Manchester United vs. Chelsea: Villas-Boas & Ferguson or the Old vs. the New

On September 23rd (November 25th for our friends across the pond), Sony Pictures is releasing their Sport comedy/drama Moneyball in theaters.

The film chronicles the true life story of Billy Beane, the Major League Baseball GM of the Oakland A’s, who successfully turned around the failing and financially strapped club using an innovative system of running statistics through computers to get an in-depth analysis that was invisible to the naked eye. By doing this, he was able to construct a team of castaways and aging veterans on the cheap, who all supplied a very specific attribute to the team as a whole.

The film itself has gotten decent reviews. With the appeal of baseball, charisma of Brad Pitt and hysterical antics of Jonah Hill, it was kind of hard for the studio to miss. But what critics have really praised is the conflict that creates the story, the battle between the new and the old. Beane inadvertently discredited over a 100 years of baseballing praxis, in which talent scouting was a skill acquired over decades of experience and viewing the game.

Most of the world will have to wait at least another two weeks to see this cliché unfold. You know the bright-eyed young man believes in change, the establishment puts him down; he begins to doubt himself and finally overcomes the odds to prevail.

We have all seen this play out many times in our lives. But we, as football fans (soccer if you have not yet realized I am transitioning away from American sports), do not have to wait for this fictitious and probably romanticized portrayal of sport and culture. Instead, we get to see the climax of this story, the part that declares a winner and the system that will endure for years to come, in less than 24 hours.

This Sundays matchup between Chelsea and Manchester United has been built up as the first big game for the two clubs in this very young Premier League season, and rightfully so. Both clubs were among the favorites to win the title, and the early contest could have implications in that decision. Predictions have been flying around the web, along with analysis of the team’s strengths and weaknesses, with the over-zealous declaring their loyalty for their club with outlandish comments.

But, what most fans, pundits and students of the game are missing about this match is the implications it has for the sport and the culture of the game as a whole—the struggle between the old and the new.

An article was written on this website yesterday laying out the rivalry between these two clubs. It was a well-written piece that went relatively deep into how these two clubs became the Premier League powers of the last decade.

However, one point that was made became particularly contentious amongst the readers. The belief that this is a rivalry at all is somewhat difficult to defend as the history between these two clubs dates back less than 15 years. Only since 2003, have Chelsea really had any kind of say in the Premier League race, or even United’s place in the table.

When Abramovic bought the team in 2003 and inundated it with tens of millions of dollars, they became relevant, and only then could a rivalry be born. The influx of cash and the belief that a championship could be bought frightened traditionalists and excited progressive minds.

It was a break from the way things had been done and led teams throughout the world to have to make a decision; do we continue to develop our youth and hope for a title, or do we gamble with our money and try to buy one?

Since 2003, Chelsea have won three Premier League titles and United has four. Chelsea have three FA Cups and United has one. Chelsea has been to one Champions League final and lost; United has been to three and won one. Perhaps United has the slight edge over the Blues, but it is impossible to say that one method is clearly superior to the other.

Just take a look at the teams who have tried to replicate them. Arsenal has been a firm believer in the development of youth and limited spending. They are heading into their seventh season without silverware. Manchester City has spent huge sums to attract some of the world’s biggest names. They have improved, but still have not shown that they can play on the biggest stages.

The game has changed immensely since 2003. Big spending has become the norm as players prices have been inflated to astronomical amounts. Sunday’s matchup is no longer a struggle between finances. The winner does not prove that their belief in spending is more right than the others. The game has evolved past that point.

But there is still a struggle between the old and new, a struggle that pits conventional wisdom gained through decades of experience against a young students meticulous dissection of every player, style and tendency—a struggle between Sir Alex Ferguson and Andre Villas-Boas.

Every fan of the game must approach Alex Ferguson with a certain amount of awe and an infinite respect. No manager has had as much success as the Scot or won as many trophies (he literally has won more silverware than years Villas-Boas has been alive!) and has done it through decades of developing his own game.

But what makes Fergie such an incredible man is his ability to spot talent young and negotiate their move to Old Trafford before their abilities are realized. From Peter Schmeichel, Denis Irwin and Eric Cantona to Christiano Ronaldo, Wayne Rooney, and Javier Hernandez, all these names reached the height of their greatness under Ferguson.

Of course, statistics, facts and date played a role in bringing them to his attention, but it was not the major contributor to their transfers. What makes Ferguson even more incredible is not through his ability to bring players to the club just as they are about to peak, but more the fact that rarely does he ever have a player who fails under him.

There are no busts like Robinho to City or flops like Schevchenko to Chelsea. Nowhere really on his resume you could point to and say too much money spent poorly. This is because Ferguson can see something that can’t be told in numbers. Something that does not show up on a stat sheet and will never be in the history books. He can see true class in a player.

Scouting for him is a holistic exercise. It is about understanding who this individual is as a player and a person. It cannot be inflated or taught. And just like how one learns to recognize it, class is developed over years of experience. It would not surprise me in the slightest if Fergie did not need only a few minutes of watching a player to decide what kind of talent he is.That only a few touches of the ball is more telling than anything written down by the statistician. It is proven way that has worked for decades, Fergie has just mastered the concept unlike any one before him.

Villas-Boas is not Alex Ferguson. Yes, of course, he watches tape and players, but it is in a different context. Much has been made about this young manager’s bravado and style. From the early days when he dropped off a note at the door step of Bobby Robson expressing his displeasure in how he was handling his club FC Porto, he has rarely done things in the traditional manner, because he did not ascend the managerial ladder in a traditional way.

Villas-Boas was never a great player. Any dreams he had of becoming a professional were illusionary before he had reached puberty. But this did not deter him from wanting to make his mark on the sport. Countless hours in dark rooms examining tapes, reading books, and soaking in all the philosophy of the great coaches he surrounded himself with made him an expert on the game. His rise to prominence was one that was not got through experience, but rather instilled through practically academic means.

By studying the philosophy and history of the sport, he was able to conceive a new concept of the game, one where the lines between defense, midfield and forwards became blurred and a high-octane attack exposed vulnerabilities in the opponent.

Players were purchased on a particular attribute they can bring to the team. While at Porto he brought in very specific players, like Joao Moutinho to be a lynchpin in the midfield and let go of players like Bruno Alves, who no longer suited the philosophy of the team.

At Chelsea, he quickly dispelled rumors that Neymar and Luka Modric were on their way to the Bridge. Instead, he opted for much more specific signings, those that would play a role on the team that could only be understood through his meticulous design.

Sunday’s match up is a trailer for Moneyball. It is a story we have all seen a hundred times, played out in real life, or at least as close to real life a game can get. Andre Villas-Boas will be playing the role of Billy Beane and Ferguson the old guard of the A’s.

But unlike the movie, we don’t know how this one is going to end. Should Villas-Boas win, will Ferguson completely abandon his faith and spend hours analyzing every frame of footage? Hardly. Should Ferguson get the victory, will Villas-Boas’ "new way" be shot down as a failed experiment? Doubt it.

Whatever the outcome shall be, we can be certain that it will not be the last time that the conflict between the old and new will be at the center of the sports world.