Look before this kicks off between gooners and Man U fans. Wenger is a fantastic manager, and I dont think anyone else could have literaly transformed the whole club (in every sense) like he has when he came in. However, Ferguson has delivered countless trophies and I would think that no-one else could have done the job he has done at Man U. They are both fantastic managers - of course I despise Feguson, but thats just rivalry. This site loves to stir it up just to get hits, but it caught me again.

He has to be an all time great, alex already had a stadium, the name, the money and they gave him time only just !! Arsene has achieved everything with his hands tied moneywise, and made good players great,changed the style of footballin a way everyone loves the way Arsenal play, and wants to watch them, and made the club lots of money it should be called The Arsene Stadium

Both are fantastic managers and they both produce teams that play attractive football. Both are bad losers but that's cos they're so used to winning that losing doesn't come naturally to them. In terms of trophies Fergie wins but he's been at United longer than Wenger has been at Arsenal. Another stirring question brought to you by Sportingo. Don't fall for it people.

Fergie,undoubtedly.He did what he said he would," knock liverpool off their perch".He brought some of the best youngsters through.He didnt spend money at the time.Beckham,scholes,giggs,neville.all free from the youth system.The treble was a great.And whats more he has another group of great youngsters playing.ronaldo,rooney,anderson,nani,tevez.Ready for the trophies?

Impossible to really argue rationally about this as the two most important questions would always go unanswered;could Ferguson have achieved the success Wenger has and elavated Arsenal football club into a situation where they sell out 60,000 every home game on a minute transfer budget ie Toure,Gallas,Sagna and Clichy cost Arsene about £1 million(we received £5 million for taking William off Chavski's books and giving them Ashley).Whereas Rio cost more than our whole team, £28 million. The second question is could Arsene have had what was required mentally to drive a massive club that had been underachieving to such glories as winning the treble? My thoughts sre that neither could have achieved the same success if the roles were reversed but if one looks at how hard it was to achieve that success I believe Arsene job is harder as if the best player comes on the market he doesn't have the funds to buy him ie Wayne Rooney £28 million.So he has to continue pulling rabbits out of the like Fabrigas £500,000

fergie hands down , he the greatest manager ever lived , as for the stadium , fergie had to watch his budget while united were extending their stadium , you only have to look at the stadium when s.a.f took over to now. when fergie has retired only then will people realise he was the greatest . p. s he hasnt finished winning trophies yet

alex ferg is a class of massel lipi of ac milan those are the only managers wo can read the game on the picth but wenger thinks buying young players he is great exp wenger bought fabrigous from bercelona and he was already great like u see messi en e thinks he is the one how tought him soccer

Looking at what both managers have done for their clubs, it is difficult to say who is better. In the 1999 season Man U did a treble i.e they won the Championship, the won the Premier League and again the won the FA while in 2004 season Arsenal went un beaten in the Premier League. One is Sir while the other is a Mr. Both have the money to buy players they need to strengthen their team but one prefers to spend less and goes for the cheapest while the other says he is going for Gold.

wenger took a team struggling normally finishing around 6th and made them into one of, if not the best team in england, he won the double in his first full season, he won the league undefeated, his transfers are amazing, its wenger all the way

i think both of them are great managers and u cant say there is one who is better than the other....both are Great..

I think if you are a supporter of a small team, a manager like Wenger would be a dream manager as he will make a small team to become a great team. With the money coming into the game, If ferguson was to manage a team like Derby with a limited budget, he would have been a nobody. With Arsene Wenger, if he was to be a coach for a small team, the small team will become a great team with his ability to turned gemstone into diamonds.Any manager can be successful with money, Chelsea have proven that and also Blackburn years ago.

Both managers have done blinding work at thier respective clubs,they are the longest serving mangers in the league. respect to them both.

Look at the record books. It is ludicrous to compare any other manager to the living legend that is Sir Alex Ferguson. All the arguments this article gives are baseless. Machester United have recorded record profits year after year after year. Olf Trafford has been transformed, expanded, etc numerous times. And Manchester United for year now, have been the embodiment of brilliant attacking football. We also need to consider that Wenger always has one plan going into a match. But when that doesent work, Arsenal dont work. Look what Bolton did to them in while Big Sam was there. After managing the biggest club in the world for more than 20 years, and with the unparalleled success he has achieved, Fergie has to be the greatest ever.

Think the reason even this question is being asked is because arsene is the media darling while grumpy old ferg is despised by them, thats why they always laud wengers sides as playing beautiful attacking stuff and comparing them all the time to brazil ajax etc. While fergie's sides who play consistently just as beautiful attacking stuff over a longer period gets ignored. Wenger is an all-time great already, but better than fergie, come on, seriously there are only a handful of super greats and fergie stands alongside the likes of paisley, stein, shankly, trappatoni,michels and busby, where has wenger nestles somewhere around clough,revie and nicholson.

If we're to compare the two, lets do it basing on the period spent at the clubs! Wenger has been at Arsenal for 11 years, and fergie for what, 22? So if we're gonna count trophies and achievements, count fergie's in his first 11 years, coz i might as well say wenger could win the trebble in his 13th year at the club!

Wenger ad Alex? Its debatable. For trophies. Alex has done better. We musnt forget that Alex is pushing 80yrs and has been at the club as long as the queen has been on the throne. For contribution to the game then Arsene is tops for using little to achieve so much. Aex has paid much more fo r titles than Arsene. Please would someone tell me how much Alex has spent on players in the last 5yrs? owen haegraves carrick rio ferdinand ronaldo etc Avan grant has shown that u dont have to be a special one to run a rich club successfully. Think about this?

As the game is ultimately judged on how many trophys you have won then Sir Alex p***es all over Wenger, and Sir Alex has only played 127 more games in his career. Currently Ferguson has won 37 trophys to Wengers 17 at the different clubs they have been at, they have both done it with money and without money, so in my view Sir Alex wins hands down, because even if Wenger carries on for another 10 years he wont win another 20 trophys in that time.

I think they're both brilliant managers and trophy-wise I'd say Ferguson has won more, but Arsene has so far built three different teams (the one that he built when he first came, the invincibles and the current team) and the current team was made with a very small amount of money. He is also able to discover amazing talents out of no where, which for me gives him the edge over Ferguson. I don't think would have been able if his budget had been as limited as Wenger's.

I meant to say that I dont think Ferguson would have been able to build such a good team if his budget was as limited as Wengers

good laugh that, claim he is better than Sir Alex then back that claim up with things that either Sir Alex did first and/or better (new stadium, record profits, playing style, not playing ugly football in order to win), apart from an 'unbeaten' season (funny, a season includes cup competitions last time I checked). 9 titles to 3, 1 CL to 0, 1 pair of eyes to none. Wenger is a great coach (truely) but not a great manager, his players have a petulant streak a mile wide, and he has always played second fiddle to a truely great manager in SAF.

Wenger = 3 League titles (never consecutive titles), 4 FA Cups, 2 Doubles, 0 European Titles Fergie= 9 League Titles (twice 2 titles in a row, once 3 titles in a row), 5 FA Cups, 2 Doubles, 1 Treble, 1 Champions League title, 1 Cup winners Cup, 1 Intercontinental Cup, 1 UEFA supercup, Current league champions. ENOUGH SAID!

Fergie is untouchable in terms of managerial success. Wenger is a great manager but it's unfortunate for him that his career exists at the same time and in the shadows of a legend.

Avan grant has shown that u dont have to be a special one to run a rich club successfully. Think about this? ------------ How has Avram Grant been successful? He has won f all. Think about this!

All the trophies he won in scotland with aberdeen, won without the resources of the two monoliths that are celtic and rangers, not surprising that with the exit of ferguson, came the resumption of the dominance of the old firm.

you must be on high to even consider who is better?or you are just insane?

Please do not forget Wenger's team has clearly exceeded ManU in red cards received.....quite an honor.....no doubt a reflection of the manager's attitude.

Are u lot forgetting that fergie brought through the likes of beckham,scholes,giggs,butt,neville,neville,brown all from the academy!and by this I mean Manchester uniteds academy!how much did this lot cost?its fine to say wenger has an eye for talent but he poaches all the youth from elsewhere.or am I wrong?fabregas?toure?clichy?please spare us this biased view that fergie has been spending money for a long time.Roy keane 3.5 million,solskjaer 1.5 million.were these signings not brilliant.Theres nothing wrong with spending money.United earned their money,by winning tropies-treble and several doubles.by playing attractive football and by good marketing.Why even mention stadiums when united had built theres long before wenger or anyone did.76000?

Hands down, why does everyone talk about Wenger in the transfer market vs Fergie (i.e. Rio, Rooney), he at the beginning inherited the best defence in the premiership, (Adams, Keown etc.) all he did is buy foriegners and transformed the team (very commendable). Fergie has always realised something Arsene refuses to, and that is to be the best team in the Land you need a core of British/Irish players, when Wenger's Plan A does not work, he goes long Ball nowadays, hardly best football in the land. Fergie has plan A and B, and if that does not work, the Britishness dogginess comes through (e.g. look recently vs Villa FA Cup). Plus Fergie's foriegners are tough nuts not ponces like Wenger players; If you went to war Would You rather Take Tevez, Anderson, Vidic and Ronaldo. Or V.Persie, Fabregas, Hleb. I know who i would take. any tough guys Arsenal have (adebayour, Gallas) we have th ebritish versions. So when the going gets tough in the league we are better equpped. It's Just that to buy the best Britis

Both of these managers are trully great, and it shows by the how they have been battling along over the years for the league title.But for me, its fergie all the way,not just cse am a manutd fan, but when fergie took over, manutd were much worst than arsenal when wenger took over. SAF has built many teams over his time at manutd, and has made manutd into a worldwide team, something that wenger hasn't done yet. fergie did in the 90s what wenger is doing now, building a team with youth,both have made great talents, but the difference is, fergie got then when they were 13 or 14, whilst wenger got them when they were 18 or more,so in player development wise, fergie has the upper hand, and the team he built was much much stronger than the team that wenger has now, although its too early to tell how well they will grow, u can see that they wont be as dominant as fergies

last post continued here: as dominant as fergies teams of the 90's. and on top of that, he has also helped expand the stadium from 55K to 75K during his time,and when he started, he had to work with a very tight budget and it stayed like that all the way till the near the end of the 90's.manutd have been recording high profits for many years, while arsenal have just started,his disciplinary record is far better than wengers team,and in the end, the number of cups he has won is much higher than wenger, even though he has been at united much longer than wenger has been at arsenal,but u can tell that wenger wont reach the number that fergie has.both are great, but to me fergie is much greater than wenger.

sorry bout the repition , but i thought the second post wasnt being posted. turned out it was, so sorry again

Old Trafford was built on wasteland Islington council wouldn't let Arsenal expand there stadium in the way Man U have. Arsenal had to go into debt building the Emerates. Man U brought Ferdinand, Carrick, Rooney, Veron. Anderson, Arsene brought a stadium he cannot play the monies that he has invested like Fergie now, but long term we are the third most profitable in the world above Man U so it's not over yet chap.

A lot of people seem to easily forget what Fergie did at Aberdeen with no money, small crowds and competing against the might of Rangers and Celtic. No disrespect but he won as many trophies there as Arsene Wenger has at Arsenal.

obviously ferguson has won a lot more. what makes this debate valid is the fact that arsenal have managed to compete with man utd for the whole of wenger's tenure (bar arguably the two seasons before this one) on a relative shoestring budget, in a medium sized stadium. man utd are the richest club in the world. wenger turned a totteham or newcastle sized club into an elite force and now they are one of the biggest clubs in the world in their own right thanks to wenger's genius and due to the emirates move

If you are asking for people's views why are u insisting that wenger is better than fergie?u shud siply give out what u think other than convising us to agree with yo fanatism.We are talking about ones achievement over the other and fergie has alredy the treble with the champs league trophy that wenger doesnt have.thats all dont argue about the future since we are not god to know what the future harbours and things may be bad than u expect.in simple language thats it.stop stop stop being idiot to that extent.

Fergie,undoubtedly.He did what he said he would," knock liverpool off their perch".He brought some of the best youngsters through.He didnt spend money at the time.Beckham,scholes,giggs,neville.all free from the youth system.The treble was a great.And whats more he has another group of great youngsters playing.ronaldo,rooney,anderson,nani,tevez.Ready for the trophies?

Fergie,undoubtedly.He did what he said he would," knock liverpool off their perch".He brought some of the best youngsters through.He didnt spend money at the time.Beckham,scholes,giggs,neville.all free from the youth system.The treble was a great.And whats more he has another group of great youngsters playing.ronaldo,rooney,anderson,nani,tevez.Ready for the trophies? [/quote] Don't talk daft,Fergie had always relied in buying success. When he had those younsters, he wa buying the best in Peter Scheimichel, Paul Ince, Kancheiskies,Cantona etc. Before the arrival of Chelsea's big purse, how much did Fergie paid for Van Nilseyroy,Veron,Ferdinand,Andy Cole, Dwight York,Rooney,Ronaldo, Jaap Stam,Saha? And he could keep the likes of Giggs because he can afford to pay what other clubs can't afford to pay to intice them as he he does to other clubs. Fergie's success is purely base on buying