The Student Room Group

Jose Mourinho is just a rich Tony Pulis - discuss

This poll is closed

Who is a better manager?

Tony Pulis 48%
Jose Mourinho 40%
They are roughly equal12%
Total votes: 91
Similarities between their two teams of today;

Spoiler


Differences between their two teams:

Spoiler


Overall:
- both teams play **** football (although Palace's counterattacking has been stunning in recent weeks)
- both teams are similar defensively
- both teams have roughly the same tactical set-up
- Pulis' players are far far far inferior to Mourinho's, and yet have a comparable defensive record
- Pulis has had a tenth of the money to spend that Mourinho has had
- Pulis has had less games in the job to impress his philosophy on his players

If Pulis had £100m to spunk on Willian, Schurrle, Salah, Matic, and had Hazard/Oscar/Eto'o to work with already, would he not be achieving as much as Mourinho right now?

Original post by sr90
If Tony Pulis was from Europe, wore a suit, looked like Michael Laudrup and was called Antonio Pulisio he'd have been offered the Chelsea job a long time ago.


Pulis >= Mourinho, surely?
(edited 9 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

tony pulis is the mid table mastermind. put him in charge of accrington stanley - he'd finish mid table. likewise, put him in charge of bayern munich - he'd finish mid table.

jose is the special one, with a fantastic new love for half zip pullovers.
Reply 2
Currently, Pulis leads the standings with 1 vote to Jose's 0.

I think this is a fair reflection of the entire football community.
Reply 3
I believe Mourinho is the better manager.
Mourinho is not the manager Football deserves but needs.

With out him the EPL is not half as good
Reply 4
Original post by James222
I believe Mourinho is the better manager.
Mourinho is not the manager Football deserves but needs.

With out him the EPL is not half as good


/overusedquotation

ok don't make Jose out to be the Dark Knight. He's an amoral, arrogant despicable human being, not a humble behind-the-scenes hero.

Did you even read the for/against?
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by matchdayG
Similarities between their two teams of today;

Spoiler


Differences between their two teams:

Spoiler


Overall:
- both teams play **** football (although Palace's counterattacking has been stunning in recent weeks)
- both teams are similar defensively
- both teams have roughly the same tactical set-up
- Pulis' players are far far far inferior to Mourinho's, and yet have a comparable defensive record
- Pulis has had a tenth of the money to spend that Mourinho has had
- Pulis has had less games in the job to impress his philosophy on his players

If Pulis had £100m to spunk on Willian, Schurrle, Salah, Matic, and had Hazard/Oscar/Eto'o to work with already, would he not be achieving as much as Mourinho right now?

Pulis >= Mourinho, surely?


Firstly, you can compare the players as much as you want, but the league table seems to suggest otherwise in terms of the qualities of both teams. Yannick Bolasie? LOL, he just runs and does the most terrible step-overs. Step-overs are used for deceit, not to indicate where you're going.

If someone told you that Tony Pulis or Mourinho had the option to become the manager of the team you support and you were in total control of the situation, who would you choose?

Secondly, playing for a top club has expectations. Tony Pulis is expected to avoid relegation, while Mourinho is expected to win trophies, which are two different objectives and the pressure is much different. Mourinho is used to managing winning teams, so from an experience stand-point, Mourinho wins. You can say Pulis hasn't had the opportunity to manage a big team, but Pulis is 56, while Mourinho is 51, so age is not an excuse now.

Finally, just because a club has money, doesn't mean they'll know how to spend it or even become succesful. Mark Hughes had shed loads of money at City, yet they only finished 8th and 5th when he was there. An even better example is Kenny Dalglish, who spent £35 million on Andy Carrol and in the following summer spent ridiculous amounts on Jordan Henderson and Stewart Downing :lol:

Who would you trust more with a £150 million budget? Pulis or Mourinho

Once you understand the difference in pressure and expectations of both managers at their respective clubs, then you'll understand it's not just money that separates Pulis and Mourinho. Money has a bit to do with it of course, but there's a whole lot of other stuff that comes along with the money which makes things more difficult, More money, more problems and all
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by 9MmBulletz
If someone told you that Tony Pulis or Mourinho had the option to become the manager of the team you support and you were in total control of the situation, who would you choose?


Ngl I would much prefer Pulis to the pathetic arrogant other one...

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 7
Naah, they don't use the same tactics. Mourinho sets up his team according to the opposition, while Pulis on the other hand uses roughly the same tactics every game.
(edited 9 years ago)
I've noticed a common misconception recently that Pulis is a gentleman, overall nice guy. Completely the opposite, terrible person. Does a great job with this sort of club though.
Original post by Gob Bluth
I've noticed a common misconception recently that Pulis is a gentleman, overall nice guy. Completely the opposite, terrible person. Does a great job with this sort of club though.


Any evidence? I assume you are primarily referring to his involvement in this Cardiff scandal.
I can't believe that Jose Mourinho only has 40% of the votes :frown:
Original post by Gob Bluth
I've noticed a common misconception recently that Pulis is a gentleman, overall nice guy. Completely the opposite, terrible person. Does a great job with this sort of club though.


I wouldn't call him a terrible person although he comes across as a prick. His players were so rash and he just defended them 'til the cows came home.

I also think he talks plenty of *******s like many managers do. Him, Martin O'Neil (good manager tbf) and Pellegrini off the top of my head
If Tony Pulis was from Europe, wore a suit, looked like Michael Laudrup and was called Antonio Pulisio he'd have been offered the Chelsea job a long time ago.
Tony Pulis has achieved a lot this season with Crystal Palace and should be applauded. His interviews and press conferences are boring compared with Jose's though.
[QUOTE=sr90;47212433]If Tony Pulis was from Europe, wore a suit, looked like Michael Laudrup and was called Antonio Pulisio he'd have been offered the Chelsea job a long time ago.

Wales is in Europe :tongue:

Seriously, of course not. Mourinho had just won two European trophies on the bounce, while making Porto untouchable in Portugal. Tony Pulis at the time was managing a Championship team.

I think the OP is a Liverpool fan and he comes on the Chelsea thread to talk rubbish and has now come up with a theory that Pulis is better than Mourinho.

The Premier League is not hard to get hold of in terms of viewing so people will know of Pulis. I mean, if Pulis was that good, surely Porto, Inter Milan or Real Madrid would've been looking at getting him in?
The highest Pulis managed at Stoke was 11th and that was in the first season in the PL. He spent a decent amount of money too and the football style was horrific.

Contrast to Hughes who has spent **** all, has the team playing more attractively and looks set for a top ten finish all in his first season.

Not taking anything away from Pulis at Palace this season though, absolutely incredible achievement, I just think he's limited to how far he can take a team.
Reply 16
Original post by scriggy
The highest Pulis managed at Stoke was 11th and that was in the first season in the PL. He spent a decent amount of money too and the football style was horrific.

Contrast to Hughes who has spent **** all, has the team playing more attractively and looks set for a top ten finish all in his first season.

Not taking anything away from Pulis at Palace this season though, absolutely incredible achievement, I just think he's limited to how far he can take a team.

You're only as good as your last season, is a well known and correct cliche for managerial ability. Pulis, a 10-3 shot to win manager of the year, is currently far ahead of 12-1 Mourinho, suggesting that his fellow professionals believe him to be a better manager too.

And as for failure in past jobs, look at Jose's abysmal failure at his past job, or his failure to bring the CL to Chelsea, when Benitez's Liverpool excelled in the competition at the same time, and Di Matteo (lol) took the weakest Chelsea team in a decade to the triumph.

If Pulis was continental, he'd be known as a 'disciplinarian', not dissimilar to Magath or van Gaal (his playing style is actually remarkably similar to van Gaal's CL winning team of 1995). As it is, he's just underrated on these shores because his direct rivals, like Mourinho, create media fuss and attention, whilst Pulis humbly goes about completing the task set, no matter the difficult. His team were 1/20 to go down, and are now are likely to finish top half, overtaking guess who, Stoke and Mark Hughes.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 17
Original post by trrr
Naah, they don't use the same tactics. Mourinho sets up his team according to the opposition, while Pulis on the other hand uses roughly the same tactics every game.


They actually do.

Mourinho sets up his team to sit deep and counter, regardless of any occasion. Take any screengrabs for the Swansea Chelsea game and you'll see how Mourinho had 6 men behind the ball at all times.

And Pulis actually uses excellent subtle variations, eg choosing which side Joel Ward plays on, despite being limited by a small and very weak squad.
Reply 18
Original post by 9MmBulletz
Firstly, you can compare the players as much as you want, but the league table seems to suggest otherwise in terms of the qualities of both teams. Yannick Bolasie? LOL, he just runs and does the most terrible step-overs. Step-overs are used for deceit, not to indicate where you're going.

If someone told you that Tony Pulis or Mourinho had the option to become the manager of the team you support and you were in total control of the situation, who would you choose?

Secondly, playing for a top club has expectations. Tony Pulis is expected to avoid relegation, while Mourinho is expected to win trophies, which are two different objectives and the pressure is much different. Mourinho is used to managing winning teams, so from an experience stand-point, Mourinho wins. You can say Pulis hasn't had the opportunity to manage a big team, but Pulis is 56, while Mourinho is 51, so age is not an excuse now.

Finally, just because a club has money, doesn't mean they'll know how to spend it or even become succesful. Mark Hughes had shed loads of money at City, yet they only finished 8th and 5th when he was there. An even better example is Kenny Dalglish, who spent £35 million on Andy Carrol and in the following summer spent ridiculous amounts on Jordan Henderson and Stewart Downing :lol:

Who would you trust more with a £150 million budget? Pulis or Mourinho

Once you understand the difference in pressure and expectations of both managers at their respective clubs, then you'll understand it's not just money that separates Pulis and Mourinho. Money has a bit to do with it of course, but there's a whole lot of other stuff that comes along with the money which makes things more difficult, More money, more problems and all


Bolasie was previously known as a headless chicken, a freestyle footballer unable to deal with the confinement of the actual pitch. But Pulis saw the potential in him, and has turned him into a near world beater. Ever since Pulis came in, he's pretty much been playing at the level of Hazard. Two assists in his last two games are indicative of Pulis' improvement of him. In contrast, Mourinho has actually reduced Oscar's assist tally from 11 last season to two this season. I think we know who gets the best out of their players - although to be fair to Mourinho, even a great manager like Pulis would struggle to match a genius predecessor like Rafa Benitez.

Tony has different expectations to Jose based on only the club that he's managing. If he was managing a bigger club, we would be allowed to see his exciting counter-attacking on the European stage. As for age, tis but a number. AVB is 34 and everyone knows he's rubbish, whereas Jupp Heynckes landed the Bayern job aged 71 and immortalised himself. Tata Martino, incidentally, this year got his first big job at age 54. And English managers are rarely preferred abroad - the only notable one was Hodgson at Inter, and he was just an interim really.

To say that Jordan Henderson's fee was ridiculous, given what his success this season (an undeniable justification of a fee exaggerated in the media) just shows what you know about big spending. Given that Chelsea regularly buy £20m players and let them rot away, I think your perceptions are out of touch with reality.

Tony can only do a job with what he's got. As it stands, they play in the same league, and Tony has undeniably done a better job.
2/10

Made me chuckle.

Quick Reply

Latest