Harry Redknapp: The Aftermath

[billyiddo]

of course we should be striving for both...and i definately agree with the second point. but if you are going to sack a good manager who you know what he brings to the table.......you would rather do that for someone that could just as easily fail, or even start the building process all over again, just as easily as they could succeed? as opposed to someone that would keep the ship steady (even if it is negative) and keep you at a level (points wise) that you would be happy with.

in essence, your grass is green ...but because it 'could be greenER' ..you would be willing to go for a gardener with a patchy field with some seriously dusty / brown bits...but some very nice and vivid green blotches ? over someone that also has a green field with less resources..

now that is a bricky analogy...but i'm sticking to it

i don't think we should be replacing Redknapp this summer unless we are confident we have found someone who we think has the potential to bring both consistency/success and the style that we want (as well as the other things which Nayim has mentioned where we want to improve on Redknapp) - otherwise there is not much point replacing him at all

im happy for him to stay and earn a new contract and prove he has the commitment to doing the job, if he isn't happy to prove his worth after admitting he was willing to drop us if that better offer had come, then that is a shame - but we shouldn't be jumping to sign someone up for the next 3 years who would have walked away only a few months a go

 

[Raziel]

so you want ferguson / wenger / guardiola / mourinho..., and you want it now.

I'd actually disagree that any/all of those managers fufill that list

- Very few clubs have a consistant system/style that flows throw the levels and allows that foundation (Barca/Scum come to mind), downside is clubs that have a "systme", tend to be short on Plan B.
- Transfer strategy, actually think we have one, executing it in a Sugar Daddy world (where we don't have one), is tough.
- Re Squad utilization, got to have good bench (which usually equates higher wages), and win enough or compete enough in CL to make players willing to sit on the bench for extended periods.

 

[africanspurs]

Are you both having gay sex ?

you're not invited.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

wohoooo...we have motion baby

okay then, next question...in your view.....who is more likely to get results, someone that has shown a consistent level ..or someone that shows extremely volatile and fluctuating levels of performance?

In my view, it depends on how that man fits with the club.

Harry kept Portsmouth up initially because he had a bit of money to sign some decent players and then went back there and took them into Europe after getting even more money to spend. Southampton may have thought 'brilliant, we're sure to stay up now that Harry's joined us!' but it didn't happen. Not saying he did a bad job there, but certain managers work better in certain circumstances, and how they fit in with those. Harry is good with a bit of money, with good players, and will let those good players play.

I think because Moyes for example has gotten consistent results with another club, it doesn't mean he'd get them here. He might well do, but I consider it a little bit risky. Just like someone like AVB, takes over Academia, a small club with inferior players, and gets great results out of them. He takes over Porto, better players, and gets great results out of them. Maybe people think that he's consistent and some kind of managerial prodigy, but it didn't work at Chelsea. It has to be the right fit for the club.

And even though Moyes could be very good, I just don't see him as the right fit for us, at least until he's given some interviews as our new manager detailing his plans, at which point I'll be more than happy to give him a chance. But if it's a choice between a guy that's got consistency from an inferior team playing reactive football vs a guy that's had a couple of up and down years playing proactive football, providing the guy is deemed to have the skills of a good manager and the club makes things easy for him, I'll take the guy playing proactive football. And that's because I'd perceive him to be better suited to our club, and therefore with us, I see him as more likely to get consistent results with us, as opposed to someone that has gotten consistent results elsewhere.

 

[africanspurs]

I'd actually disagree that any/all of those managers fufill that list

- Very few clubs have a consistant system/style that flows throw the levels and allows that foundation (Barca/Scum come to mind), downside is clubs that have a "systme", tend to be short on Plan B.
- Transfer strategy, actually think we have one, executing it in a Sugar Daddy world (where we don't have one), is tough.
- Re Squad utilization, got to have good bench (which usually equates higher wages), and win enough or compete enough in CL to make players willing to sit on the bench for extended periods.

pretty sure those managers have proven time and time again that they are well in that list at the near top

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

I'd actually disagree that any/all of those managers fufill that list

- Very few clubs have a consistant system/style that flows throw the levels and allows that foundation (Barca/Scum come to mind), downside is clubs that have a "systme", tend to be short on Plan B.
- Transfer strategy, actually think we have one, executing it in a Sugar Daddy world (where we don't have one), is tough.
- Re Squad utilization, got to have good bench (which usually equates higher wages), and win enough or compete enough in CL to make players willing to sit on the bench for extended periods.

That is something that will massively hold us back unfortunately.

 

[billyiddo]

re having a good bench and not having the money to do so :

Gomes, Cudicini, Dawson (one of Gallas/King) Corluka, Huddelstone, Bentley, Jenas, Pienaar, Defoe - Pav/Saha

players off the top of my head that are/were at our club in the past year and don't regularly start who are most likely on big(ish) contracts - im not arguing their ability here but to say we can't afford to have a good bench is way off the mark

edit : actually taking a second to look at the ability of that selection of players there it does make you wonder how many teams in the prem would like to have a selection of back ups like that to call upon

 

[Rorschach]

In my view, it depends on how that man fits with the club.

Harry kept Portsmouth up initially because he had a bit of money to sign some decent players and then went back there and took them into Europe after getting even more money to spend. Southampton may have thought 'brilliant, we're sure to stay up now that Harry's joined us!' but it didn't happen. Not saying he did a bad job there, but certain managers work better in certain circumstances, and how they fit in with those. Harry is good with a bit of money, with good players, and will let those good players play.

I think because Moyes for example has gotten consistent results with another club, it doesn't mean he'd get them here. He might well do, but I consider it a little bit risky. Just like someone like AVB, takes over Academia, a small club with inferior players, and gets great results out of them. He takes over Porto, better players, and gets great results out of them. Maybe people think that he's consistent and some kind of managerial prodigy, but it didn't work at Chelsea. It has to be the right fit for the club.

And even though Moyes could be very good, I just don't see him as the right fit for us, at least until he's given some interviews as our new manager detailing his plans, at which point I'll be more than happy to give him a chance. But if it's a choice between a guy that's got consistency from an inferior team playing reactive football vs a guy that's had a couple of up and down years playing proactive football, providing the guy is deemed to have the skills of a good manager and the club makes things easy for him, I'll take the guy playing proactive football. And that's because I'd perceive him to be better suited to our club, and therefore with us, I see him as more likely to get consistent results with us, as opposed to someone that has gotten consistent results elsewhere.

Good post.

 

[africanspurs]

In my view, it depends on how that man fits with the club.

Harry kept Portsmouth up initially because he had a bit of money to sign some decent players and then went back there and took them into Europe after getting even more money to spend. Southampton may have thought 'brilliant, we're sure to stay up now that Harry's joined us!' but it didn't happen. Not saying he did a bad job there, but certain managers work better in certain circumstances, and how they fit in with those. Harry is good with a bit of money, with good players, and will let those good players play.

I think because Moyes for example has gotten consistent results with another club, it doesn't mean he'd get them here. He might well do, but I consider it a little bit risky. Just like someone like AVB, takes over Academia, a small club with inferior players, and gets great results out of them. He takes over Porto, better players, and gets great results out of them. Maybe people think that he's consistent and some kind of managerial prodigy, but it didn't work at Chelsea. It has to be the right fit for the club.

And even though Moyes could be very good, I just don't see him as the right fit for us, at least until he's given some interviews as our new manager detailing his plans, at which point I'll be more than happy to give him a chance. But if it's a choice between a guy that's got consistency from an inferior team playing reactive football vs a guy that's had a couple of up and down years playing proactive football, providing the guy is deemed to have the skills of a good manager and the club makes things easy for him, I'll take the guy playing proactive football. And that's because I'd perceive him to be better suited to our club, and therefore with us, I see him as more likely to get consistent results with us, as opposed to someone that has gotten consistent results elsewhere.

"providing the guy is deemed to have the skills of a good manager and the club makes things easy for him,"


you dont think moyes has the skills of a good manager?

plus i'm not sure if you even answered the question i asked ....LOL

 

[BrainOfLevy]

"providing the guy is deemed to have the skills of a good manager and the club makes things easy for him,"


you dont think moyes has the skills of a good manager?

plus i'm not sure if you even answered the question i asked ....LOL

I think Moyes does have the skills of a good manager. What I was trying to say there is I wouldn't hire someone that knew comparitively very little about the game, but had an attacking idealism, just because they liked to attack. I'd want someone to have the skills of a good manager, and have a proactive philosophy, rather than someone who had been consistent and reactive, even if that proactive manager had some ups and downs before coming to us.

So in terms of trying to answer your question - who is more likely to get results. I believe it's the person most suited to the club. Harry's a consistent manager and AVB has fluctuated, but I think if the circumstances are right, they could both work for us. They are both suited to us, at least IMO.

 

[mick cooper]

its all academic

HR will be managing us when we kick off next season.

(the death knell of HR.........)

[-o<

(that was meant to be the praying smiley)

 

[africanspurs]

I think Moyes does have the skills of a good manager. What I was trying to say there is I wouldn't hire someone that knew comparitively very little about the game, but had an attacking idealism, just because they liked to attack. I'd want someone to have the skills of a good manager, and have a proactive philosophy, rather than someone who had been consistent and reactive, even if that proactive manager had some ups and downs before coming to us.

So in terms of trying to answer your question - who is more likely to get results. I believe it's the person most suited to the club. Harry's a consistent manager and AVB has fluctuated, but I think if the circumstances are right, they could both work for us. They are both suited to us, at least IMO.

Man oh man, there is something about the way i'm asking the question? cause i dont seem to see the answer to the question i asked

i give up. dont answer it , i get the feeling i'd just get another good answer that doesnt address my actual concerns

lets talk about what you said instead. you believe its the person more suited to the club, that bit is alittle bit confusing to me, by club do you mean the players? resources? fans etc...how can one person be more suited to a club than another person? if at the end of the day , results are all that matter? cause you can put that byline to anyone "if te circumstances are correct/ right"...apply that to anyone and lietraly anyone can succeed at tottenham that has a managerial pedigree half decent

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

you are right, it was a twist on what you said, seeing as you never said it in the first place...but i was operating under the assumption that when we let go of harry we were after something in particular and that the outcome or receipt of this thing we were after would happen pretty much immediately? if you want to wait a couple a few years then thats certainly your perogative and is actually ver much something i would applaud as being extremely visionary and patient.

I simply want us to be the best we can be (and I believe we are capable of a lot more than we currently produce). If a new manager comes in and takes 3 years to reach that peak Ill be happy all the time I feel we are heading in that direction.

my only ting is that if you're willing to wait, then why not wait with harry..year after year we have shown the 'progression' your talking about have we not?

I think he has hit a plateu - I dont think we are making progress as a side, improving sytematically or learning from experience.

We have good players, they perform well, we win a lot of games - but what progression has the side made in 3 years?

The biggest change to the side was the introduction of Ade, which just added a dimension - the organisation/preparation/tactics etc werent revolutionised were they?

plus another thing, if you want redknapp and more...why did you mention martinez and rodgers etc....when they havent even shown their capabilities to be redknapp aside from implement a continental style of playing football during a good run of games?

Rodgers was the one for me. Very much in line with Billys posts I think we need to spot the next big managerial talent.

Its been done to death, but essentially I think thats Rodgers. I think he has motivation, strategy, a system, good eye in the market...

I think he has the main strengths of Harry, and much of the "extras" Im looking for. Though of course its not guaranteed of the options (that were) available to us he would represent a gamble well worth making. [Should we be looking for a manager]

the managing personell thing is still confusing me, to put it simply.,..what did harry do wrong in accordance with personnel management? we were winning and he played a winning team....what did he do wrong? what could he have done differently that would make this more acceptable to you

I think a strong system of play allows you to rotate players without affecting performance drastically (Rodgers changed 6 between matches over Christmas and won both games!). With this ability you can keep you squad involved, fit and available.

Redknapp tends to only rotate on a basis of injury. For me this isnt right.

Look at Niko, he has left because he was essentially the forgoten/unwanted man, and yet he could have had so much involvement if utilised properly. If this continues where does it leave the squad?

the irony thing is that the straw man thing is actually you bringing it up LOL. i havent said that you are either one thing or another...i've just asked a simple question...LOL LOL. the fact that you find it an issue to answer is more telling than the question or even the answer itself.

My point was that you seemed to be hanging a lot on a question that seemed designed only to group people into one side or another. Building divisions, with the idea that its either/or. I answered your question - I said "Both". So what did that reveal to you?

 

[mick cooper]

Man oh man, there is something about the way i'm asking the question? cause i dont seem to see the answer to the question i asked

i give up. dont answer it , i get the feeling i'd just get another good answer that doesnt address my actual concerns

lets talk about what you said instead. you believe its the person more suited to the club, that bit is alittle bit confusing to me, by club do you mean the players? resources? fans etc...how can one person be more suited to a club than another person? if at the end of the day , results are all that matter? cause you can put that byline to anyone "if te circumstances are correct/ right"...apply that to anyone and lietraly anyone can succeed at tottenham that has a managerial pedigree half decent

at least Moyes will satisfy the crowd that constantly bitch about HRs love of a quote or a soundbite

Moyes is like an undertaker on mogadon and could send a glass eye to sleep.

I have seen more charisma in a breeze block

at least we wont go down if he's given the nod

the football will make your eyes bleed, but if thats what the people want

let them eat lumpy bread.

I'd rather eat cake.......

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

I simply want us to be the best we can be (and I believe we are capable of a lot more than we currently produce). If a new manager comes in and takes 3 years to reach that peak Ill be happy all the time I feel we are heading in that direction.

Please can you define this statement more clearly? What do you think the current Spurs squad should be able to achieve?

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

The best teams are greater than the sum of their parts. Aided by a clever style of play and a manager who makes the right calls. It also grows in quality with astute transfer business (read "Astute", not necessarily "Expensive" - Berbatov and Modric great examples).

I think we are a team that performs equal to the sum of its parts, and so often less if any member is not on form or injured.

Despite this we were well in the hunt for a strong top 3 finish, with "more" we could have been in the title race.

 

[harr1984]

I used to wonder why other fans ridiculed us and label us fickle. A couple of top 4 finishes, and all of a sudden we should be in the race for titles? Outside of of a Spurs forum you would get laughed at.....

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

The best teams are greater than the sum of their parts. Aided by a clever style of play and a manager who makes the right calls. It also grows in quality with astute transfer business (read "Astute", not necessarily "Expensive" - Berbatov and Modric great examples).

I think we are a team that performs equal to the sum of its parts, and so often less if any member is not on form or injured.

Despite this we were well in the hunt for a strong top 3 finish, with "more" we could have been in the title race.

So just to clarify, it is your belief that our current squad are good enough to be title contenders under the right Manager?

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I used to wonder why other fans ridiculed us and label us fickle. A couple of top 4 finishes, and all of a sudden we should be in the race for titles? Outside of of a Spurs forum you would get laughed at.....

Am I wrong? Did you see any football last season at all?

MK - last season? Absolutely. Going forward, less likely right now - but certainly possible. With a stronger system of play and some smart purchases why not?

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Am I wrong? Did you see any football last season at all?

MK - last season? Absolutely. Going forward, less likely right now - but certainly possible. With a stronger system of play and some smart purchases why not?

I think this is why you and me fundamentally clash so much. It's my belief that if every team had their strongest XI fit, ours is 5th. I don't believe we were ever seriously title contenders. I don't believe our defence is good enough to be a title winning defence and, as well as Ade did for a large part of last season, I believe we are lacking a real top quality forward.

Incidentally we haven't sold anyone yet but Kranjcar, so if you believe we were good enough to win the title last season then surely the same set of players are capable next season? Especially considering we have a very young side and they're all a year more experienced?