Thomas Frank - Head Coach

[MartyFunkhouser]

Ange v Frank again

 

[Bishop]

I will boldly predict that if somehow Thomas’ Tottenham find themselves in the last 8 of the CL, yet 15th or 16th in the PL but with a 15 point cushion between us and the bottom three, absolutely no-one would have a single issue with trying the same thing twice, especially with a manager that puts huge stock in ‘per game per opponent’ specialist preparation.
I am not, BTW, saying that I disagree with you. It’s just lightning in a bottle malarky!

(Caveat - I am not mad enough to believe that this scenario could happen…or could it?)

If he lost 22 games he would deserve the sack. As average as I think this squad is 22 losses way beyond what I would consider to be a little below par.

 

[Bishop]

Mbeumo wasn't the Mbeumo we know until Frank, too lazy to dig up Toney's record but fair to say his best years were under Frank.

That is part of people's criticism right now, how is he making Richi, RKM, Tel, Odobert, Kudus, Johnson, Xavi better?
- Looks like he's outright given up on Tel & Johnson (100M worth of players)
- Odobert is now a bit part player
- Kudus is getting worse
- We don't play to Richi's strengths
- RKM looks the best of them but isn't getting in the goals
- Xavi was in/out/in?

It's pretty bad that Frank can't seem to get the best out of anyone in our front line, that we can't adjust (for somehow who's entire philosophy was sold as being adjustable/pragmatic) to make even one of them hit top form?

Honestly Frank's biggest achievement for the season seems to have been keeping Richi, VDV & Romero fit

fudging hell, we are bloody awful at this transfer business. We shouldn't have paid more than 50m for them total.

Richy has no strengths worth caring about and Odobert (who I do rate as having good potential) has never been anything but a bit part player here (annoyingly from both managers hes had here so far).

 

[billyiddo]

fudging hell, we are bloody awful at this transfer business. We shouldn't have paid more than 50m for them total.

Richy has no strengths worth caring about and Odobert (who I do rate as having good potential) has never been anything but a bit part player here (annoyingly from both managers hes had here so far).

I really don't know why we ponied up for Tel after his loan - we needed a starting LW to replace Son who would allow Odobert to develop as a rotational player - signing Tel on a perm, who looked no more ready for first team football than Odobert, made zero sense.

i wonder if it was a deal that had some kind of non reported obligation given Ange's bullishness when discussing whether he would be a Spurs player long term...

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

I really don't know why we ponied up for Tel after his loan - we needed a starting LW to replace Son who would allow Odobert to develop as a rotational player - signing Tel on a perm, who looked no more ready for first team football than Odobert, made zero sense.

i wonder if it was a deal that had some kind of non reported obligation given Ange's bullishness when discussing whether he would be a Spurs player long term...

Apparently Kudus was the quality replacement for Son, or so I was told

 

[thfcsteff]

I think you've labelled Frank way too early, as if he cannot be a different Spurs manager to the one we saw at Brentford.

Pragmatism is proaction. You build your proactive football philosophy into your squad and then you tweak game for game based on what opposition you face. Proactive is the ability to switch for the game and within the game for me and we've not seen enough of it at Spurs. It's tweaking to the opposition strengths and weaknesses but also keeping your philosophy intact. That can't happen quickly.

There is no better example than winners like Pep and Klopp who did this year after year. The big test for Frank is to figure out when he feels he has the quality to take the handbrake off a little and let the opposition worry more about us than we worry about them. That's the luxury that Pep and Klopp had eventually. With Pep and Klopp, they made major tactical changes in the big CL games or top of the table clashes. They let the relegation fodder worry about them and made barely any tweaks to their own go-to system of play. Then there were minor tweaks in between for the clubs, even like us, who they feared less. I bet Pep wished he'd made more tweaks against us to be fair. Better in-game management.

We're just not that far yet with Frank or his squad to make the assumption about him that he won't manage differently at Spurs in the way you say. We hired him on the potential to build something and that can't happen in 6 months. I've talked about this a lot but conceding over 60 goals for 3 seasons becomes a disease. It's a nasty habit that Frank is trying to break because he know we'll never be anything with that type of defensive record. 6 clean sheets (a third) in the PL is an improvement. At the half way point we've conceded 23 goals and that is a considerable improvement. I think we're 8th on both goals for and against in the league. Feels about right.

Personally, I'll take the pain to get the gain. I hope he keeps studying the opposition and being pragmatic game to game in this phase. I hope he obsesses about keeping the ball out of our own net. It will teach the players a lot to go through this process. Then we'll find out eventually whether your assumption is true or not. Even if it is, doesn't mean we can't play exhilarating football and win trophies even if we are tweaking game to game.

1. I hope you're right. It is the only question which needs answering IMO.

2. With Pep and Klopp you have chosen two managers with such enormous personalities and definitive styles. I think you are too quick to label me as someone who does not believe in degrees of pragmatism. Not the case. When I see a firm direction of traffic and intent, I think it is wholly necessary in order to win trophies (one of the reasons the Europa victory happened of course). Tweaks and adjustments are unspoken parts of the game; but are you going to try and tell me that when those sides stepped onto the pitch, their primary - and this is important, primary - intention was to negate the opposition? They came to impose their style, and were mindful of threats in the other direction.

3. As it currently stands (and this with his first choice defenders largely fit) we have still conceded 2 more goals than at this stage last season. Obviously that is a cruel statistic to pull out as it shows we are actually no more defensively solid than we were last season (and a point worse off) however perhaps we can mitigate that with all going on around him? I don't know. Most managers who say they will tighten up the defence and bang that drum do so quite quickly.

4. I think you, and several other people, find my personal viewpoint on how I want this club to play football hard to accept? I am not sure really. You say, quite rightly, that we can still play 'exhilerating football' and win trophies even if Frank turns out to simply be the manager he is. That is true. There is exhileration in sitting mid-to-deep for vast tracts of games and suddenly blowing people away with first-rate counter attacks. It just isn't the sort of 'exhileration' I personally enjoy. I like to see dominance on the ball, creativity using all areas of the pitch, and goals. I like to see us take to the game to people, not wait and snatch it from them. I accept that we will need two or three top class players to supplement what we have in order to get there (as @Bishop is always stating) however for that to mean anything, the manager would have to want that style and way.
WInning trophies? I want more, absolutely. As do we all. A reminder though...the one we just won? Some still saw fit to minimise it's achievement.

 

[thfcsteff]

Is a glass half full or empty. There’s a number of posters who were pro Ange that are superficially backing Frank whilst totally undermining him! Don’t you see that backing a manager and giving them time means exactly that?? Not constantly being negative about them, the way they work, and building negative narratives.

As for the detail of your post is nonsense - with respect. Every successful manager adapts! You’re maybe still stuck in Ange mode here too. Look at someone like Simone at Athleti - a very defined set way of playing. Or so you think. His team now players a very different way to when he stared. The core perhaps and ethics are the same but he’s adapted. Guardiola - constantly changing and developing never getting stuck with rigid moves so others can counter it. Ferguson - always developing new sides around specific players. You’re whole premise is flawed truth be told.

Sadly it does seem as though many here read what I'm writing and leap to the assumption that I don't believe in adapting/tweaking when necessary, etc. I don't even know if it is worth explaining TBH, however needless to say, having watched, played, and (amateur level) coached football for the better part of 50 years (I am 59 in March), having had the privilege to see some great managers and absolutely incredible players, I am keenly aware that every game needs subtle shifts/changes.

Look at the managers you have chosen (@Muttley also chose Pep and then Klopp). Simeone, Guardiola, Ferguson, Klopp. What would you say they have in common the most?
They are huge personalities who have an exceptionally strong and self-defined version of how they believe football is played. They have a very primary style. Of COURSE they will pay respect to the opposition they face, and of course they will make certain adjustments, but what they absolutely don't do is go into games being underdogs. They won't allow it. They won't allow their club to be seen that way.

Poch did that for us. I sadly don't know how many people ever really understood that. And ridicule him as everyone does around these parts, Ange was trying to do the same. A major problem with this club is that since Poch, we have allowed ourselves to become 'less' as opposed to believe we are 'more'.

I hope folks like you and @Muttley are right regarding Frank, I really do because then we ALL win. But truthfully, I am not sure he is of that ilk. A fine coach and a great guy, no argument. But when will we start speaking about what this club is, what it's traditions demand, rather than turning it all down?


Look at us now as opposed to post-Bilbao. Do you even recognise the place?

 

[thfcsteff]

Apparently Kudus was the quality replacement for Son, or so I was told

...in which case the scouting didn't even get the right side of the pitch!

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

...in which case the scouting didn't even get the right side of the pitch!

With Spurs, all is possible hahaha

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

We both know the reality here. Let’s not get off of reality trying to prove a point.

Ange had one way of playing - until he had to change it maybe under pressure from players - see VDVs interview. Trying to claim that his press had any nuance and tactical dexterity to it because Ange was busted, is a little far fetched.

This is no criticism of Ange, one of the biggest compliments we can give him is he did what it took to win. I am glad we stuck with him. Just about, we got it done. But his press resembled a school yard game of football, sometimes you’d see multiple players closing the same man, as you’d see in a playground because there wasn’t coordination. It was ‘sprint to close the ball down at all cost’. And that cost was a room full of injured players.

I’m genuinely not even sure what you mean by a press having nuance and tactical dexterity. What is it you would like to see? If you’re advocating for only pressing at certain times, totally fine. If you’re advocating for sophisticated pressing triggers based on opposition weakness, shape of the opposition passing lane, or funnelling them to one side or the other…also fine. I just don’t know exactly what you’re looking for and why it is important to you? Because we’ve seen sides have a high intensity press for most of the 90 do well. We’ve seen low block and counter sides win titles in this country. We’ve seen pressing + rapid transitions, we’ve seen press and controlled possession, we’ve seen pressing when level and low block when ahead, and we’ve seen pressing at certain periods of the game based on minute and low block on others.

Literally we’ve seen it all work. So my question to you is what do you want? If you’re saying that your opinion is that an intense 90 minute press simply cannot work, I think we have plenty of examples that negate it. My point is that it all works. If the circumstances are right. The right pieces are in place etc. Late Spurs Poch evolved his pressing to be much less constant than early Spurs Poch. Results were worse. I could argue that this means higher intensity pressing more constantly equals better results. I’m not going to do that because I think there was a lot of context to late Spurs Poch, and that’s my argument with all of it. You’re very definitive that one idea simply cannot and did not work and I don’t buy that.

(Btw - I couldn’t give you anything deeper on the nuances of Ange’s press because I wasn’t in the tactical meetings. I’m sure if I went back and watched every game last season I could give you a breakdown. Suffice to say, he changed in December to more of a mid block because he knew playing the same 11 players 3 times in 7 days wouldn’t work with his ideal system. But even at the start of last season, there would have been more nuance to it in terms of what the pressing triggers are, where exactly it starts, who are we tighter to, who do we leave (opposition specific) where are we funnelling the ball, what angles are we showing, etc etc etc. I can’t tell you exactly what it was without doing the study myself, but I just know this is what happens at the elite level. If it was school yard, it would be easily exploited by other elite teams and we’d lose every game by ten goals. Because it’s extremely high risk and requires excellent coordination especially so our last line makes the right decisions more often than not. I’d say that’s actually where a lot of the nuance comes in)

 

[Muttley]

1. I hope you're right. It is the only question which needs answering IMO.

2. With Pep and Klopp you have chosen two managers with such enormous personalities and definitive styles. I think you are too quick to label me as someone who does not believe in degrees of pragmatism. Not the case. When I see a firm direction of traffic and intent, I think it is wholly necessary in order to win trophies (one of the reasons the Europa victory happened of course). Tweaks and adjustments are unspoken parts of the game; but are you going to try and tell me that when those sides stepped onto the pitch, their primary - and this is important, primary - intention was to negate the opposition? They came to impose their style, and were mindful of threats in the other direction.

3. As it currently stands (and this with his first choice defenders largely fit) we have still conceded 2 more goals than at this stage last season. Obviously that is a cruel statistic to pull out as it shows we are actually no more defensively solid than we were last season (and a point worse off) however perhaps we can mitigate that with all going on around him? I don't know. Most managers who say they will tighten up the defence and bang that drum do so quite quickly.

4. I think you, and several other people, find my personal viewpoint on how I want this club to play football hard to accept? I am not sure really. You say, quite rightly, that we can still play 'exhilerating football' and win trophies even if Frank turns out to simply be the manager he is. That is true. There is exhileration in sitting mid-to-deep for vast tracts of games and suddenly blowing people away with first-rate counter attacks. It just isn't the sort of 'exhileration' I personally enjoy. I like to see dominance on the ball, creativity using all areas of the pitch, and goals. I like to see us take to the game to people, not wait and snatch it from them. I accept that we will need two or three top class players to supplement what we have in order to get there (as @Bishop is always stating) however for that to mean anything, the manager would have to want that style and way.
WInning trophies? I want more, absolutely. As do we all. A reminder though...the one we just won? Some still saw fit to minimise it's achievement.

With 2, I think it was a major reversal in tactics that won us the trophy. It wasn't a tweaking from the normal Ange philosophy we'd seen for 18 months. It was a switch to sitting deep and playing on the counter, as opposed to the high press. It worked a treat as well. The problem seem to be that we couldn't find any middle ground across all comps with our tactics. We'll never know whether Ange could have done in season 3. To some of us, it didn't look that likely to be fair.

With 3 I just looked at the PL. This year is 23 goals conceded and last year was 26 goals after 18 games but ended up being 65 at the end of the season. I assume you were looking across all comps. I also think you might be overlooking Udogie. We haven't exactly had our full compliment of first choices all season. That lack of leftie balance is important in my opinion. We certainly haven't had an injury crisis though and perhaps we can give Frank and his staff some credit for that.

With 4, I do think with the pods you seem to be a bit down on Frank. As you know I always felt you gave Ange a lot of slack. Does that perhaps make you a sterotypical Spurs dreamer? Perhaps you want to jump straight to Brazil football to use an old term in our lifetimes. I think you get the way I think. If you don't have a solid defensive basis, everything is mostly irrelevant in football. Which is why I loved the 16/17 season under Poch. 26 goals conceded and 86 scored is the Spurs I want to see again. It took Poch a while to build that. No way Frank can build that in 6 months to be fair.

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

I think you've labelled Frank way too early, as if he cannot be a different Spurs manager to the one we saw at Brentford.

Pragmatism is proaction. You build your proactive football philosophy into your squad and then you tweak game for game based on what opposition you face. Proactive is the ability to switch for the game and within the game for me and we've not seen enough of it at Spurs. It's tweaking to the opposition strengths and weaknesses but also keeping your philosophy intact. That can't happen quickly.

There is no better example than winners like Pep and Klopp who did this year after year. The big test for Frank is to figure out when he feels he has the quality to take the handbrake off a little and let the opposition worry more about us than we worry about them. That's the luxury that Pep and Klopp had eventually. With Pep and Klopp, they made major tactical changes in the big CL games or top of the table clashes. They let the relegation fodder worry about them and made barely any tweaks to their own go-to system of play. Then there were minor tweaks in between for the clubs, even like us, who they feared less. I bet Pep wished he'd made more tweaks against us to be fair. Better in-game management.

We're just not that far yet with Frank or his squad to make the assumption about him that he won't manage differently at Spurs in the way you say. We hired him on the potential to build something and that can't happen in 6 months. I've talked about this a lot but conceding over 60 goals for 3 seasons becomes a disease. It's a nasty habit that Frank is trying to break because he know we'll never be anything with that type of defensive record. 6 clean sheets (a third) in the PL is an improvement. At the half way point we've conceded 23 goals and that is a considerable improvement. I think we're 8th on both goals for and against in the league. Feels about right.

Personally, I'll take the pain to get the gain. I hope he keeps studying the opposition and being pragmatic game to game in this phase. I hope he obsesses about keeping the ball out of our own net. It will teach the players a lot to go through this process. Then we'll find out eventually whether your assumption is true or not. Even if it is, doesn't mean we can't play exhilarating football and win trophies even if we are tweaking game to game.

I’m not sure you can ever turn a reactive manager into a proactive one. And I think what we’re seeing with Frank is what we’re gonna get. And I’m not even saying that’s a bad thing - I’m interested in the project and I see the green shoots coming together.

A Pep or a Klopp has a really clear defined identity that they impose immediately, and over the course of their time they recruit better and more suited players. And once the identity is established they get more comfortable making adjustments because they are confident the foundations that they will always go back to have been established. Right up to this season Pep switching to a low block to hold on to a 1 goal lead at Arsenal. Doesn’t mean they are now a low block team, but situationally he feels comfortable doing it.

I actually think with Frank, he got to work on his method pretty immediately too. But where I think it will evolve is that he will judge us as having more quality than our opposition more often, so we will start seeing more games like vs Brentford at home where the team is clearly playing with more freedom. But I think firstly he wanted to establish his principles (defending and controlled possession, lowering the tempo in phases, increasing it in others) which is why he played Bentancur and Palinha together against Wolves at home. But I think this is probably consistent with the slow first ten games he’s had at Brentford and Brondby too, where he considers establishing principles to be really important.

But I think in the last month, he’s started to loosen. Playing Gray consistently is an example of that. Games like Brentford are an example of that. So I don’t think all of a sudden we’re going to turn up away at a top 10 side and impose a sophisticated possession game on a team. I think we’ll follow a similar pattern of containing and countering and exploiting our superior energy (thanks to rotation and lowering our own tempo). But I think the better the quality of the squad gets, and the more used to Frank’s foundational principles they become, we see more games like Brentford. Where he judges that actually the higher % play is simply to attack more and let our quality tell.

 

[Muttley]

Look at us now as opposed to post-Bilbao. Do you even recognise the place?

Not sure what you mean by this.

We're the same club, on the same project. We've just moved a couple of chairs around.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Arsenal, City, and Liverpool have shown if you back playing real football, and slowly reinforce, you get the style working. Yea city have spent, but arsenal and Liverpool weren't that crazy in spending.

Arsenal playing real football?.....yes they tried that BUT have moved to whatever gonads will get them over the line, and unfortunately dragging the PL 'product' down the drain with them, as copycats jump on the bandwagon.

 

[Muttley]

I’m not sure you can ever turn a reactive manager into a proactive one. And I think what we’re seeing with Frank is what we’re gonna get. And I’m not even saying that’s a bad thing - I’m interested in the project and I see the green shoots coming together.

A Pep or a Klopp has a really clear defined identity that they impose immediately, and over the course of their time they recruit better and more suited players. And once the identity is established they get more comfortable making adjustments because they are confident the foundations that they will always go back to have been established. Right up to this season Pep switching to a low block to hold on to a 1 goal lead at Arsenal. Doesn’t mean they are now a low block team, but situationally he feels comfortable doing it.

I actually think with Frank, he got to work on his method pretty immediately too. But where I think it will evolve is that he will judge us as having more quality than our opposition more often, so we will start seeing more games like vs Brentford at home where the team is clearly playing with more freedom. But I think firstly he wanted to establish his principles (defending and controlled possession, lowering the tempo in phases, increasing it in others) which is why he played Bentancur and Palinha together against Wolves at home. But I think this is probably consistent with the slow first ten games he’s had at Brentford and Brondby too, where he considers establishing principles to be really important.

But I think in the last month, he’s started to loosen. Playing Gray consistently is an example of that. Games like Brentford are an example of that. So I don’t think all of a sudden we’re going to turn up away at a top 10 side and impose a sophisticated possession game on a team. I think we’ll follow a similar pattern of containing and countering and exploiting our superior energy (thanks to rotation and lowering our own tempo). But I think the better the quality of the squad gets, and the more used to Frank’s foundational principles they become, we see more games like Brentford. Where he judges that actually the higher % play is simply to attack more and let our quality tell.

But you should also perhaps understand that Frank is the proactive one in the way a lot of us think. Identifying strengths and weaknesses of your opposition is proactive especially when you blend them into your own philosophy. Frank's the one that is building processes and strong foundations. Frank exudes proaction compared to prior managers. He reminds me of Pep and Klopp because they went down the same path as Frank is in their first season. Under Poch, we had Paulinho, Capoue, Stamboue, Dembele etc getting splinters whilst Mason and Bentalab got the shirts. Is that any different from Gray with Frank? Those first seasons were pretty tough for all of the above and I expect that this season as well.

I do think the second half of the season will be better than the first. Those methods will start to kick in. We'll get players back and even a new player or two. Frank and the club will be in a happier place.

 

[SpurMeUp]

I’m genuinely not even sure what you mean by a press having nuance and tactical dexterity. What is it you would like to see? If you’re advocating for only pressing at certain times, totally fine. If you’re advocating for sophisticated pressing triggers based on opposition weakness, shape of the opposition passing lane, or funnelling them to one side or the other…also fine.

Haha. I appreciate you saving me the hassle of writing it, you’ve summed it up. Things that we never saw under Ange.

I just don’t know exactly what you’re looking for and why it is important to you? Because we’ve seen sides have a high intensity press for most of the 90 do well.

Without Europe and without much longevity at the top level.

We’ve seen low block and counter sides win titles in this country. We’ve seen pressing + rapid transitions, we’ve seen press and controlled possession, we’ve seen pressing when level and low block when ahead, and we’ve seen pressing at certain periods of the game based on minute and low block on others.

Literally we’ve seen it all work. So my question to you is what do you want?

Let’s recap you were offended that I’d called our press under Ange school yard. So it’s more a question of what you’d like me to call his press that would more respectful.

I was pleased to see out the season with Ange, and now I’m pleased we’re moving onto a manager who isn’t asking the forwards to run themselves into the ground every game, and asking the defense to spring back with last ditch tackles. We’re more pragmatic now, but missing a lot of creativity from Son Kulu and Madders.

If you’re saying that your opinion is that an intense 90 minute press simply cannot work, I think we have plenty of examples that negate it.

For a final or key game absolutely. Bit of a straw man going up here.

My point is that it all works. If the circumstances are right. The right pieces are in place etc. Late Spurs Poch evolved his pressing to be much less constant than early Spurs Poch. Results were worse. I could argue that this means higher intensity pressing more constantly equals better results. I’m not going to do that because I think there was a lot of context to late Spurs Poch, and that’s my argument with all of it. You’re very definitive that one idea simply cannot and did not work and I don’t buy that.

(Btw - I couldn’t give you anything deeper on the nuances of Ange’s press because I wasn’t in the tactical meetings. I’m sure if I went back and watched every game last season I could give you a breakdown.

I very much doubt it! You’d see players haring after the ball from all and every angle. It was exciting, exhilarating and can work short term for smaller teams not in Europe. Frank understands that truth, and that is the difference. He can build something long term, given the chance.

Suffice to say, he changed in December to more of a mid block because he knew playing the same 11 players 3 times in 7 days wouldn’t work with his ideal system. But even at the start of last season, there would have been more nuance to it in terms of what the pressing triggers are, where exactly it starts, who are we tighter to, who do we leave (opposition specific) where are we funnelling the ball, what angles are we showing, etc etc etc. I can’t tell you exactly what it was without doing the study myself, but I just know this is what happens at the elite level. If it was school yard, it would be easily exploited by other elite teams and we’d lose every game by ten goals. Because it’s extremely high risk and requires excellent coordination especially so our last line makes the right decisions more often than not. I’d say that’s actually where a lot of the nuance comes in)

If you say so, sorry gave up by now

 

[thfcsteff]

Not sure what you mean by this.

We're the same club, on the same project. We've just moved a couple of chairs around.

So it feels the same to you?

 

[thfcsteff]

With 2, I think it was a major reversal in tactics that won us the trophy. It wasn't a tweaking from the normal Ange philosophy we'd seen for 18 months. It was a switch to sitting deep and playing on the counter, as opposed to the high press. It worked a treat as well. The problem seem to be that we couldn't find any middle ground across all comps with our tactics. We'll never know whether Ange could have done in season 3. To some of us, it didn't look that likely to be fair.

With 3 I just looked at the PL. This year is 23 goals conceded and last year was 26 goals after 18 games but ended up being 65 at the end of the season. I assume you were looking across all comps. I also think you might be overlooking Udogie. We haven't exactly had our full compliment of first choices all season. That lack of leftie balance is important in my opinion. We certainly haven't had an injury crisis though and perhaps we can give Frank and his staff some credit for that.

With 4, I do think with the pods you seem to be a bit down on Frank. As you know I always felt you gave Ange a lot of slack. Does that perhaps make you a sterotypical Spurs dreamer? Perhaps you want to jump straight to Brazil football to use an old term in our lifetimes. I think you get the way I think. If you don't have a solid defensive basis, everything is mostly irrelevant in football. Which is why I loved the 16/17 season under Poch. 26 goals conceded and 86 scored is the Spurs I want to see again. It took Poch a while to build that. No way Frank can build that in 6 months to be fair.

It's funny you mention Brazil.
I loved their 82 side.
I saw every Brazil game in 1994 WC Finals bar the SF, and knew early on they'd be very hard to beat because of Dunga and to an extent Mauro Silva. Dunga was the player they needed, and he allowed a 'less than typical' Brazil game to be far more pragmatic whilst still allowing the likes of Romario and Bebeto to shine. I'd wager Mourinho watched that tournament like a hawk. It was a vital step for them in terms of winning as opposed to relying solely on beauty.

You keep comparing Frank to Poch. Can you help me understand why? Two more different people in football it'd be hard to find, albeit both do share the quality of being decent guys it seems.

p.s. your continual inference that my opinion somehow suggests a lack of importance in understanding with regards to the art of defending is funny. Frank's supposed 'putting the defensive house in order' is not going too well despite having many fit defenders. Udogie and LB balance? I was on about that from early the season (even explaining how the lack of balance makes it more important not to channel everything through a 'one outlet Kudus'). Of course it has an effect. You need round pegs in round holes. BTW, Ben Davies -a player Thomas was happy to keep for LB cover and experience - is the subject of interest from Nice; his lack of playing time/use suggests it might happen...

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

Haha. I appreciate you saving me the hassle of writing it, you’ve summed it up. Things that we never saw under Ange.

Without Europe and without much longevity at the top level.

Let’s recap you were offended that I’d called our press under Ange school yard. So it’s more a question of what you’d like me to call his press that would more respectful.

I was pleased to see out the season with Ange, and now I’m pleased we’re moving onto a manager who isn’t asking the forwards to run themselves into the ground every game, and asking the defense to spring back with last ditch tackles. We’re more pragmatic now, but missing a lot of creativity from Son Kulu and Madders.

For a final or key game absolutely. Bit of a straw man going up here.

My point is that it all works. If the circumstances are right. The right pieces are in place etc. Late Spurs Poch evolved his pressing to be much less constant than early Spurs Poch. Results were worse. I could argue that this means higher intensity pressing more constantly equals better results. I’m not going to do that because I think there was a lot of context to late Spurs Poch, and that’s my argument with all of it. You’re very definitive that one idea simply cannot and did not work and I don’t buy that.

I very much doubt it! You’d see players haring after the ball from all and every angle. It was exciting, exhilarating and can work short term for smaller teams not in Europe. Frank understands that truth, and that is the difference. He can build something long term, given the chance.


If you say so, sorry gave up by now

I was willing to have a more in depth conversation about it but I see we can’t get past ‘running the players into the ground and forcing the defence to sprint back with last ditch tackles’ which I think is just too surface level.

I’m very open to the idea that Frank does things that Ange doesn’t do. But this idea that Frank understands a truth that Ange does not is way off for me. I am open to discussing the merits of all systems and ways of looking at the game. You seem very firm and entrenched in your opinion that one of these styles cannot work. So there’s not much to discuss.

I’m even open to the idea that Frank’s approach and pragmatism will likely have more longer term viability than Ange’s idealism. But I’d rather not have a discussion where one side is made out to be a school level amateur quality coach. It’s rubbish debate!

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

It's funny you mention Brazil.
I loved their 82 side.
I saw every Brazil game in 1994 WC Finals bar the SF, and knew early on they'd be very hard to beat because of Dunga and to an extent Mauro Silva. Dunga was the player they needed, and he allowed a 'less than typical' Brazil game to be far more pragmatic whilst still allowing the likes of Romario and Bebeto to shine. I'd wager Mourinho watched that tournament like a hawk. It was a vital step for them in terms of winning as opposed to relying solely on beauty.

You keep comparing Frank to Poch. Can you help me understand why? Two more different people in football it'd be hard to find, albeit both do share the quality of being decent guys it seems.

p.s. your continual inference that my opinion somehow suggests a lack of importance in understanding with regards to the art of defending is funny. Frank's supposed 'putting the defensive house in order' is not going too well despite having many fit defenders. Udogie and LB balance? I was on about that from early the season (even explaining how the lack of balance makes it more important not to channel everything through a 'one outlet Kudus'). Of course it has an effect. You need round pegs in round holes. BTW, Ben Davies -a player Thomas was happy to keep for LB cover and experience - is the subject of interest from Nice; his lack of playing time/use suggests it might happen...

Poch and Frank’s similarities are most closely around long term culture building at clubs. They go about it in different ways and have different football and leadership styles, but clearly they instill principles that endure beyond a season or two. In this reading, you could throw Moyes into the mix.