across Europe (for starters) even bother to do whatever they do to “support” their clubs. Winning yes, winning trophies? Not an option for most. There must be many other facets to the game then that attract fans than just trophies. (Admittedly trophies attract even more fans.)

    Also, on what criteria are they judged each season? What years did AW do that much better than Ferguson? 2002 and 2004. But Fergie wasn’t that far behind, whereas when Ferguson did better than AW surely AW was further behind? Perhaps not in 2006, but surely from 2007-2010.

    Mourinho wasn’t on the radar till 2003, so that must have dented his overall score. Otherwise you’d have to hand it to him.

  9. Thanks everyone for the comments – good debate going on.

    Bob/Trophy-tease – just to clarify on the trophies, this is from a manager’s perspective, rather than a fan’s perspective – which I think you are implying?

    Henry’s Winter – yes very true indeed!

  10. A fair and balanced article. Would Wenger have maybe won more with Chelsea’s budget? Sure. But at the end of the day he hasn’t won a thing in 5 seasons and a lot of this is his choice. He prefers to try and unearth the next Toure or Van Persie and watch them grow rather trying to buy for the most part. Arsenal were skint when they first moved but not so much now yet Wenger has been in denial for 5 years that his backline and keepers are championship-quality and by and large they are not.

    Wenger, Ferguson, and Mourinho are all top managers and awful losers for the most part, but there’s no way Wenger’s record in this century can be considered the best. And for the record, I am a Gooner.

  11. Wenger is my manager of the decade because not only has he brought success to Arsenal he has shown the way with many innovative processes, nutrition, training, man management and education all included. Processes that many other managers have followed. That includes SAF. But Wenger does it better than the rest, he is honest, forthright and a great role model. He has unearthed so much raw talent, a lot of who now benefit other clubs around Europe after being groomed in the Arsenal way. Never before has one man produced so much talent at such little cost. The mere fact that SAF, Mourinho etc bought success automatically relegates them down table. During his association with Arsenal Wenger also helped design and build an amazing new home as well as a state of the art training ground. Add to that fundraising for local charities and disadvantaged children and you cannot fail to see why Wenger deserved this award. Wenger has worked his magic despite constantly being under fire from a xenophobic media trying to get under Wengers skin. A true great among managers. A true great among men.

  12. Mr Wenger won 1st place because he develops rather than buys players (generally). Sir Alex are always able to throw alot of money at problems; even spending 32 mill on Berbatov. Mourinho’s biggest skill is going to the right club at the right time – ie the one with the best squad of players and/or the most money to spend. The truth is that neither Jose or Sir Alex could’ve steered their clubs through such a frugal and difficult time (money, new stadium etc) and still not fallen out of the top 4 and remaining in the top 8 seeds in Europe. Wenger is a true great.

  13. Well considering d specification of decade, no coach deserve better than morinho because his coaching can be traced only to ds decade wit no coach best his record he is surely d special one .despite d fact dt I am united fans, d truth must be told

  14. Just to play Devil’s advocate…how many of the current Arsenal team were bought? (I know the answer but hoping that makes you think about the whole buying vs. developing argument)

  15. First off, I am a diehard ManUnited fan. That being said, this is about the success of the coaches over the past decade, not teams. I love Fergie to death but I would have to unanimously give it to Mourinho. He has won so much in the last decade and he did it at 3 different clubs in 3 different leagues in 3 different countries with 3 completely different squads! And no one can just say “oh, it’s because he was handed an all-star lineup”. That’s bull!! Look at what happened to Porto after he left, look at Chelsea, look at Inter now! All had the same squads when he left and the next manager in line could not get the best out of them! Wenger is no where near the class or Mourinho and Fergie! He’s a great manager and has been great at Arsenal, but he doesn’t have the silverwear to show for it. Mourinho is a legend, Sir Alex is a legend! Wenger, to be seen…

  16. It’s intriguing and understandable that most of these posts are from Arsenal fans who say Wenger rightly won it…

    …the reasons for them giving seem to circle around making the most of resources available…if the award is to be given based on that then Moyes has an equally big claim to the award for example.

    There’s much to be admired about Wenger and how he’s steered Arsenal in the first decade but look at where his Arsenal team were at the start of the decade and where they are now…in terms of the team, they’ve regressed…off the pitch things have changed a lot, the whole spending thing is Wenger’s own doing. It’s a lie he doesn’t have money to spend, one needs only to look at Arsenal’s accounts to see there has always been money there just he chooses not to spend it and says it should go to paying off the debt – admirable but also to an extent, foolish.

    For me, a manger should be judged first and foremost by achievements on the pitch and related to the playing squad – yes there is more to a manager than that, but that is why a manager is employed…for success on the pitch, not to sort the finances or sort the stadium etc…and hence for me, it’s why Wenger isn’t the manager of the decade.

    As I said before, it’s hard to look beyond Mourinho but Fergie has constantly rebuilt his team to always remain competitive.

    I actually think it’s one of those awards where there is no right or wrong answer and in fact it’s impossible to judge as really only a handful of managers can be considered and how on earth do you compare them when they’re in different leagues and with different budgets etc etc

    For me, someone like Moyes has as much of a right to think he deserves recognition as Fergie or Wenger do.

    I’d still give it to Mourinho – the man is all about winning and success – yes he had money to spend at Chelsea but you have to make a team gel and work…just look at Madrid last year and how much they spent, it doesn’t always happen. He’s a born winner and so far for me is the manager of the 21st century (hard to say that when SAF is the man in charge of the team I support and rightly will be recognised as the greatest manager ever when he retires)

  17. Good article and interesting debate. Quite surprised Wenger won it but based on consistency alone, I think he would have received a lot of votes. As a Gooner, it pains me to say that my head says Fergue’s the best; he’s got the balance right between spending and unearthing talent. Giggs, Scholes (Neville to a lesser extent) are still going strong with players like Fletcher, Rafael, Anderson all being bought young and trained up. Add to that the purchases of Ferdinand, Vidic, Rooney, Park and you can see that despite the long list of failures (djembe djemba, kleberson, Chadwick etc) Fergie still gets the it right in the end. Mourinho has been a character but comes 3rd for me quite easily; fewer trophies than Fergie, rubbish football, most money spent, massive clubs (barring Porto).

    Wenger: consistent with some trophies, amazing style of play, innovative/trend setting practices, excellent on a tight budget (not necessarily through choice as people keep alluding to), new stadium etc etc. I don’t think there can be too many complaints; both Fergie and Wenger deserve it and I’m sure that despite their history, they’d both agree…

  18. If I’m honest I think Fergie should have won it but from what I can gather it was awarded on a mathematical formula by adding up the results of every Manager of the Season vote, which kind of throws debate out of the window!

    Porto aside, the teams Mourinho coached basically couldn’t lose. When his Chelsea side were dominant all of his players wer at their peak and two great Arsenal and United sides were being rebuilt. He also had Abramovich ready and willing to spend whatever was necessary (he seems to have lost interest to some degree now) while Arsenal were moving into a new stadium. How quickly the tables turned when Ronaldo and Rooney hit their best for United- resulting in three straight titles- suggests that winning titles before that didn’t take a huge amount of doing, especially with that money. And as for his Inter side- you’d have to be Rafa Benitez to struggle in Serie A with that team! I think finally now the wheels are starting to come off the Mourinho bandwagon as his Real side is falling behind Barca in the SPL, sorry, La Liga.

    Everyone has gone over Wenger’s achievements so I won’t do it again, but I think despite the trophy drought he has done enough to make the award not entirely unreasonable. And as someone pointed out, great managerial achievements are not always measured in trophies i.e. David Moyes, Hodgson at Fulham etc.

    But I have to say Fergie has combined big trophy success with ‘natural’ spending and probably deserves it. And while he undoubtedly has had more to spend than Wenger to get those prizes, the money he had was all as a result of his own achievements with United in the past, which can’t be said for Mourinho at Chelsea (Abramovich), Inter (Moratti) or Real (Spanish Govt., who knows where, who or what!)

    And the question in comments about the number of Arsenal players bought or developed: almost all were ‘bought’ technically but as young players and then developed. The players in the current squad bought as established players would be: Sagna, Squilacci, possibly Koscielny, Rosicky, Arshavin, Chamakh and arguably van Persie (bought young and relatively unheard of but still a regular in the Feyenoord side). I may have forgotten someone but I think that’s it.

  19. apart from chelsea (because they have asugar daddy,mourinho has left clubsin poor financial positions, he winstrophys but showsno responsibility to the welfare of the clubs, i would have said fergie number1

  20. I think Steve Coppell should have won it for the work he did at Reading with less than £5, and I’m both a United and Arsenal fan 😉

  21. my lord..i opened this expecting a similar kind of tirade as i saw on another man u blog and was surprised to find it quite reasonable!

    that aside, i think you could argue for either wenger, fergie or mourinho for different reasons. it’s obviously not all about trophies or the award would be a relatively simple totting up process. working on the basis that a manager is there to get the best out of his resources, i can see why wenger won it. he has over achieved and kept arsenal competitive despite all expert analysis at the start of each season. fergies record speaks for itself, though he is at the club with with best resources available if you take into account stadium, fan base, history etc. mourinho definitely has something about him..sucess follows, but i think the manner in which he does it will exclude him from any award which has an element of human judgement. the guy just takes gamesmanship to the extreme.

  22. Personally, i would have chosen Wenger anytime as the winner but could easily have accepted sir Alex as the winner if he was their choice. The choice of Wenger as the best manager of the decade clearly demonstrates that the decision was not based on number of trophies won during that period.I think the decision was based on other factors that improve the game in its entirity.You’ve already mention aspects like developing young players into great footballers,nurturing a footballing ethos that is recognised worldwide and with great entertainment value.A great job in contributing to the development of a football club to a higher level and by that making many people (who love the game)proud.His team has been very consistent inspite of a tight budget.His team has consistently qualified for the champions league thirteen years in a row. Wenger deserves this recognition and i hope it inspires younger managers – especially in developing young talents. I like the tone of your article. It’s curious and well balanced.

  23. i’m a gooner, but I think fergie should’ve won it. He’s consistently competed this decade, but unlike us, he’s continued to win trophies at the end.
    I can see why they chose wenger, he’s been brilliant and has transformed our club, and i think his outside exploits, such as the limited resources available, building a new stadium, the invincibles and generally playing attractive football won him the award and so, well done Arsene!

    a very good article, nicely balanced, so much so that i agree with you. Top work mate

  24. gooner. mourinho by 10 miles.
    wenger went head to head with ferguson in the earlyyears when ferguson wa spending 30 milon on defenders, a time when top clubs would dream about spending 20 mil.
    ferguson’s real achievment with aberdeen, he has underachieved at united.
    wenger overachieved initially at arsenal, now he is victim to ideals.
    mourinho has done it in portugal, england quickly. can he break barca hegemony?

  25. Its hard from Man U fans to understand why Wenger came first when Sir Alex has won so many trophies. But Wenger’s tropy haul was impressive in the first half of the decade and then Arsenal built (and paid for) a fantastic new state-of-the-art stadium in the most expensive city in Europe. Unlike Citeh, they weren’t handed a stadium by the local council. Wenger’s achievement in keeping Arsenal in the Champions League with very little net expenditure over the past 5 years was terrific. Personally I wouldn’t mind if Sir Alex had won. Jose? Not sure… Porto were blessed in a way no club has been since (remember Scholes incorrectly disallowed goal that would have scuppered them at OT?). Since then, he’s managed with a cheque book.

  26. net spend 1.7 million- go back to bruce riochs time and imagine we could get a manager to take us to titles, cup, unbeaten season, consistant european footy and a brand new 60,000 seater stadium? 1.7 millian!! unbelievable achievment

  27. Arsene wenger did not in any single year win the coach awards. He only won it when the results were totalled up. It is more about the consistency then it is about the trophies. More about the win-loss ratio than it is about the final points total. The coach of the decade is a reflection of stats, nothing else. The very fact that Mourinho is on the list indicates that its not about developing players or doing it within budget.

    My manager of the decade – Sir Alex Ferguson (very grudgingly). Apart from the bleak period when he had the likes of Kleberson and Djemba-Djemba in his team, they have always been a feared bunch.

    People say Mourinho only knows how to spend – but here’s a perspective. Drogba for £24m versus Adebayor for £25m. Essien for £24m vs Barry for £18m. He knows value , but he loves shopping in Harrods

  28. Damo – who has a net spend of £1.7m? Wenger certainly doesn’t!!!

    Since 94/95 Arsenal have a net spend of £39.316m – what that shows is how good he is at getting good fees for players he’s sold

  29. Mark – I appreciate your comments but I completely disagree with your statement that Ferguson has ‘underachieved at Untied’. Can I ask what you are basing that on?

    United hadn’t won the title since 1967 and had been relegated in that time. Ferguson has won 11 Premier League titles and two European cups – a monumental feat. I think even the great man would stress that he feels United should have picked up at least another European Cup in that time, but to be honest – i’m not moaning with the two he has won!

    We’ve been spoilt.

  30. If it is judged on net spending,hands down Wenger will win it every time.Fergie and Mourinho have spent millions and millions and keep doing so,granted they achieve a lot but it has been very expensive.Fergie got 70 mil for Ronaldo but he has also overseen purchases such as 25 mil for Veron,30 mil for Rooney,30 mil for Rooney,30 mil for Berbatov etc, name me one purchase by Wenger over 15 mil and you will struggle.Mourinho used a small nations BNP at Chelsea and the same to a lesser extent at Inter.One more thing is the fact that he have kept Arsenal competitive with several semifinls,cl final in 2006 very close to titles in 2007 and 2009 where Uniteds grit and Arsenals injurylist killed it.If you look at it on the trophy winning side you can only really give it to Mourinho with a trophy in every full season.But i would give my left hand for a CL win and a couple of added Pl titles so noone in their right mind will argue that Fergie isnt a great manager

  31. Danish Gooner – Nasri all in is £15.8m 😉 – don’t forget though, Wenger and Arsenal have been prepared to spend – Bergkamp, Wiltord, Overmars, Henry, Edu, Lauren and Jeffers were all sizeable transfers at the time…As I said before, Arsenal outspent United for many of the PL early years (up to about 2000 roughly).

    The key is as you said, the net spend, Arsenal have a high turnover of players and get good fees -> the downside is of course not really replacing some players properly

  32. interesting article mr salomon.

    anyone who has called for wenger to be sacked needs their head examined…the man is a legend in his own time, and without him, arsenal might have spent the last 14 years being (shivers) like sp*rs.

    in the first 5 years of the decade his trophy haul was more impressive than ferguson’s but since the move to the emirates his ability to compete has been severely hampered due to financial constraints. the fact arsenal have managed to even compete despite having a squad assembled at approximately 1/20 the price of utd and chelsea is testimony to how good he really is.

    that being said, it is hard to look past ferguson and particularly mourinho (especially following last season with inter). on a trophies won basis, both evidently surpass wenger. but there are other considerations, and i doubt that either wouldve had the success wenger has had if theyd been forced to work to such a tight budget.

    with the players they have, if wenger managed city, would they win the league? Discuss.

  33. Not my article Jez!

    First half of the decade: Wenger 2 PLs and 3 FA Cups; Fergie 3 PLs and 1 FA Cup – not a lot in it

    Jez, 1/20 – gimme a break lad!! Since 2000, Wenger has spent £215m roughly and Fergie £330m roughly – yeah a lot more, but be realistic!!!

    All of it is hypothetical in terms of would other managers do as well etc etc – Wenger has certainly developed a frustrating knack of being tactically stubborn (I believe that is a common opinion of Gooners) – e.g. at OT it was clear he needed to change how Arsenal were playing but there never is a plan b, arsenal’s plan a works against most opponents but not all and Wenger has developed this inability to change his system lately.

  34. utd:

    van der saar 2m
    fabio 2.6m (half of 5.2 for both twins)
    ferdinand 30m
    vidic 7m
    evra 5.5m
    carrick 18m
    anderson 18m
    nani 17m
    valencia 16m
    rooney 27m
    berbatov 30m

    total: 173.1

    arsenal:

    fabianski 1m
    clichy 0.05 m
    vermaelen 10m
    djourou 0m
    sagna 6m
    cesc 0m
    song 0m
    wilshere 0m
    van persie 2.1m
    arshavin 13m (allegedly)
    nasri 10m

    total: 42.105m

    that means utd’s first 11 was more than 4 times more costly to construct.

    thats just the starting 11…as you go deeper into the squads, the ratio increases…chamakh free, eboue free, bendtner free, gibbs free, wozsecnshfdcgfsdy free (although admittedly utd have scholes, giggs, gibson, o shea and fletcher)

    so yes a 20th was hyperbolic, but the difference in cost of the two squads is immense. the article highlights that arsenal’s net spend has been over 100m less than utd this decade.

    i would wager that had wenger been given 100 million to spend (thats approximately 4 rooneys OR 3 vidics and a ronaldo) then arsenal may well have continued to match and even out perform utd in the second half of the decade just as they did in the first half.

    that is entirely hypothetical of course, but its definitely worth considering.

    re wengers tactical stubborness…its a media obsession that ignores the fact that arsenal have plainly not been as good as chelsea and utd these past few years. no one complains when arsenal beat the lesser teams…and the fact that wenger now was has a comparable team to utd and chelsea is showing…utd were a tad fortunate to win at ot, and wenger learnt from that defeat as evidenced by the win vs chelsea.

    nonetheless, is wenger a better tactician than mourinho/ferguson? no. is he a better all-round manager? debatable.

  35. think you’ve got to get it out of your heads that the poll is not decided based on a trophy count. just like the nonsense you wrote that because anderson has won more trophies than fabregas he has a case for being a better player; it just doesn’t work like that. fabregas better player than anderson, wenger better manager than fergie.

  36. Arsene Wenger – thanks for commenting on the story and I appreciate your opinion on the matter.

    With regards to ‘who is a better manager’, it is purely subjective but I would argue that trophies are a massive part of a managers goals and objectives surely? Arsenal are a massive club in England (third highest Championship wins of all time) and surely Arsenal fans will be happy with no trophies BUT you produce some magnificent football. Do you see my point?

    Of course winning trophies isn’t the only quality a manager needs, but i’m sure you’ll agree (bias aside) that United play some very nice attacking football as well?

    As I mentioned this wasn’t a criticism of Wenger – but a platform for fans to put their point across.

    BTW – I think Fabregas is a sublime footballer and I didn’t write that article you are talking about. I’ve extracted my response to that post and pasted it below:

    I sometimes refrain from commenting on certain pieces – something I really shouldn’t do considering I manage and maintain the thing! However, I do wish to make some points.

    I used to get into many rows with Arsenal fans (people I know – not random people at Highbury) about footballing philosophy, styles and achievements. For every United fan that claims the treble is the greatest achievement ever in English football – you will get an Arsenal fan claiming a season unbeaten merits such an accolade. Arsene Wenger once remark “everyone thinks he has the prettiest wife” when respond to a Fergie claim that United played better football. This analogy boils down to how fans weigh up each others credentials.

    What do I think of Fabregas? I think he is a fine midfielderer with great vision, intelligent movement and above all is a leader. Does he rub other fans up the wrong way? Sure he does – but then did Eric Cantona and Gary Neville. He notched up 15 goals in 26 Premier League appearances last season – an impressive return. Every time I’ve watched Arsenal play Chelsea – the west Londonders bully the whole side rather than just Fabregas out of the match. I think, and correct me if i’m wrong, the praise he receives is sometimes far too great for a player that has only won an FA Cup back in 2005 (a match which Arsenal were second best for the whole 120 minutes!)?

    Sure – a great player can play in a side and not win anything like an average player can play in a great side and win something – like Stephane Guivarc’h in France 1998. But then on the flip side – a great player can transform a side and lift it above and beyond its mortal captabilities – like Maradona with Argentina in 1986 or with Napoli in the late 80s. The problem could be, like Nick says as an experienced researcher, that Arsenal fans may tend to overrate certain players. I was once told that Cristiano Ronaldo was like Glenn Helder, but Helder had better delivery. Now this person was knowledgeable but was so blinded by his love for his club – he could see the quality of Ronaldo. I had a similar conversation with a chap that wouldn’t talk to me again that evening after I claimed that Ronaldo would go on to be the best player in the World – looking at fellow Arsenal fans in dismay when I suggest he was better than Reyes. But that is why we love football and our clubs – debate is good – but every fan needs to be able to take a step back and accept other views.

    All of our opinions are subjective – so the whole “my dad is bigger than your dad” arguments fall on deaf ears. I always thought Darren Fletcher was top class – even when he was getting slated by everyone – but its all down to your opinion. I think Ronaldo, Brazilian Ronaldo, was one of the best forwards i’ve ever seen – but he wasn’t a patch on Maradona. Now, that is my opinion and its up to you to agree/disagree/argue (maturely) your case.

    I’m really looking forward to Monday as I think it should be a quality game of football. United have had some great wins in recent years and I know that Arsenal will want to replicate their double win in 2006/07 over United. But I would stress to any poster that wants to focus on the article being ‘embarassing’ or that Yolkie’s opinion/point of view is ‘rubish’ (as one Gooner put it) that you argue as to why you think he is wrong about Fabregas. Go mad on the chalkboard, statistics, honours – whatever you want – but blogs are for debates rather than childish slanging matches.

  37. I was as surprised as many of you where to hear that Wenger has been given this award (maybe 1998 – 2008) but what everyone seems to be overlooking is the fact that the results where based on a decade of annual polling. Voters where not asked to choose who their “manager of the decade” is.

    I’m sure even you die hard Utd fans would agree that Mr Wenger would be in your top 3 or 4 managers list most years over the last decade. Most people didn’t know who Jose was in 2000, 2001, 2002.
    According to the IFFHS it was Wenger’s consistency in the 10-year period that earned him the award. Their website stated: ‘Although the Frenchman has until now never won the annual vote, he has been among the best-placed coaches every year.
    I have to admit that Fergie would be a more deserving winner looking at the trophies he has won. However I believe voters would have been a lot more ruthless during his unsuccessful years in comparison with Wenger as funds, and entertainment suddenly become higher priorities. Utd spent on average 16m a year. AFC 2m. This is demonstrated in voting over 2004, 2005, 2006.
    http://www.iffhs.de/?3e0f05f6cf02f8dd08354b4ce8278cec4790e0380a

  38. It is the most un-biased article I have read for a long time. I am a die-hard Manchester United fan but I think Jose Mourinho is the one who should have been handed the award. SAF comes second and Arsene Wenger third. But thats just a personal opinion. I have read all the above comments and I’ve come up with my own analysis which I believe is un-biased only to try to support my point that why Jose Mourinho should have been the winner.
    Jose Mourinho
    a) Pluses: 1) 6 LEAGUE titles with 3 different clubs, in 3 different countries, with 3 different squads, in 3 different footballing cultures.
    2) 2 Champions Leagues and 1 UEFA Cup
    3) Every available domestic trophy where ever he went
    4) Best tactician in the world
    5) All at a very young age
    6) Eye for the right player at the right club (Yesterday’s Drogba 24M, Essien 24M, Molouda 12M and Ashley Cole 5M (Total 65 Million) when Jose signed them are worth atleast 130 Million pounds in today’s market if Chelsea decide to sell them)
    b) Minuses: 1) Negative football
    2) Too out-spoken and disrespectful to others at time which is why I believe he didn’t win it.
    3) Unknown in 2000, 2001, 2002 which costed him valuable points at the end of the decade
    c) Misperception about him spending loads of money:
    During his stint at Chelsea he spent alot of money but he had an eye for the player he wanted at the club. Looking at his big singings like Drogba, Cole, Essien, Molouda and Alex who costed alot (except cole) one forgets the instant success Jose brought to Chelsea and had he stayed longer, very few would doubt that a Champions League trophy would have been in Chelsea’s trophy cabinet today.
    I didn’t include Shevchenko who costed more than 30M pounds because he was Abrahamovich’s signing not Jose’s.
    The fact that Abrahamovich threw money at every player he liked when he took over sent a wrong perception about Jose. Spending doesn’t bring success. For instance, Real Madrid failed to dominate world football as the club had planned with Galacticos, and how Renieri failed to win the league in the first year of Abra’s reign or lately how Mark Hughes and Pellegrini failed at their clubs despite spending Millions. My point is, he spends for a purpose and makes sure the purpose is achieved no matter what.
    When he joined Inter Milan he didn’t spend HUGE sum over players. Let remind of what he did. He bought Lucio for cheap. He sold Ibrahamovich for 45 Million with Eto’o joining Inter for FREE and with those 45M he bought Scniedjer and Millito who were the pillars of that Trebel winning side.
    Someone mentioned that the clubs he left suffered financially after he left. Chelsea are not suffering financially. They just have no idea on how to update their (now old) squad. Inter too are not in a bad financial position. Its just that Rafa couldn’t replicate Mourinho’s success despite having the same players he had.

    Why Arsene Wenger shouldn’t have won:
    1) Failure to win the league in the past 6 years and looks highly unlikey this year so make that 7.
    2) Failure to transform his squad after the big players left or I would say SOLD which comes under bad management.
    3) Failure to blend older experienced players with the young ones inorder to protect the younger players and respect their development which again is bad management.
    4) Tactically failing on bigger occasions against big clubs.
    5) Selling big players at the wrong time. Pires, Henry, Viera, Wiltord all left within 12 months. Bad management.
    Reasons why he won.
    1) Emirates Stadium.
    2) Footballing philosophy of grooming youngsters.
    3) Attractive football.
    Wrong perception:
    1) He doesn’t spend. Well Arsenal have spent 200M in the last 15 years so I wouldn’t say he doesn’t spend, while SAF has spent 300M but unlike Wenger won every trophy at a club level.

  39. i’m man united fans,but i think it should be Vicente Del Bosque, 2 champions league and 2 world cup (1 for madrid,1 for spain) and 2 la liga, any doubts?

  40. How about Guardiola? Ten titles out of thirteen in three seasons and more to come (6 next season). Oh, was this only about English football?

  41. I’m a diehard Manchester United supporter. I started following united from the 70’s. The F.A cup 🏆 final between Man United and Arsenal, in which Arsenal won 3-2. So you know how long I waited for united to win the league ( 25yrs to be precise). I experienced the ups and downs with my team. One year we started the season flying 12 games we won from the opening day, under Ron Atkinson, only to collapse in dramatic fashion. Ron Atkinson got sacked and in came Sir Alex Ferguson who the press put under immense scrutiny and pressure because of the size and expectations of the club. Also Sir Matt Busby was deemed an alleged milestone around Ferguson neck. So when Ferguson won the league cup 🏆, his first trophy 🏆, all the weight was lifted from his shoulders. Then Ferguson went from strength to strength. There has been times Ferguson has had financial restrictions on him, especially when the Glaziers bought the club. Ferguson had limitations financially because of loan repayments and the extension of Old Trafford. The most Ferguson spent was £30 million on Rio Ferdinand. He didn’t even spend £10 million for Edwin Van der Sa to replace Peter Schmiechel when he retired, who was a world class goal keeper. He gambled £25 or £30 million on Juan Sebastian Veron and Veron flopped. After that he was tight with the cash 💰, especially with all the super agents peddling their clients like fruit and veg to the highest bidder, playing clubs of each other to inflate the players fee. Ferguson would only pay premium prices if he believed the player to be world class. Ferguson built his own team, and he built at least three, with no fear of promoting youngsters who had come through the United academy. For example the class of 96 which benefited the England national side. As all managers he has made a profit on some players and made a loss on others. In Fergusons’ favour he managed and nurtured the best player in the world. Also managed and nurtured the most lucrative commercial footballer so far. If you look at the premier league Ferguson finger prints are all over it.
    1) Aston villa – Tom Cleverly
    2) Arsenal – Danny Welbeck
    3) Crystal palace – Wilfred zaha
    4) Everton – Darren Gibson Tim Howard
    5) Leicester City – Ritchie De Leat
    6) Newcastle United – Steve McLaren
    7) Stoke City – Mark Hughes, Miram Diouf
    8) Sunderland – John O’shea, Wes Brown.Frazer Campbell
    9) Manchester City – Brian Kidd
    This doesn’t include those that are out on loan. Then there are the players playing and the managers managing in the lower leagues and abroad. This is the influence Sir Alex Ferguson has had on football ⚽. Then surely he is the best manager in the last decade

1 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Tweets that mention Sir Alex Ferguson comes second in coach of the decade | Manchester United Blog | The Stretty Rant -- Topsy.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*