YOUR attitude to the expected new Manchester United manager may depend on whether you refer to him as ‘Jose’ or ‘Mourinho’ (or worse) - and that’s just among supporters of the Red Devils.
Those who chose the ‘Jose’ camp take the view the Portuguese is ‘a character’, those who refer to him as ‘Mourinho’ consider his character is sorely lacking, certainly lacking in good qualities. Me? Well, our policy is to refer to people by their surname after the initial use of their first name. Grins.
There’s no disputing he is a winner - but at what cost, both financial and in terms of the club’s reputation? To be fair to the small sample of Manchester United fans who I’ve ‘canvassed’, there appears to be a large degree of ambivalence towards him, an almost reluctant acceptance their club simply ‘has to’ appoint the controversial former Chelsea boss in order to achieve serious success again. There’s probably a lot of judicious editing of Twitter feeds going on among the Old Trafford faithful, especially after matches between their club and Chelsea.
You’d imagine there would be almost universal acclaim for the imminent appointment of undoubtedly one of the best managers over the past decade or so. However, Mourinho is a ‘Marmite’ manager, not because he’d eat himself but because, generally, you either love him or hate him.
There’s a sense there is that Jose/Mourinho dichotomy within the man himself, a Smeagol/Gollum split. He can be charming, entertaining, amusing - but he can also be vindictive, malicious and hurtful.
Much is being made of Mourinho renewing the ‘El Clasico’ rivalry with new Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola from their days and nights with Real Madrid and Barcelona.
There’ll undoubtedly also be a frisson when he goes back to Stamford Bridge in the opposition dugout and when Chelsea come to Old Trafford, but his high standing among most of the Blues support should mean he isn’t subject to much, if any, verbal abuse from them.
However, there may be much more friction in United’s true greatest rivalry, with Liverpool. There’s long been speculation Mourinho had an affection for Liverpool before he came to England and that his subsequent dislike of them was that of a lover spurned.
Certainly, before he left Porto in 2004, he said in an interview: “Liverpool are a team that interests everyone and Chelsea does not interest me so much because it is a new project with lots of money invested in it.
“I think it is a project which, if the club fail to win everything, then Abramovich could retire and take the money out of the club. It’s an uncertain project. It is interesting for a coach to have the money to hire quality players, but you never know if a project like this will bring success.”
The, ahem, fact Liverpool instead plumped for Rafa Benitez may explain some of the vitriol Mourinho always exuded towards the Anfield club. At least his well-known antipathy towards the Merseyside Reds will no doubt help to endear him to Red Devils.
What those Manchester United supporters really want is silverware, of course - not just the FA Cup but the Premier and Champions League trophies back at Old Trafford. The hope is he will bring success very soon, the fear is it will only be for the short term. Mourinho showed ‘the money to hire quality players’ can bring success, at least when allied to the excellent managerial skills he has.
On his return to Chelsea, he talked of building a dynasty and, of course, did deliver them another title just last year, but his second spell there ended in a spectacular implosion. That added weight to the ‘third season syndrome’ theory that has been propounded about the Portuguese boss.
It was actually into his fourth season with Chelsea when he left the Bridge for the first time, while he only spent two campaigns at Inter, before leaving of his own volition, as he had done when departing Porto. However, the perceived pattern of ‘progress, success, fall-out’ did hold true at Real Madrid and after his return to Chelsea.
A partial explanation is his reliance on older, more experienced players means they can clock up titles but then fall away due to too many miles on the clock. The close-knit group he creates brings a wonderful team ethic, but underused squad members can begin to feel like outsiders; the demands he places on players make strong bonds, but those can begin to feel like shackles over time.
Louis van Gaal, for all his faults, did blood a lot of young players at Old Trafford, even if he may have been forced into that approach by a host of injuries to senior men.
Manchester United fans worry that Mourinho will not follow suit, especially with a large transfer fund to spend this summer. Yet, otherwise, he seems a perfect fit for the club.
A ruthlessly successful boss who intimidates referees and the media, launches personal attacks on managerial rivals, cultivates a siege mentality and is the sorest of sore losers... Apart from youth development, is Jose Mourinho all that different from Alex Ferguson? Manchester United fans will hope not - but fear so.
Even those with concerns about his tactics will expect an improvement on LvG’s poor ‘style’ of football. For all the criticism he receives, Mourinho sides usually score plenty and don’t concede much. He may not be known for the free-flowing wingplay of ‘Fergie’s Fledglings’ throughout the ’90s, but the Scotsman became much more pragmatic in his later years too.
Just over seven years ago, the following quotes were attributed to Mourinho when he was in his first season with Inter: “If you want me to rule out ever being Manchester United manager, I can’t. Special clubs need special managers so, in theory, it could work, but nobody knows what the future is in football.”
Mourinho subsequently denied saying that, but there’s little doubt he wanted to succeed Ferguson, as evidenced by his fawning comments after his Real Madrid team won at Old Trafford in the Champions League in 2013.
Mourinho seems set to scratch that itch now - but whether that brings pain or relief to Manchester United fans remains to be seen.
