ENIC

[jimmyb]

Erm, Moyes got them CL football (nearly ) and they kept him for over a decade. Consistent top 6 finishers. Martinez, got them 5th last season finishing above Spurs and United.

Arsenal, would have thought that one was obvious. Wenger, longest serving manager in the league. Won 3 premier league titles, CL finalist, top 4 finish every season he's been there.

Laudrup, won Swansea their first trophy in GHod knows how long.

What buck? Perhaps not stepping down as chairman, but some serious questions to be pointed in his direction, I really don't see what the harm is in this or why people are so defensive about questioning Levy. We have to be near the top of clubs who have had the most managers in the PL era, except Chelsea, I can't think of any club that has gone through more managers in the last 10 years. At what point do we say he's got too many managerial appointments wrong is the question am I asking I guess.

One more thing, it's hypocritial of people to say certain managers underachieved with the resources and players they had, saying we should have finished higher, but people defend Levy and say "where do you expect us to finish with our budget compared to our rivals?". So if people are going to extend this courtesy for him, shouldn't the same be done for managers? Just a thought.

I'm going to assume that you mean during the ENIC era at Spurs, since that is what this thread is about. And on the basis of those clubs currently in the Premier League, we're firmly in mid table when it comes to the number of managers each club has had since February 2001 (not including caretakers - though I have included Sherwood!):

Southampton - 15

Crystal Palace - 14

QPR - 12
Leicester - 12

Swansea - 11

Chelsea - 10
WBA -10
Sunderland - 10

Saudi Sportswashing Machine - 9
Hull - 9
Tottenham - 9

Aston Villa - 7
West Ham - 7
Burnley - 7
Emirates Marketing Project - 7

Stoke - 6

Liverpool - 5

Everton - 3
Man Utd - 3

Arsenal - 1

 

[jimmyb]

Well we've covered what I don't agree with mate, not just you I don't agree with. I really don't like creating "sides" but it does sometimes feel like we aren't allowed to be critical of him when he makes mistakes. Everyone at the club should be held accountable when things go wrong, that goes for managers, players, the chairman and the owner. I don't feel I'm particularly harsh or unfair towards him but I'm sure some wouldn't agree, it just gets a bit tiresome when when people say "would you rather do a Leeds" like there's just Levy/Enic's way of doing things, or we'll go under.

This is a fallacy.

Just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean that they are doing so because they can't accept criticism.

It's far more likely that their disagreement is because they just.............well.........disagree with you! No other motive necessary.

 

[jimmyb]

That'd make sense if people were saying that in this discussion but the only things being spoke about are the issues you have raised. In fact you have actually brought up clubs to compare his time here to in this very discussion so we'd be well within our rights to use examples to the contrary, so it makes that particular complaint all the more confusing. you can't have it both ways at the end of the day.

Im finding these discussions often follow a similar path - poster criticizes Levy, poster defends Levy, original poster then complains he isn't allowed to be negative.

Classic fallacy, mate.

Attempting to discredit an opposing argument on the basis of nothing more than the false assertion that it is intolerant of any dissenting opinion.

 

[Jurgen the German]

This is a fallacy.

Just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean that they are doing so because they can't accept criticism.

It's far more likely that their disagreement is because they just.............well.........disagree with you! No other motive necessary.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Thanks for the responses though.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Classic fallacy, mate.

Attempting to discredit an opposing argument on the basis of nothing more than the false assertion that it is intolerant of any dissenting opinion.

Wasn't trying to "discredit" anyone.

 

[Jurgen the German]

That'd make sense if people were saying that in this discussion but the only things being spoke about are the issues you have raised. In fact you have actually brought up clubs to compare his time here to in this very discussion so we'd be well within our rights to use examples to the contrary, so it makes that particular complaint all the more confusing. you can't have it both ways at the end of the day.

Im finding these discussions often follow a similar path - poster criticizes Levy, poster defends Levy, original poster then complains he isn't allowed to be negative.

That's just how it comes across Billy.

 

[Jurgen the German]

I'm going to assume that you mean during the ENIC era at Spurs, since that is what this thread is about. And on the basis of those clubs currently in the Premier League, we're firmly in mid table when it comes to the number of managers each club has had since February 2001 (not including caretakers - though I have included Sherwood!):

Southampton - 15

Crystal Palace - 14

QPR - 12
Leicester - 12

Swansea - 11

Chelsea - 10
WBA -10
Sunderland - 10

Saudi Sportswashing Machine - 9
Hull - 9
Tottenham - 9

Aston Villa - 7
West Ham - 7
Burnley - 7
Emirates Marketing Project - 7

Stoke - 6

Liverpool - 5

Everton - 3
Man Utd - 3

Arsenal - 1

The majority of those clubs have experienced relegation and promotion where you tend to get a lot of sackings/new appointments. With the exception of Chelsea, when you compare it to our rivals it does appear quite high.

 

[braineclipse]

Well we've covered what I don't agree with mate, not just you I don't agree with. I really don't like creating "sides" but it does sometimes feel like we aren't allowed to be critical of him when he makes mistakes. Everyone at the club should be held accountable when things go wrong, that goes for managers, players, the chairman and the owner. I don't feel I'm particularly harsh or unfair towards him but I'm sure some wouldn't agree, it just gets a bit tiresome when when people say "would you rather do a Leeds" like there's just Levy/Enic's way of doing things, or we'll go under.

But the comparisons brought up when people ask "who are doing better" are teams that wouldn't have gotten a mention 4-5 years ago I think.

Levy took over for Spurs in 2001. Since then Southampton have gone from the Premier League, to the Championship, into League One, back to the Championship before returning to the Premier League (having previously been in the top flight for 25+ years in a row, so hardly out of nowhere).

Swansea have seen a fairly steady improvement in the same time period, but at a completely different level.

Let these clubs deal with the expectations of over performing (compared to finances) for a decade or more of oil money infused Premier League football with bigger clubs snatching up your best players and sniffing around any successful manager you get. Then we can compare them fairly to Levy. When the question of better run clubs was brought up 4-5 years ago I'm guessing names like Wigan or Bolton would be closer to being mentioned than Southampton and Swansea.

That being said, we could do a lot worse than what they have at Swansea should we lose Levy. Not that it's likely that they would be the one's coming in should he leave...

 

[Jordinho]

The majority of those clubs have experienced relegation and promotion where you tend to get a lot of sackings/new appointments. With the exception of Chelsea, when you compare it to our rivals it does appear quite high.

Sackings usually happens when a club (over)achieves for a period, then hits a slump (getting promoted is the safest way to get sacked). Form will always fluctuate. Unless the circumstances are very dire (Ramos), it's not just about losing a few games. Hoddle and Jol were sacked because they couldn't take us forward IMO, they didn't have what was required. AVB and Redknapp made their positions untenable off the pitch. Pleat and Sherwood were always going to be caretakers unless they pulled off something spectacular.

 

[Baleforce]

its not just a case of comparison with other boards, we can still critique performance in isolation

this isn't a black and white argument, just because ENIC have done a lot of good doesn't make them immune from any other criticism (and I for one do feel it's a little like that on GG sometimes, might just be due to me tending to be on the other side of the argument though)

if you walk into a pub and the only beer they have is john smiths, it doesn't mean that john smiths is suddenly a good beer because there isn't anything better

 

[Jordinho]

But would you get rid of John Smith's entirely just so you can try something else? That's where looking at other pubs/clubs comes in handy.

 

[jimmyb]

The majority of those clubs have experienced relegation and promotion where you tend to get a lot of sackings/new appointments. With the exception of Chelsea, when you compare it to our rivals it does appear quite high.

Hang on, a minute......

If your argument is that Spurs are failing to a degree because they too often change manager, then you can't excuse other clubs for changing managers as often, or more often, on the basis that they are failing to an even greater degree. You can't eat your cake and have it!

Everything is relative. Spurs might not have the excuse of having been relegated but that's only because they have loftier ambitions than merely avoiding relegation. And if those ambitions aren't fulfilled, then the chairman faces the same choice as that faced by those chairmen whose ambition is merely to keep their club in, or return it to, the Premier League - namely, whether to stick or twist with regard to the manager.

 

[Baleforce]

it might come to that, but maybe a quiet word from the landlord to jack dee and the smiths might improve, start with some 2 star reviews on untappd maybe

there doesn't have to be a drastic action to everything, beers can change, I'm sure we all remember when Heineken was 3.7% and on the shelf next to the likes of Skol and carling, but they had to want to change, had to want to be that premium golden product that it now is, the brewery was already there, they use the same water and hops, it was just a slight change in attitude

(apologies for this analogy, it's already out of control, I started it and I've nearly lost track of what the pub is, who the beer is and who's drinking it)

 

[billyiddo]

^ :lol:

Have been in a similar situation on here many a time before

 

[Jurgen the German]

Hang on, a minute......

If your argument is that Spurs are failing to a degree because they too often change manager, then you can't excuse other clubs for changing managers as often, or more often, on the basis that they are failing to an even greater degree. You can't eat your cake and have it!

Everything is relative. Spurs might not have the excuse of having been relegated but that's only because they have loftier ambitions than merely avoiding relegation. And if those ambitions aren't fulfilled, then the chairman faces the same choice as that faced by those chairmen whose ambition is merely to keep their club in, or return it to, the Premier League - namely, whether to stick or twist with regard to the manager.

Erm, where did I use the word "failing"? Point to a post where I said this.

I merely mentioned that compared to our rivals, we have employed a lot of managers, most of whom have been deemed not good enough.

Do you genuinely believe that Poch will not be sacked if we finish 7th for example this season? I would love to believ that Levy will keep faith with him if the signs are good but I remain unconvinced.

 

[Jurgen the German]

^ :lol:

Have been in a similar situation on here many a time before

I could use a beer after the last few pages :lol:

 

[billyiddo]

Erm, where did I use the word "failing"? Point to a post where I said this.

I merely mentioned that compared to our rivals, we have employed a lot of managers, most of whom have been deemed not good enough.

Do you genuinely believe that Poch will not be sacked if we finish 7th for example this season? I would love to believ that Levy will keep faith with him if the signs are good but I remain unconvinced.

I believe barring a failure of epic proportions or a behind the scenes falling out Pochettino will be here next season (and beyond) Levy's main talking point upon his appointment was developing players/a style of play/entertaining football - and he was given a 5 year deal to boot. All that points towards league position in his first season being of secondary importance, to me at least (and within reason of course)

Newspaper reports/ITK etc has hinted that it's very much a case of the players being on trial and not the manager - i think this would make sense and tie in to our summer transfer activity - low profile signings to bolster weak spots in the squad with a view to letting the MP assess the squad over the season - trim the fat next summer and bring in the players required to improve the first team.

 

[markysimmo]

 

[Denmark Spur]

According to posters over at SC, there were " Levy Out " banners shown at the game yesterday.

Stewards took them away within a minute of them appearing.

Honestly think we will see more of that in the future if results do not improve.

 

[Andyandy]

I believe barring a failure of epic proportions or a behind the scenes falling out Pochettino will be here next season (and beyond) Levy's main talking point upon his appointment was developing players/a style of play/entertaining football - and he was given a 5 year deal to boot. All that points towards league position in his first season being of secondary importance, to me at least (and within reason of course)

Newspaper reports/ITK etc has hinted that it's very much a case of the players being on trial and not the manager - i think this would make sense and tie in to our summer transfer activity - low profile signings to bolster weak spots in the squad with a view to letting the MP assess the squad over the season - trim the fat next summer and bring in the players required to improve the first team.

I would love to think that MP has been given a season to make decisions about his/the squad. However the reality is that he is a very easy spacegoat for the failure of others prior to his appointment.

For me, there are no longer any excuses for Levy's mismanagement since he fired Redknapp. The appointment of three coaches, signing of ten players who are almost all worth less than we paid, reinstalling a DOF (Baldini) etc. all mistakes which are now costing the club many millions of pounds.

MP and Baldini are his men, he chose them, he tore up the successful model, he chose not to appoint an experienced coach, he reinstalled his DoF system that failed beforehand. If MP is fired this season then Levy has to resign himself - no question.