The 'If You Still Need to Purge Yourself Of Ange' Thread

[BrainOfLevy]

But I guess you also know it is easy in football tactics to be an Ossie Ardiles and attack, attack, attack? It's also easy to be a George Graham and defend, defend, defend? It's so damn easy to focus on one of the 2 major traits that is required to win football matches. Surely, nobody can ever say that Ange excelled at both?

I actually loved Ange-Wall and the way we won the EL. I doubted for ages that Ange had it in him to setup a team to keep clean sheets. I was banging on about his disrespect for clean sheets since the day he joined our club. On the flips side, I massively applauded him for losing Kane and still getting more league goals from the many different players in the team. All Jose and Conte ever did was played to our best 2 players, Kane and Son. Everything else was at the sacrifice of those 2. Ange didn't do that. Ever player was equal and he has a system where goals could come from all sorts of areas. A little like 'Arry in that respect.

However, Ange couldn't setup a team to find the balance between the 2 key areas. He couldn't make us strong defensively whilst getting the goals to go in. For me, it was nothing to do with deepening the squad even further. He had a deep squad anyway. Injuries was a 24/25 season factor, but even in normalised injury periods over the 2 years he couldn't find the balance between defence and attack.

On the football areas that matter the most, Ange came up short.

If Frank ends up being the perfect combination of defence and attack, and that was what it took for us to out perform our financial position, I’d be delighted.

I wouldn’t say thought that Ange was just about attack attack attack. I think done well it swarms the opposition and keeps them far away from our goal too. It’s more nuanced than that, but it also requires likely more of the right players to play that system well. Because he’s not going to compromise or adjust in order to change the system for short term gain.

Equally though I think the whole roostertail of who he is makes the style possible. It’s everything - it’s the way he encourages the players to play. It’s the motivation. It’s the reinforcement through the media. It’s the belief in himself. It’s the coaching, the training. It’s everything together. Other managers couldn’t coach the way Ange coaches, because they don’t have the personality or the inclination.

And again, I get why people would rather have a less volatile experience. I was just happy to take some volatility for the potential upswings. Because I’m bored of being a top 6 team and want to win the league. Maybe Frank’s way will get us there too.

 

[thfcsteff]

No, but that's not really a quesrion you can give a black or white answer to

Errrr...I agree it isn't a black and white answer, but it is also inaccurate to say he didn't succeed.
He did.
He won a trophy.
That's probably the single most tangible example of success football allows us.

 

[Mosquito_Coasting]

If Frank ends up being the perfect combination of defence and attack, and that was what it took for us to out perform our financial position, I’d be delighted.

I wouldn’t say thought that Ange was just about attack attack attack. I think done well it swarms the opposition and keeps them far away from our goal too. It’s more nuanced than that, but it also requires likely more of the right players to play that system well. Because he’s not going to compromise or adjust in order to change the system for short term gain.

Equally though I think the whole roostertail of who he is makes the style possible. It’s everything - it’s the way he encourages the players to play. It’s the motivation. It’s the reinforcement through the media. It’s the belief in himself. It’s the coaching, the training. It’s everything together. Other managers couldn’t coach the way Ange coaches, because they don’t have the personality or the inclination.

And again, I get why people would rather have a less volatile experience. I was just happy to take some volatility for the potential upswings. Because I’m bored of being a top 6 team and want to win the league. Maybe Frank’s way will get us there too.

I think as a club one level below the elite teams in the division we need a manager who can use attacking and defending systems well. Yet to really experience one at Spurs though really. They're hard to find.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

I think as a club one level below the elite teams in the division we need a manager who can use attacking and defending systems well. Yet to really experience one at Spurs though really. They're hard to find.

Or we just try something that requires such a belief and such bravery that no other club would dare try it?

I think to out perform our financial position we need to do something different. Maybe that something is Frank getting it right every game with his adjustments. Or maybe it could have been something like Ange’s method. I would agree that playing a nice Brendan Rodgers style possession game at Spurs probably isn’t going to see us out perform, but Ange’s system was more than that. So crazy and so different that it might just have worked.

 

[Bishop]

Errrr...I agree it isn't a black and white answer, but it is also inaccurate to say he didn't succeed.
He did.
He won a trophy.
That's probably the single most tangible example of success football allows us.

He succeeded in the Europa League, he failed in everything else and miserably so in the league. Judging his overall time at Spurs comes down to how you weight the competitions and the performances and results of those competitions.

 

[Lemonade Money]

No, but that's not really a quesrion you can give a black or white answer to

Racist!

 

[Mrs Vert]

I know you’re trying to be fair and balanced with your last line but I just find it so utterly patronising - not to me but to the man we’re discussing. This is the exact sort of thing he’s had to deal with his entire career, people doubting him. The man who got us 5th in his first season and then a first European trophy in 41 years after dealing with a historic injury crisis gets a pat on the head and told that he might be perfectly good manager, just not in our league .

Obviously you need more than bravery. I think Ange’s was a high risk system that needed players capable of playing in a really brave way for it to work. It probably requires having the first choice defence available for more than 25% of a league season. It probably requires being able to rotate and maintain some energy rather than having to use the same 11 players every game every 3 days for 3 days months straight. I was willing to see what it would look like with a deeper, more experienced squad. And not having to play one of Ben Davies or Archie Gray at centre back for most of the season. But that’s just me. I get that you feel you can draw conclusions from all the time after the first ten games, but the players that actually played in those games were either not the first choice or not in the optimal condition to give their best for most of them.

But I don't think he would have got a deeper better squad with Levy in charge!! We have bought another 20yr cb.(yes meant to be 1st choice) We have all the other kids coming back. (Cant be bothered to list who on loan) we have extended Davies....AGAIN.
Levy doing lip service to "wanting to win league and champs" well I still don't see it under his watch" (stars may align one day like the Europa, but I shan't hold thy breath)

Ok fine we have til 1st sept. And I shall try and hold judgement. But if we decided to get people who don't watch cartoon network and have PL experience, it may not happen til last day in which case. Miss the pre season and 4 games (PSG and 3 league games).

Anyhow. Who knows. But going on history
Cant remember if it was under Conte but we bought really early and I was quite surprised

 

[billyiddo]

Errrr...I agree it isn't a black and white answer, but it is also inaccurate to say he didn't succeed.
He did.
He won a trophy.
That's probably the single most tangible example of success football allows us.

Not according to Ange it isn't - surely you have seen the quotes from him saying a solitary cup win won't define whether he has done a good job or not (or words to that effect) - if I could find the time i would go back to his thread around the time those comments were made to see what the general consensus was - i know that I was in agreement with him as it matches up with what I have consistently said wrt the wider lack of trophies debate.

Also within the context of what was being said when @afsoc4life responded to ask whether Ange had succeeded here - my post was talking about PL level and so no in terms of that he absoloutely has not succeeded

 

[billyiddo]

Also i find it strange to see people suggesting Ange could have got us punching above our weight when most of the defense of him centers around not having his full first team available or not having more experience/quality available in reserve - these are not arguments in favour of a manager who can punch above his weight. Even the EL win is an example of winning a competition we were the favourites for from the outset and more financially stacked than all but 1 other club in the whole competition.

If you want to see actual evidence of a manager punching above his weight look at Frank's performance at Brentford over the last 6 years and then look at their wages & transfer expenditure in relation to the rest of the league. Also look at who took the most points off the top 6 last season.

 

[Mrs Vert]

I think this is the excuse they used to make the decision, but I don’t actually buy it. It’s just doesn’t make any sense. Why would the season before have any bearing on the season just gone? I think they just didn’t believe that Ange was right for the structure as much as Frank is. And part of that was probably that they didn’t want this kind of all or nothing approach to things. They didn’t believe. And that’s ok, it’s their club.

But I don’t buy it as a logical decision making framework. His first season he finished 5th. He has an amazing start, while bedding his system and replacing the club’s greatest ever player. We reach the Chelsea game, where the resultant injuries and suspensions lead to some bad form over the next 4 games, although we still draw at City. We then actually have decent form (not world beating, not terrible) up until a run of games in April: Saudi Sportswashing Machine away, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and City were our losses. It’s just not logical to assume this relatively tough run of fixtures in one season with one squad should be equated with the next season’s context. We finished 5th, and 3 points off 4th.

The next season we start ok, with better underlying numbers than results but still perfectly well situated to ultimately pick up form. And then a ridiculous injury crisis hits. And then the only way to salvage something out of the season becomes focusing on the Europa League.

I really do understand why the argument of ‘gee, these results didn’t look good, we might as well get rid’ makes sense to some people. But I think it’s just devoid of context, and it just doesn’t make sense. It’s a reason to justify the sacking. But I think it’s very easy to debunk the argument around it - the form in the first season was never so bad as to constitute a trend that would unduly worry anybody. And the second season has so many obvious tough circumstances that have been discussed to death. They simply didn’t believe in his method. And that’s fine. I believed and I would have liked to see him given the chance, because I think it’s perfectly reasonable to expect results to be better with a deeper squad and a normalised injury run. That is what is way more likely to affect results and be a predictor of success than some supposed ‘trend’.

I think that's valid. I think the all or nothing is what the board didnt want. And while i was galvanized by is speech in the beginning and all excited for it. Maybe my faith didn't follow thru!
I was all up for sticking with him thru ups and downs but towards end of last year I just thought it was madness and found him too stubborn and i was mad watching the games cos i just couldn't understand why he would never change!

But like others of said...that's his ethos. And i wasn't on board anymore! But then he did change it up in some games and we weren't walked over.....which confused me even more!!

 

[Muttley]

If Frank ends up being the perfect combination of defence and attack, and that was what it took for us to out perform our financial position, I’d be delighted.

I wouldn’t say thought that Ange was just about attack attack attack. I think done well it swarms the opposition and keeps them far away from our goal too. It’s more nuanced than that, but it also requires likely more of the right players to play that system well. Because he’s not going to compromise or adjust in order to change the system for short term gain.

Equally though I think the whole roostertail of who he is makes the style possible. It’s everything - it’s the way he encourages the players to play. It’s the motivation. It’s the reinforcement through the media. It’s the belief in himself. It’s the coaching, the training. It’s everything together. Other managers couldn’t coach the way Ange coaches, because they don’t have the personality or the inclination.

And again, I get why people would rather have a less volatile experience. I was just happy to take some volatility for the potential upswings. Because I’m bored of being a top 6 team and want to win the league. Maybe Frank’s way will get us there too.

Ange never turned the dials and put them in the right places to get the balance, that's all. He either over-rotated one way or towards the end of his tenure the other. Some would say that he needed more time because of the mitigating circumstances. Not me.

I prefer to think about the other scenario where you see managers come along in difficult circumstances and very quickly find that balance. When I did my own research on Frank I looked at the goals for and against for a team that were promoted into the PL. We all know that some of the bottom teams go all defensive to try and stay in the division. Others e.g. Burnley last time around, tried to continue with the front foot progressive football and fall on their sword in the higher PL level. What I noticed with Frank is that he could get a healthy blend of both.

Even with mitigating circumstances, when you're conceding over 60 goals in the PL for 2 consecutive seasons there is something clearly wrong with the coaching. I'm not surprised at all that heads rolled.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Also i find it strange to see people suggesting Ange could have got us punching above our weight when most of the defense of him centers around not having his full first team available or not having more experience/quality available in reserve - these are not arguments in favour of a manager who can punch above his weight. Even the EL win is an example of winning a competition we were the favourites for from the outset and more financially stacked than all but 1 other club in the whole competition.

If you want to see actual evidence of a manager punching above his weight look at Frank's performance at Brentford over the last 6 years and then look at their wages & transfer expenditure in relation to the rest of the league. Also look at who took the most points off the top 6 last season.

My view is that if Ange had a deeper squad and normalised injuries, and actually had the opportunity to properly play the football he wanted to play, there was a chance we could punch above our weight. Because to do that by having a system, it requires getting those specific pieces in place in order to be able to execute it. It’s like Conte needing wingbacks. One way to out perform is to get specific pieces for the system and then hope those pieces don’t get injured too often.

Another way to out perform might be to adjust and be flexible every time. I hope it works with Frank! But I think a lot of people are just looking at Frank as the secret sauce we’ve needed all along, but everything has its drawbacks and benefits. The drawback of having an idealised system is that if you don’t have the players for it, you don’t get the outperformance. And the drawback of flexibility is that you may end up being devoid of any identity and be overly reliant on the coach getting his adjustments right every single time. We’re one of the teams that most oppositions will happily sit deep against, and sometimes needing a system that the players feel comfortable and fluid with is required to break that down.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Not according to Ange it isn't - surely you have seen the quotes from him saying a solitary cup win won't define whether he has done a good job or not (or words to that effect) - if I could find the time i would go back to his thread around the time those comments were made to see what the general consensus was - i know that I was in agreement with him as it matches up with what I have consistently said wrt the wider lack of trophies debate.

Also within the context of what was being said when @afsoc4life responded to ask whether Ange had succeeded here - my post was talking about PL level and so no in terms of that he absoloutely has not succeeded

Obviously he made those comments before a crazy injury crisis hit and a decision has to be made in how to salvage the season. And his point was that unless he has set the club up for long term success, one trophy here and there is not going to change that.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

But I don't think he would have got a deeper better squad with Levy in charge!! We have bought another 20yr cb.(yes meant to be 1st choice) We have all the other kids coming back. (Cant be bothered to list who on loan) we have extended Davies....AGAIN.
Levy doing lip service to "wanting to win league and champs" well I still don't see it under his watch" (stars may align one day like the Europa, but I shan't hold thy breath)

Ok fine we have til 1st sept. And I shall try and hold judgement. But if we decided to get people who don't watch cartoon network and have PL experience, it may not happen til last day in which case. Miss the pre season and 4 games (PSG and 3 league games).

Anyhow. Who knows. But going on history
Cant remember if it was under Conte but we bought really early and I was quite surprised

I don’t disagree with you there on any part! I truly hope the talk of wanting to win the PL and CL is backed up by the decision makers at the club.

 

[thfcsteff]

Not according to Ange it isn't - surely you have seen the quotes from him saying a solitary cup win won't define whether he has done a good job or not (or words to that effect) - if I could find the time i would go back to his thread around the time those comments were made to see what the general consensus was - i know that I was in agreement with him as it matches up with what I have consistently said wrt the wider lack of trophies debate.

Also within the context of what was being said when @afsoc4life responded to ask whether Ange had succeeded here - my post was talking about PL level and so no in terms of that he absoloutely has not succeeded

Incredible.
It is a simple point.
He succeeded.
He brought us our first European trophy in 41 years. Trophies = success in a tangible form.

No-one is arguing that he succeeded in the Premier League. You simply said he hadn't succeeded.
Quotes from Ange? Great. But again, trophies are the only truly tangible sign of success football offers. And he won us one.

 

[thfcsteff]

Also i find it strange to see people suggesting Ange could have got us punching above our weight when most of the defense of him centers around not having his full first team available or not having more experience/quality available in reserve - these are not arguments in favour of a manager who can punch above his weight. Even the EL win is an example of winning a competition we were the favourites for from the outset and more financially stacked than all but 1 other club in the whole competition.

If you want to see actual evidence of a manager punching above his weight look at Frank's performance at Brentford over the last 6 years and then look at their wages & transfer expenditure in relation to the rest of the league. Also look at who took the most points off the top 6 last season.

Are you saying injuries have no bearing if you're good enough? Surely it's a matter of numbers, both in terms of who is hurt and who is then available.

 

[thfcsteff]

Obviously he made those comments before a crazy injury crisis hit and a decision has to be made in how to salvage the season. And his point was that unless he has set the club up for long term success, one trophy here and there is not going to change that.

Context often only works one way in this debate BoL; you'll see amigo

 

[billyiddo]

Incredible.
It is a simple point.
He succeeded.
He brought us our first European trophy in 41 years. Trophies = success in a tangible form.

No-one is arguing that he succeeded in the Premier League. You simply said he hadn't succeeded.
Quotes from Ange? Great. But again, trophies are the only truly tangible sign of success football offers. And he won us one.

Lol I was clearly talking about PL football :

It's more of an attempt to show that despite maybe throwing some ott negative adjectives around at certain low points I do not think the man is an outright bad manager - the PL is, imv, the most competitive level of club football in the world, there's no shame in not making it at this level.


The J League appears to be the highest ranked league Ange has managed in pre PL, no.23 according to Google - there's a lot of ground between no. 23 and no. 1 that someone could find their ceiling at, tactics working lower down the ladder aren't necessarily going to work at the top of it (naive imv to think they would) - simply put i do not think you can succeed at this level when being so consistently open defensively, the risk balance is WAY off and when you're in a place where you are being routinely punished is it actually bravery to continue on?

The whole point of my discussion at that moment is quite clearly that I don't think he's good enough at PL level - so when someone responds to the above asking if I think he succeeded here, following basic conversational logic it's in reference to what is being discussed eg the PL (which is why i said no, but it's not as simple as that) I don't think Ramos or George Graham succeeded here either.

 

[Raziel]

https://www.reddit.com/r/coys/comments/1ljfytu/anges_pre_match_speech_before_the_europa_league

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Are you saying injuries have no bearing if you're good enough? Surely it's a matter of numbers, both in terms of who is hurt and who is then available.

This is what I find completely mad. Emirates Marketing Project, with their resources, basically get blown off course and have a trophyless season because Rodri gets injured.

Eddie Howe went from being under pressure, dealing with a lot of injuries and a PL + CL schedule at once, and then was back in good graces because he got players back, a deeper squad, and started getting results again.

David Moyes finished 17th with Everton one season, and the very next finished 4th.

I could go on. There's plenty of examples of managers stock being low, and then recovering. There's usually a lot of context around why they struggled in a particular season, and it's rarely that the manager just 'wasn't good enough.' Most of the time injuries play a massive part.

I think Moyes is actually an interesting analogy. I think it's fair to say for example that the job of replacing SAF was too big for him, and in that context he may not have been the right person. But so many assumptions about his tactical acumen or coaching preparation being bad when 17th would have been thrown out the window when he got 4th with Everton.

I don't think we have enough data to say that Ange would have ultimately failed, or was not good enough in the PL for Spurs. We have a 5th placed finish, and we have a season so ridiculous that I don't remember any club ever having to deal with a similar set of circumstances. And we still won a European trophy at the end of it! Most of the time, injuries and player quality dictate how successful a manager can be.