Quote:
|
Originally Posted by !@#$%!
they changed formations but used the same modality-- possession and short passes
but no, you're right, he brought in coman (fail) and costa (win) to open up the wings a bit. and had to depend on ribery and robben for winning. not sure if those hires were his or the board's though.
but under pep they were never able to win through physicality. maybe he had the tools available (xabi alonso, vidal) but never used them to overwhelm the opponent like heynckes did which is why atletico mowed them down like a bunch of porcelain dolls last year. whereas with heynckes they overpowered barcelona like they were gifted , but ultimately small, children.
that was an edge lost, i swear. the glory and danger of overspecialization. this is why apes took over beautiful beautifule felines at the top of the food chain-- less specialized, a lot more flexible.
|
I take your point about them maybe becoming a bit less physical but, in terms of them going out to Atletico, they were hardly mowed down. They went out on an away goal and could've just as easily gone through. The margins at that level are usually far too fine to draw any absolute conclusions. If Heynckes's Bayern could somehow play Pep's Bayern ten times in a row, I imagine the honours would be about even. Beyond that it just comes down to the style of football we prefer to watch. I know lots of people find Pep's style frustrating just as many others love it. It certainly isn't perfect, but then no team or manager ever have been. Again, playing around with history, it'd be fascinating to see how Heynckes would've dealt with a defensive machine like Simeone's Atletico.