khaled_a_d
Senior Member
People have been saying that for almost a decade now. And he proved them wrong several times.
Carlo Ancelotti
- Thread starter ElBuitre
- Start date
People have been saying that for almost a decade now. And he proved them wrong several times.
Birdy
Senior Member
He is not a deep md,
whenever he played Tchou-Valverde or Cama-Valverde combinations deep they looked shit again.
His ideal position is where Tap-ingham plays, and he is not as good.
Birdy
Senior Member
Well, except that he didn't...
He voodoo-fluked 2 CLs the last years, something a coach can do only with Madrid. Others have done it as well...
Other than that, winning La Liga with this squad against 0.5 opponent in 2022 and 1.5 opponent in 2024 is not some prime feat
His stints at Napoli and Everton revealed his true level for 21st cent football
jamrock
Senior Member
It would have been better than No legs and cama.
Honestly he should have went with Tchou and Valverde, never been a fan of cama.
But a Kimmich type player is what's needed beside valverde, he's not a Bellingham type player really.
He can actually play Midfield.
Temptation
Well-known member
Miserably failed at Napoli and Everton.
Maradona37
Well-known member
Goes to show that - to an extent - management is a game where you are limited.
No matter how good a coach you are, in this era you will always do far better with Real Madrid than you will with Everton (no disrespect to the blue scousers). It isn't the 80s anymore.
Management isn't like being a player, where you can truly be a big fish in a RELATIVELY smaller pond (but still big club) and win some trophies (Gerrard, Bruno Fernandes). Even really good coaches like Iraola and De Zerbi have a limit to how high they can take clubs like the Cherries, the Seagulls and Marseille.
That's the thing on management. Tempt goes in on hard on Guardiola but there's a semblance of truth there too - even the greatest managers of all time aren't miracle workers and can't turn around clubs like Everton. They still need resources, a structure, and good players.
It is why I never understood the harsh criticism of Klopp's final record or relative lack of trophies at Liverpool - in most finals he was taking charge of the lesser talented team on paper, and he was one of the main reasons they were so competitive. And he only won fewer trophies at Liverpool because he was up against the relentless Man City machine. Ferguson would have won a lot less if he had to face that machine too, but he is so arse-licked that nobody ever points out his flaws. Plus Klopp often got close to 100 points and still couldn't win the league.
Management is a game where you need the resources and good players. You can punch above your weight and do better than you should, but only to a point. There is a limit. Miracles like Ranieri aside, no manager or coach in this era is taking a relegation level team like Everton really high in the league or to challengers.
I think Carlo is a good coach, obviously. But his reputation has been inflated by managing Real Madrid and AC Milan in really good spells for the club. Of course, you can argue he was part of why they were good, especially at Milan. But at Real Madrid they often won through sheer luck and miracles, not design or his grand plan. You cannot claim that keepers making loads of saves and Benzema or Ronaldo going mental in front of goal is down to Carlo. The games were too chaotic (as with Di Matteo's fluke win). Yet all we hear is how 'cool and collected Carlo is'. He probably just tweaks certain things and makes it up as he goes along.
So still a great coach. But no way do I genuinely believe he knows as much about football as Pep, Michels, Zagallo, Sacchi, Mourinho, Cruyff and various other tactical geniuses.
No matter how good a coach you are, in this era you will always do far better with Real Madrid than you will with Everton (no disrespect to the blue scousers). It isn't the 80s anymore.
Management isn't like being a player, where you can truly be a big fish in a RELATIVELY smaller pond (but still big club) and win some trophies (Gerrard, Bruno Fernandes). Even really good coaches like Iraola and De Zerbi have a limit to how high they can take clubs like the Cherries, the Seagulls and Marseille.
That's the thing on management. Tempt goes in on hard on Guardiola but there's a semblance of truth there too - even the greatest managers of all time aren't miracle workers and can't turn around clubs like Everton. They still need resources, a structure, and good players.
It is why I never understood the harsh criticism of Klopp's final record or relative lack of trophies at Liverpool - in most finals he was taking charge of the lesser talented team on paper, and he was one of the main reasons they were so competitive. And he only won fewer trophies at Liverpool because he was up against the relentless Man City machine. Ferguson would have won a lot less if he had to face that machine too, but he is so arse-licked that nobody ever points out his flaws. Plus Klopp often got close to 100 points and still couldn't win the league.
Management is a game where you need the resources and good players. You can punch above your weight and do better than you should, but only to a point. There is a limit. Miracles like Ranieri aside, no manager or coach in this era is taking a relegation level team like Everton really high in the league or to challengers.
I think Carlo is a good coach, obviously. But his reputation has been inflated by managing Real Madrid and AC Milan in really good spells for the club. Of course, you can argue he was part of why they were good, especially at Milan. But at Real Madrid they often won through sheer luck and miracles, not design or his grand plan. You cannot claim that keepers making loads of saves and Benzema or Ronaldo going mental in front of goal is down to Carlo. The games were too chaotic (as with Di Matteo's fluke win). Yet all we hear is how 'cool and collected Carlo is'. He probably just tweaks certain things and makes it up as he goes along.
So still a great coach. But no way do I genuinely believe he knows as much about football as Pep, Michels, Zagallo, Sacchi, Mourinho, Cruyff and various other tactical geniuses.
khaled_a_d
Senior Member
He didn't fail miserably at Everon, the club was worse after him. They were just in consistent decline.
Napoli he had finished 2nd in his first year, far from failing miserably either.
Fati_Future_BallonDor
Well-known member
Home of Barca Fans
