ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
Humm, not sure you follow the Serie A. Inter is the eternal underachiever (because they are one of the Great). They had a golden age in the 60s and after that a loooong period in the wilderness: few random titles here and there. BUT they managed to resurface in the 2000s. And Mourinho had absolutely nothing to do with that. Mancini, the money, etc. etc. did it. In Italy almost everyone hates Milan AC. Inter is the laughing stock though.
As for RM, I mean, if he is such a genius, how come he only managed to grab one league (out of three)? The league -along with the Champions League- is the serious title, by the way, the bread and butter. The Copa del Rey can be grabbed by more teams (a list of 6 or 7 teams). And this 5 - 0 trashing puts things in perspective. The team did not improve a lot after Pellegrini... Yes, he failed. You have to understand these people are on a different level: they must grab the 10th Champions League title. And this, he didn't deliver (three opportunities). He admitted his defeat when he said "I was the one who ended Barcelona supremacy". Boll*cks! There are cycles in football, and Barcelona cycle is over. A natural death.
Yes, his Inter defeated Barcelona (with Etoo playing as a wing-back, as previously mentioned, because that WAS the match). In big style LOL [:D] That match only proves Barcelona was inmensely superior. It also proves, no matter the money he's spent, Mourinho always plays as weak teams. And finally, it also proves in football victory is never guaranteed. And that's indeed a good thing.
Here the Liverpool which won the Champions League in 2005 is teaching us a lesson. They were an average -if not poor- team (and I am talking about players, or the lack of word-class players). They did not park the bus. They were more or less solid and tried to WIN (aka attack) their games. Outplayed in the first part of the final, they managed an astonishing comeback. Inter victory on the other hand had nothing special. Parking the bus is not -and will never be- heroic, except if you happen to be a poor, average team...
The fans all over the world know this. The 2005 final was err... Greatness! And that's something Mourinho will never smell. Remember, the Curriculum Vitae is his problem.
Challenge about the money? So Mourinho played with average, bad players? NEVER.
warspite1
Just because Inter Milan had won a few titles before Mourinho makes not the slightest bit of difference to the argument - indeed it strengthens Mourinho's case i.e. he took a strong Inter side and made it better - he made them Champions of Europe....Something Mancini was incapable of.
So what are you saying? Mancini delivered titles on a shoestring? Also if its so damn easy to win - because your predecessor won, then I repeat - what the hell happened with Benitez and every Inter manager since???
But of course its not easy - its not just about having money - you have to spend that money wisely, you have to get the right players. If it was easy then you would not have failures.
You also contradict your argument too many times - the Inter victory was not special - but you admitted Barcelona was immensely superior...er that makes the victory special.....
I am not saying Mourinho played with bad or average players. I AM saying you are exaggerating how much his success is due to money compared with other managers - most of whom are immeasurably less successful. If only Mourinho spends money then who bought: Ronaldo, Messi, Naymar, Kaka, Torres [8|], Bale, Zidane, Ibrahimovic etc etc etc.
