Ange departs

[Bishop]

I’m sure this has been done to death but honestly I’m surprised at how much the extent of our injuries, combined with the combination of the relentless schedule at the time that they happened, has seemingly been forgotten. His coaches have talked about how they tried to adapt in the league, but maintain the principles they had. All your reference to ‘poor performances’ is basically us playing a reserve team that is running on fumes, and having to get up again 3 days later to go again.

It's not been forgotten but it is the nature of the beast that if you are managing a moderately successful Spurs you will have a every 3 day schedule. If you can't use the extent of your squad to get the results or performances then maybe this job isn't suited to you.

You can't just decide that one competition the actual main one is one you're just going not bother in anymore. That's not how you train excellence that training acceptance of lower standards.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

...don't you ever wonder how much more it could've been if (figuratively) the smallest yet most important of steps had been taken at key moments?

This is exactly the point.

I think the reason people are now seemingly more and more waking up to the 'Doom Loop' with regard to manager turnover is this sense that we have established ourselves in the top 6. Our spending and wage structure is designed that we can always propel ourselves back there if we have an anomalous terrible season. So it's about how do we push on from here.

I am not happy to remain in 5th/6th more often than not anymore. And, if we have these owners, the only way I see something meaningfully changing is actually creating something different. Be that a system, a spirit, a culture, an overall way of working that accrues outsized benefits over time. The fact that Levy sacked Poch suggests to me that he didn't actually understand why Poch was ever as successful as he was in the first place. It was those things. I think Levy just saw the results, liked them, and then stopped liking them when they went away for a bit. And the context of not signing anyone for 18 months, or of players ageing and not able to play the same high tempo way, or just needing to move on to try something different in their lives and careers, this was completely removed or not considered.

There isn't enough of a belief in 'something more' that I can see will help us propel further with these budgetary restrictions. And so my worry is unless a manager is an absolute miracle worker or we get extremely lucky with 4-5 other teams faltering in the same season, we aren't going to push on from here. I think it requires changing how we approach the transfer market (acting quickly and decisively for our top targets, and paying the wages to get them) or it requires an approach of being smarter overall, where we allow those benefits to accrue over the long term.

If Frank can match his budgetary over performance that he achieved with Brentford with us, then it really will have been the perfect appointment, and he will have been the guy ENIC will have been waiting for all along. My suspicion though having now been able to evaluate Levy's decisions over 20+ years is that he is most concerned with league results, and does whatever it takes to get us back into the top 6. I'm bored of this now. There's not really an excuse given we have the infrastructure of a top club, to not start acting like one in football aspects. And the only reason we aren't doing that is because ENIC haven't found a buyer to take the club off their hands, and make it all worth their while.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

It's not been forgotten but it is the nature of the beast that if you are managing a moderately successful Spurs you will have a every 3 day schedule. If you can't use the extent of your squad to get the results or performances then maybe this job isn't suited to you.

You can't just decide that one competition the actual main one is one you're just going not bother in anymore. That's not how you train excellence that training acceptance of lower standards.

I mean you can decide that, because our manager did, and won us a European trophy for the first time in 41 years. All the while the players remained fully behind him despite a terrible season in the league.

If you want to seriously challenge in 4 competitions, you need a squad to compete to do it. We had 12 players out at one point, including nearly all our first choice defence, our top goal scorer, our record signing, our next record signing (both strikers), our vice captain creator...I could go on.

I fully believe that the way Ange managed it meant he would have maintained the players backing and belief in the principles of play and we would have been top 6 minimum in his third season.

 

[billyiddo]

Why do we keep referring to 5th/6th? No one wants to settle for that. We have shown previously that when we get it right we are several notches above that and not far away from being at the very top - the aim is to get back to that level and push on

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Why do we keep referring to 5th/6th? No one wants to settle for that. We have shown previously that when we get it right we are several notches above that and not far away from being at the very top - the aim is to get back to that level and push on

Since 09/10:

09/10: 4th
10/11: 5th
11/12: 4th
12/13: 5th
13/14: 6th
14/15: 5th
15/16: 3rd
16/17: 2nd
17/18: 3rd
18/19: 4th
19/20: 6th
20/21: 7th
21/22: 4th
22/23: 8th
23/24: 5th

Average: 4.73, rounds up to 5th.

I've been kind here and left out the 17th place finish, which would have strengthened my point here further. But let's say we finished 10th this year because we sacked off the Europa League, it still rounds to 5th. I also could have started from the 04/05 season when I think it could be argued we started really getting our act together and implementing the ENIC strategy of signing the best young players we could.

'When we get it right' is having a manager like Poch, who we sacked after he got 4th, made a CL final, and wasn't able to sign anyone for 18 months. Or when we had Conte, who quickly sniffed that we weren't that serious at all about pushing on as a club and decided to blow up his position.

This is key. When we are on the cusp, we do not actually, meaningfully push on. We hold back. We don't give these clearly talented coaches what they need to truly build something special. To be clear I understand all the reasons why it doesn't fit the sustainability ENIC plan, I'm just saying I don't care about their plan anymore. I want different owners who will help us push on.

As such our level is 5th. It's 3rd or 4th in a good year, and it's 7-8th in a bad year. This is our level under ENIC. I do not seriously believe that they have just been waiting for the perfect money ball manager to allow them to start winning league titles. I think Frank will fit their structure, but I think our range under him is going to continue to be what it has been under ENIC.

 

[Lilbaz]

Just to clarify (in my case anyway) when I talked about the 'romance' it was largely in reference to my wish to see what could've happened with this group after that triumph in that way. Trading boredom, etc? That wasn't in my thinking, but I will say I found it bordering on insane that he leveraged everything on one basket with such a fragile egg. If he'd been interested in saving his job, he'd have sacked off the cups and focussed on a Europa League place run in the league. I thought it was exhilerating in one sense and madness in another...with (of course) that net result. Anyway, soon we can close the chapter

You think he'd have got anywhere near the el place if he focused on the league?
You did watch us play?

 

[Mr Gogolak]

Just to clarify (in my case anyway) when I talked about the 'romance' it was largely in reference to my wish to see what could've happened with this group after that triumph in that way. Trading boredom, etc? That wasn't in my thinking, but I will say I found it bordering on insane that he leveraged everything on one basket with such a fragile egg. If he'd been interested in saving his job, he'd have sacked off the cups and focussed on a Europa League place run in the league. I thought it was exhilerating in one sense and madness in another...with (of course) that net result. Anyway, soon we can close the chapter

It's not always clear when you write in a language that isn't your own, but there's no right or wrong answer here: I don't have anything against people who enjoyed Postecoglou's style and there was definitely a case to argue he deserved another season - just like there was one to argue he should be sacked. That's my point here (even though it was poorly articulated): everyone's looking for something different and we have our values and priorities. The fun part is confronting them.

There's nothing I like more than hearing the next guy say 'it's noise' in the middle of a great gig. It's just a shame that I'm usually on stage when that happens...

 

[billyiddo]

Since 09/10:

09/10: 4th
10/11: 5th
11/12: 4th
12/13: 5th
13/14: 6th
14/15: 5th
15/16: 3rd
16/17: 2nd
17/18: 3rd
18/19: 4th
19/20: 6th
20/21: 7th
21/22: 4th
22/23: 8th
23/24: 5th

Average: 4.73, rounds up to 5th.

I've been kind here and left out the 17th place finish, which would have strengthened my point here further. But let's say we finished 10th this year because we sacked off the Europa League, it still rounds to 5th. I also could have started from the 04/05 season when I think it could be argued we started really getting our act together and implementing the ENIC strategy of signing the best young players we could.

'When we get it right' is having a manager like Poch, who we sacked after he got 4th, made a CL final, and wasn't able to sign anyone for 18 months. Or when we had Conte, who quickly sniffed that we weren't that serious at all about pushing on as a club and decided to blow up his position.

This is key. When we are on the cusp, we do not actually, meaningfully push on. We hold back. We don't give these clearly talented coaches what they need to truly build something special. To be clear I understand all the reasons why it doesn't fit the sustainability ENIC plan, I'm just saying I don't care about their plan anymore. I want different owners who will help us push on.

As such our level is 5th. It's 3rd or 4th in a good year, and it's 7-8th in a bad year. This is our level under ENIC. I do not seriously believe that they have just been waiting for the perfect money ball manager to allow them to start winning league titles. I think Frank will fit their structure, but I think our range under him is going to continue to be what it has been under ENIC.

What our level is and what we are aspiring to/capable of are different things - maybe I've misread but there seems to be some framing of the situation that you're either a footballing romantic wanting cup wins/success or you're a steady Eddie who would prefer to be sitting in 5th - my response to that is no one wants to just cruise along at our base level of 4th/5th/6th - that's just the starting point that should be marked against. There's a multitude of reasons why things haven't kicked on at various stages but asides from Redknapp & Poch I haven’t felt that the managers we have let go since have been capable of providing more than what they were - and when you are at that point you twist rather than stick imv

 

[Bishop]

I mean you can decide that, because our manager did, and won us a European trophy for the first time in 41 years. All the while the players remained fully behind him despite a terrible season in the league.

If you want to seriously challenge in 4 competitions, you need a squad to compete to do it. We had 12 players out at one point, including nearly all our first choice defence, our top goal scorer, our record signing, our next record signing (both strikers), our vice captain creator...I could go on.

I fully believe that the way Ange managed it meant he would have maintained the players backing and belief in the principles of play and we would have been top 6 minimum in his third season.

You can decide that but it's a bad decision on your part as the manager to bin off the league and finish in the lowest possible position without getting relegated. It will likely end in the same result as Ange ie. getting the sack.

The league campaign is the ultimate decider of quality and progress. Cups are a bonus. If you win a cup whilst having a great season that's amazing. If you do so while having a ok season it might even turn that into a great year. Do it while having a poor season it's just a bit meh and do it whilst being godawful and sadly that's not going to change the narrative that frankly you failed in the meat and potatoes of any football team. The league campaign.

Cups rely on the draw and game to game form. It's not a sustainable way to evaluate a team's relevant quality, only the league does that and this past season was a disaster in that respect and no amount of injuries obscures this fact, out form was very concerning before any injury concerns besides injuries happen they are part and parcel of the game Ange said this himself before he started using it as an excuse. If you haven't built a squad to cope with injuries or to adjust your system to cope thats a failing on your part as a manager or coach. But again I want to reiterate we were poor way before any I jury concerns so I'm not really buying that excuse.

 

[SteveAWOL]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1932123499562217812

What dire straights the Italian FA are in to get turned down by the manager of the worst team to win Premier League and then have to consider the manager of the worst team to win Europa League Guess they must’ve watched us park the bus in the final, as can’t imagine AngeBall will go down well with a nation raised on catenaccio!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1932360132656025666

 

[Lemonade Money]

What dire straights the Italian FA are in to get turned down by the manager of the worst team to win Premier League and then have to consider the manager of the worst team to win Europa League Guess they must’ve watched us park the bus in the final, as can’t imagine AngeBall will go down well with a nation raised on catenaccio!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1932360132656025666

The irony of the 'I'm free!' John Inman expression.

 

[Bishop]

I

Since 09/10:

09/10: 4th
10/11: 5th
11/12: 4th
12/13: 5th
13/14: 6th
14/15: 5th
15/16: 3rd
16/17: 2nd
17/18: 3rd
18/19: 4th
19/20: 6th
20/21: 7th
21/22: 4th
22/23: 8th
23/24: 5th

Average: 4.73, rounds up to 5th.

I've been kind here and left out the 17th place finish, which would have strengthened my point here further. But let's say we finished 10th this year because we sacked off the Europa League, it still rounds to 5th. I also could have started from the 04/05 season when I think it could be argued we started really getting our act together and implementing the ENIC strategy of signing the best young players we could.

'When we get it right' is having a manager like Poch, who we sacked after he got 4th, made a CL final, and wasn't able to sign anyone for 18 months. Or when we had Conte, who quickly sniffed that we weren't that serious at all about pushing on as a club and decided to blow up his position.

This is key. When we are on the cusp, we do not actually, meaningfully push on. We hold back. We don't give these clearly talented coaches what they need to truly build something special. To be clear I understand all the reasons why it doesn't fit the sustainability ENIC plan, I'm just saying I don't care about their plan anymore. I want different owners who will help us push on.

As such our level is 5th. It's 3rd or 4th in a good year, and it's 7-8th in a bad year. This is our level under ENIC. I do not seriously believe that they have just been waiting for the perfect money ball manager to allow them to start winning league titles. I think Frank will fit their structure, but I think our range under him is going to continue to be what it has been under ENIC.

I don't disagree with you on the just if ENIC being unable to capitalise. It goes against their model, why play risky when you can play it relatively safely especially financially and reap the benefits so in that regard I'm with you.

However I don't believe winning a cup with Ange whilst supposedly binning off the league (I don't believe that's the case, I think he just didn't know how to arrest the form once his system had been solved) is a means to gain ultimate success. Given ENIC overly cautious approach they are even less likely to invest in the squad if the league return is brick but we have the occasional cup run and win. That's not something they can invest in, as there's nothing close to a reliable indicator of success.

No if we want ENIC to throw off the cloak of cowardice then we actually need to perform in the league, game after game. Let them SE that we are actually on to something and need a little extra to take it to the next level. Sadly and I mean that truly I liked Ange and his principles that can't be with a man like Ange who is unwilling to compromise or unable to react to an ever changing tactical situation in games to maximise our results.

 

[glasgowspur]

It's not settling, it's realistic positioning.
I would love to win either the PL or CL, however I think it's realistic to say that the odds are against us, we should strive to win them but be wary of making them our defining targets.

Why do we keep referring to 5th/6th? No one wants to settle for that. We have shown previously that when we get it right we are several notches above that and not far away from being at the very top - the aim is to get back to that level and push on

 

[Bishop]

It's not settling, it's realistic positioning.
I would love to win either the PL or CL, however I think it's realistic to say that the odds are against us, we should strive to win them but be wary of making them our defining targets.

We aren't winning the PL or CL off the foundation of finishing 17th. We actually need to be a consistently good side proven game after in the league to do this.

 

[glasgowspur]

We aren't winning the PL or CL off the foundation of finishing 17th. We actually need to be a consistently good side proven game after in the league to do this.

I never said we would, even the post I was replying to never mentioned 17th position so I'm really not sure why that is relevant or you're bringing it up.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

Since 09/10:

09/10: 4th
10/11: 5th
11/12: 4th
12/13: 5th
13/14: 6th
14/15: 5th
15/16: 3rd
16/17: 2nd
17/18: 3rd
18/19: 4th
19/20: 6th
20/21: 7th
21/22: 4th
22/23: 8th
23/24: 5th

Average: 4.73, rounds up to 5th.

I've been kind here and left out the 17th place finish, which would have strengthened my point here further. But let's say we finished 10th this year because we sacked off the Europa League, it still rounds to 5th. I also could have started from the 04/05 season when I think it could be argued we started really getting our act together and implementing the ENIC strategy of signing the best young players we could.

'When we get it right' is having a manager like Poch, who we sacked after he got 4th, made a CL final, and wasn't able to sign anyone for 18 months. Or when we had Conte, who quickly sniffed that we weren't that serious at all about pushing on as a club and decided to blow up his position.

This is key. When we are on the cusp, we do not actually, meaningfully push on. We hold back. We don't give these clearly talented coaches what they need to truly build something special. To be clear I understand all the reasons why it doesn't fit the sustainability ENIC plan, I'm just saying I don't care about their plan anymore. I want different owners who will help us push on.

As such our level is 5th. It's 3rd or 4th in a good year, and it's 7-8th in a bad year. This is our level under ENIC. I do not seriously believe that they have just been waiting for the perfect money ball manager to allow them to start winning league titles. I think Frank will fit their structure, but I think our range under him is going to continue to be what it has been under ENIC.

Said another way, @billyiddo, we've challenged for the title seriously, twice. Ever under ENIC. That's what I'm not happy with. 5 is the average, there'll be a few top 3-4 finishes in there, and there'll be some 7-8th places too. But we challenged for the title when we decided to rip up the Doom Loop, gave a manager a 5 year contract and said 'no more chopping and changing, we're going to build a culture and believe in a method, and we are not going to hold unreasonable expectations on this person immediately'. Lo and behold we then had our best league performances once that method really got embedded.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

You can decide that but it's a bad decision on your part as the manager to bin off the league and finish in the lowest possible position without getting relegated. It will likely end in the same result as Ange ie. getting the sack.

The league campaign is the ultimate decider of quality and progress. Cups are a bonus. If you win a cup whilst having a great season that's amazing. If you do so while having a ok season it might even turn that into a great year. Do it while having a poor season it's just a bit meh and do it whilst being godawful and sadly that's not going to change the narrative that frankly you failed in the meat and potatoes of any football team. The league campaign.

Cups rely on the draw and game to game form. It's not a sustainable way to evaluate a team's relevant quality, only the league does that and this past season was a disaster in that respect and no amount of injuries obscures this fact, out form was very concerning before any injury concerns besides injuries happen they are part and parcel of the game Ange said this himself before he started using it as an excuse. If you haven't built a squad to cope with injuries or to adjust your system to cope thats a failing on your part as a manager or coach. But again I want to reiterate we were poor way before any I jury concerns so I'm not really buying that excuse.

We'll have to agree to disagree...I am never referring to the Europa win as a 'bit meh'. I couldn't give a toss about our league form this year because I believe our injuries screwed us from being able to finish in the European spots. I therefore wanted to maximise our chance of winning the Europa League so that we could take something beautiful from this season.

I just don't agree that we were 'poor before the injury concerns' either. We weren't yet firing on all cylinders, and we definitely dropped some frustrating points. We also had some big wins and even under Poch we started seasons slowly.

I think this last season was an anomaly. We would have been fine in the League under Ange going forward, just like we were when we finished 5th in his first season.

 

[Raziel]

I fully believe that the way Ange managed it meant he would have maintained the players backing and belief in the principles of play and we would have been top 6 minimum in his third season.

Since 09/10:

09/10: 4th
10/11: 5th
11/12: 4th
12/13: 5th
13/14: 6th
14/15: 5th
15/16: 3rd
16/17: 2nd
17/18: 3rd
18/19: 4th
19/20: 6th
20/21: 7th
21/22: 4th
22/23: 8th
23/24: 5th

Average: 4.73, rounds up to 5th.

I think you are trying to make two points separately, so I'll address as such, first point is specific to Ange capable of top 6 in third season.

- Spurs is a top 6 club, basically 18+ years of data shows that (your data as well), regardless of manager, regardless of current squad, the club gives the manager sufficient resources to finish in top 6
- Despite the above, nothing in the data re Ange says he would finish 6th, see my chart below, basically his entire tenure, we have just gotten worse in league, despite the team that finished 5th, having Solanke, Gray, Bergvall, Danso, Tel & Kinsky getting added to it, just for it to get even worse. Basically the only reason we didn't finish lower than 17th is the points early in season and the fact that the bottom teams were losing as much as us.



Any belief that Ange would turn it around after 2 years of results continuously getting worse is pretty much in the realm of fantasy.

 

[billyiddo]

Said another way, @billyiddo, we've challenged for the title seriously, twice. Ever under ENIC. That's what I'm not happy with. 5 is the average, there'll be a few top 3-4 finishes in there, and there'll be some 7-8th places too. But we challenged for the title when we decided to rip up the Doom Loop, gave a manager a 5 year contract and said 'no more chopping and changing, we're going to build a culture and believe in a method, and we are not going to hold unreasonable expectations on this person immediately'. Lo and behold we then had our best league performances once that method really got embedded.

I don't believe you can just set about a 5 year plan like that, at least not with a single manager - obviously in an ideal scenario you appoint a manager and he works out well and progresses and earns a couple of contact extensions, bit if you appoint a manager that doesn't work out? What you just stick with him because you've committed to something? That's just stupid to be blunt. Managers are just another cog and should be swapped out if not functioning

 

[Raziel]

I don't believe you can just set about a 5 year plan like that, at least not with a single manager - obviously in an ideal scenario you appoint a manager and he works out well and progresses and earns a couple of contact extensions, bit if you appoint a manager that doesn't work out? What you just stick with him because you've committed to something? That's just stupid to be blunt. Managers are just another cog and should be swapped out if not functioning

Agree, see my earlier point, this weird idea than tenure somehow automatically equals success?

And even success/failure is something that continues to need to be evaluated. Arteta is on the verge of proving this all wrong, Arsenal has stuck with him through 8th, 8th, 5th (bottled 4th), 2nd, 2nd, 2nd. In that period they have spent ~800M. One view is he has been successful, 2nd view is other managers would not have bottled the 4th (cost them CL revenue) and would have gotten one of the three 2nd place finishes over the line, and probably a cup or better run in Europe.