Ange departs

[BrainOfLevy]

I

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.

I think even the eye test shows we played a very different form of football from December onwards. That was the coaching staff adapting. There was no solving of his system, because we weren't even playing his system.

On your last point, I think they saw enough. From Poch. From Conte. Arguably even from Harry. They also managed to hire Jose and didn't create any of the circumstances to match how he'd been successful elsewhere. We've had numerous coaches who have more than demonstrated progress in the League, and just needed the additional push to make the next step, like Liverpool did. They didn't do it.

 

[Lost Mango]

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.

We have given lots of managers 5 year contracts.

We didn't rip up the Doom Loop. Hindsight suggests we backed him to give him time to embed but if Pochetino hadn't maintained 5th or better (which he did) in his first 2 seasons he wouldn't have lasted 5 years.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

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

I think 'multitude of reasons' is doing a lot of work there to be honest. We haven't kicked on because we didn't back Poch. Or Conte. Poch and Klopp started at the same time. Liverpool kicked on with an aggressive move for a top goalkeeper and centre back and have won league titles. Poch was held back from doing the same.

I don't want cups rather than the league. I want to win the actual league. And some cups. I never wanted to 'do it the easy way' like Chelsea or City did. But I feel like we've done our hard yards. We've built the infrastructure, we now just need the team. I just don't believe another 5 year plan is actually going to get us to win the league, especially when we keep sacking managers / not backing them.

 

[billyiddo]

I think even the eye test shows we played a very different form of football from December onwards. That was the coaching staff adapting. There was no solving of his system, because we weren't even playing his system.

On your last point, I think they saw enough. From Poch. From Conte. Arguably even from Harry. They also managed to hire Jose and didn't create any of the circumstances to match how he'd been successful elsewhere. We've had numerous coaches who have more than demonstrated progress in the League, and just needed the additional push to make the next step, like Liverpool did. They didn't do it.

Jose came in selling the dream that he was the missing piece of the jigsaw - more fool Levy for buying it but the scenario sold to him was that everything was here for Jose to succeed. There was also the COVID to contend with.

 

[Bishop]

I think even the eye test shows we played a very different form of football from December onwards. That was the coaching staff adapting. There was no solving of his system, because we weren't even playing his system.

On your last point, I think they saw enough. From Poch. From Conte. Arguably even from Harry. They also managed to hire Jose and didn't create any of the circumstances to match how he'd been successful elsewhere. We've had numerous coaches who have more than demonstrated progress in the League, and just needed the additional push to make the next step, like Liverpool did. They didn't do it.

The eye test said we were struggling from the very start of the season. I can bring up my posts at the time when I said it. Post December it worsened but it was already bad before then.

Im no pro ENIC guy, I think they make poor decisions consistently. However what I was trying to say is they will never push on if we are finishing 17th, 10th etc and winning the occasional cup. They won't even push on when we get 86 points and challenge for the league but which if the two is more likely to get an ENIC it's not the team finishing flipping 17th.

 

[thfcsteff]

Always/obviously, but you would have to acknowledge just as much as "we could have done better", we could have done worse (piece people often miss).

e.g. if Frank comes in and gets us 5th/6th and a decent run in cups, the club will hardly get anyone praising them, but it will be the right call (hard to prove)



The issue (and at risk of repeating myself), he and/or the team was unable to balance between bare fudging minimum in league and prioritization of EL. There is no doubt in my mind that if he got 12th (still worse result in 20 years) and won the cup, he'd have a job today/next season. And there is a bit more to it as well (e.g. the club's perspective on injuries)

I see all perspectives and was just sharing mine

 

[thfcsteff]

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

...who knows? But I think you get my wider point.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

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.

View attachment 19868

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

Honestly I just don't understand how the context of a massive, historic injury crisis and a relentless schedule keeps getting ignored! He finished 5th in his first season! As you say, Spurs is a top 6 club. I have full confidence we would have been back to 6th as a minimum in his 3rd season.

 

[thfcsteff]

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

Yes.
There is a false framing.
It has come from polarised positions and a degree of inflexibility when it comes to acknowledging dialectics in discussions over Ange.
I agree that the definitions are erroneous at best and offensive at worse...

 

[thfcsteff]

Honestly I just don't understand how the context of a massive, historic injury crisis and a relentless schedule keeps getting ignored! He finished 5th in his first season! As you say, Spurs is a top 6 club. I have full confidence we would have been back to 6th as a minimum in his 3rd season.

There is an argument/opinion which says he is responsible for the injury crisis due to his style of play. In itself that becomes another discussion in need of dialectic analysis (unless you believe in blunt absolutes).

Not necessarily my opinion, but one often shared, and I think it offers a perspective as to why it at the very least gets short thrift? I'm only writing this because I know you've been away thus have missed the endless endless exchanges on this very subject :-(

 

[BrainOfLevy]

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

I would have loved to have stuck with Poch or allowed him to strengthen when we were challenging for the title.

I would have loved to have backed Conte, considering he has proven he can win the league against richer opponents if he gets the right pieces for his system.

We have not had a succession of failing managers. We have had great managers that fail to be backed by the club to the extent that we can truly challenge for the title on a consistent basis.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

The eye test said we were struggling from the very start of the season. I can bring up my posts at the time when I said it. Post December it worsened but it was already bad before then.

Im no pro ENIC guy, I think they make poor decisions consistently. However what I was trying to say is they will never push on if we are finishing 17th, 10th etc and winning the occasional cup. They won't even push on when we get 86 points and challenge for the league but which if the two is more likely to get an ENIC it's not the team finishing flipping 17th.

I agree with your second para. They didn't even push on when we were finishing 2nd with 86 points. Or when making the CL final.

We simply weren't going to finish anywhere near 17th again under Ange or anyone else. We'd very likely be back in the top 6 whoever was manager. I want to win the league. What needs to change to make that happen?

 

[johnola]

Honestly I just don't understand how the context of a massive, historic injury crisis and a relentless schedule keeps getting ignored! He finished 5th in his first season! As you say, Spurs is a top 6 club. I have full confidence we would have been back to 6th as a minimum in his 3rd season.

We played 41 games in total that season. Which must be the least in any single season.

 

[johnola]

[I want to win the league. What needs to change to make that happen?]

Relegation.

 

[Raziel]

I would have loved to have stuck with Poch or allowed him to strengthen when we were challenging for the title.

I would have loved to have backed Conte, considering he has proven he can win the league against richer opponents if he gets the right pieces for his system.

We have not had a succession of failing managers. We have had great managers that fail to be backed by the club to the extent that we can truly challenge for the title on a consistent basis.

You apply a simplicity to stuff that I'm struggling to understand

- Poch, unfortunately mate we were building a 1B stadium at the peak of his side, no grand fudging scheme against him, no plot to pocket the cash, we were doing something than United, Chelsea & Liverpool have failed to do so far (years later) that is/was critical for future of the club
- Jose, two points, he positioned the squad as good enough before he took the job, and Covid, the small factor of us losing 170M+ in revenue meant both we couldn't back him and it would have been fiscally fudging irresponsible to do so when no one knew when Covid would end and revenue would return
- Conte got a 155M spent with only one summer window (would actually be 200M if you include when final Porro transaction happened), and the club went all in on Porro (3rd most expensive FB at the time IIRC?) specifically for him, Conte failed not because we didn't back him, he had a fudging personal meltdown
- Ange got close to 300M, how much more backing did he need?

This comes back to the same circle argument every few years

- Who are you expecting Spurs to outspend? is it everybody? or do you believe if we spend close enough to top 4, it puts us in with a shot (hint, we spend top 4 money now, both total and net spend)
- If you expect Spurs to spend more than 150M+ per window, where is the money coming from?
- And for every manager, do you really think the difference between where they ended was one player? you really think Ange would have finished top 6 if we bought him a fudging LB or CB cover?

I've said it before, I in principle agree, Spurs won't win the PL with ENIC ownership, not because they are making bad decisions (and they do), or because they don't back the manager (see above), it's because fundamentally you have two teams in the league playing by a different set of rules

 

[Bishop]

I agree with your second para. They didn't even push on when we were finishing 2nd with 86 points. Or when making the CL final.

We simply weren't going to finish anywhere near 17th again under Ange or anyone else. We'd very likely be back in the top 6 whoever was manager. I want to win the league. What needs to change to make that happen?

The man running the club; Daniel Levy.

It might actually be somewhat the case now with the appointment of Vinai as CEO. But I won't hold my breath.

 

[Muttley]

Honestly I just don't understand how the context of a massive, historic injury crisis and a relentless schedule keeps getting ignored! He finished 5th in his first season! As you say, Spurs is a top 6 club. I have full confidence we would have been back to 6th as a minimum in his 3rd season.

I don't think it was. I've been hanging back with this conversation as you can't win. Most of what I read is shoulda, woulda, coulda on both sides.

For me, there were clearly mitigating circumstances. What I would say though it is still eleven vs eleven. In Dec / Jan we were a decimated and fatigued squad but I still saw coaching errors. In mid Feb we started to get pretty decent match day squads out and there were still coaching issues. Then there was coaching adjustments, good ones, for the EL run and we prevailed. We weren't that convincing to be fair in the final, and I still have my Utd mates probably rightly saying that they were the better team and we had the football gods on our side. We definitely did.

It hasn't been a glowing endorsement of Ange and his coaching team's abilities over these last 2 years in my opinion. The stakes are really high at Spurs and we clearly couldn't take that risk any longer in a guy who has that has these cracks in his coaching portfolio. Then (my opinion) he started to really let himself down in the interview environment. He was fractious, preachy and evasive. I didn't want to hear "Yeah, we're not happy with our league position, next question". I wanted him to provide football answers as enthusiastically as he was talked about stonecutters, doctors and teachers. Football management is what he is paid for.

I have a feeling that in the end the employer / employee conversations were the main reason Ange had to go. No fan would be privy to those but you can read into the fuzzy lines that Ange didn't have good answers and didn't create confidence for the next chapter. It wasn't like Levy was managing this one-on-one. We now have a new leadership team and the word "unanimous" was quite telling. I'm not sure he had advocacy with any of our decision makers in the end. I have a feeling they just made a fantastic decision for our club.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

You apply a simplicity to stuff that I'm struggling to understand

- Poch, unfortunately mate we were building a 1B stadium at the peak of his side, no grand fudging scheme against him, no plot to pocket the cash, we were doing something than United, Chelsea & Liverpool have failed to do so far (years later) that is/was critical for future of the club
- Jose, two points, he positioned the squad as good enough before he took the job, and Covid, the small factor of us losing 170M+ in revenue meant both we couldn't back him and it would have been fiscally fudging irresponsible to do so when no one knew when Covid would end and revenue would return
- Conte got a 155M spent with only one summer window (would actually be 200M if you include when final Porro transaction happened), and the club went all in on Porro (3rd most expensive FB at the time IIRC?) specifically for him, Conte failed not because we didn't back him, he had a fudging personal meltdown
- Ange got close to 300M, how much more backing did he need?

This comes back to the same circle argument every few years

- Who are you expecting Spurs to outspend? is it everybody? or do you believe if we spend close enough to top 4, it puts us in with a shot (hint, we spend top 4 money now, both total and net spend)
- If you expect Spurs to spend more than 150M+ per window, where is the money coming from?
- And for every manager, do you really think the difference between where they ended was one player? you really think Ange would have finished top 6 if we bought him a fudging LB or CB cover?

I've said it before, I in principle agree, Spurs won't win the PL with ENIC ownership, not because they are making bad decisions (and they do), or because they don't back the manager (see above), it's because fundamentally you have two teams in the league playing by a different set of rules

Look very simply, we need owners who can play by those same rules. City have operated in a league of their own in terms of owner backing, fine. But Liverpool have managed to get there with smart investment at the right time. I suspect that Chelsea will keep getting closer again. It is not impossible, but it does mean taking a bit more of a risk with who you try and sign. It means moving aggressively on your first choice targets, early, and not going by the strategy that we need to wait longer so that other clubs have done their business and now we can swoop in at better prices.

I don't care where the money comes from, I just want it to come from somewhere. I no longer want to think that life is great because our club has got to where it is by being sustainable. I want to win the league. We have the infrastructure, but we have owners that don't want to invest at the level to be up there consistently.

 

[Raziel]

Look very simply, we need owners who can play by those same rules. City have operated in a league of their own in terms of owner backing, fine. But Liverpool have managed to get there with smart investment at the right time. I suspect that Chelsea will keep getting closer again. It is not impossible, but it does mean taking a bit more of a risk with who you try and sign. It means moving aggressively on your first choice targets, early, and not going by the strategy that we need to wait longer so that other clubs have done their business and now we can swoop in at better prices.

I don't care where the money comes from, I just want it to come from somewhere. I no longer want to think that life is great because our club has got to where it is by being sustainable. I want to win the league. We have the infrastructure, but we have owners that don't want to invest at the level to be up there consistently.

And there we agree

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

The Guardian absolutely nailing it in an analysis piece that generally rips the Postecoglu era at Spurs to shreds...