• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Management Poll: Who do you want most as our next manager?

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Who would be your first choice?

  • Graham Potter

  • Scott Parker

  • Ten Hag

  • Rafa Benitez

  • None of the above - comment below

  • *Marcelo Bielsa

  • *Ralf Rangnick

  • *Ralph Hasenhüttl

  • *Steven Gerrard

  • *Julen Lopetegui

  • *Christophe Galtier

  • *Marcelo Gallardo

  • *Oliver Glasner

  • *Ryan Mason

  • *Maurizio Sarri

  • *Gian Piero Gasperini

  • *Mauricio Pochettino

  • *Antonio Conte

  • *Eddie Howe

  • *Gareth Southgate

  • *Nuno Espirito Santo

  • *Paulo Fonseca

  • *Gennaro Gattuso

  • *Ernesto Valverde

Results are only viewable after voting.
Juicy Sushi said:
I like doing my own data digging on playing styles to see what different managers have to offer. Yes, xG is nice, but there are other things too I think which show a manager's style and tactical thinking. If the brief really is possession-based attacking football, then it should be something that shows up in their body of work. So I went and looked up a few different things for different managers to get an idea of what they look like, and then see how they compared across Europe's Top 5 Leagues (so, England, France, Spain, Germany, and Italy, totaling 98 teams), to get a rough idea of everyone in a single group. All data is from FBref. I included one guy not mentioned by anyone who might be a good fit, and I included Nagelsmann to see why he was so highly rated.

So, first off, the classic xG. I wanted to see it as a constant rate, so it's per 90, but I also wanted to see both for and against (xG/90 and xGA/90). A guy with a good difference could be a mediocre attacking team but brilliant defensively, or vice versa. I'm also including Shots/90 to get an idea of which guys coach teams to do more active attacking, or leaky sieve defending. We're Spurs, and we want people to be on the front foot all game long, but good teams don't give up a lot of shots in return.

Potter xG/90 1.43 (33rd) xGA/90 0.98 (13th) S/90 12.82 (28th) SA/90 8.76 (9th)
Galtier xG/90 1.33 (44th) xGA/90 0.70 (1st) S/90 12.94 (27th) SA/90 8.77 (11th)
Fonseca xG/90 1.84 (13th) xGA/90 1.31 (48th) S/90 13.79 (18th) SA/90 10.15 (24th)
Lopetegui xG/90 1.36 (40th) xGA/90 0.91 (6th) S/90 12.00 (38th) SA/90 8.76 (10th)
Kovacs xG/90 1.80 (14th) xGA/90 0.91 (7th) S/90 12.49 (31st) SA/90 8.60 (7th)
Nagelsmann xG/90 1.90 (10th) xGA/90 0.81 (3rd) S/90 15.68 (4th) SA/90 7.26 (2nd)

So, Potter combines an top 1/3 in Europe attack to a roughly top 10 defence, with Galtier's attack taking about as many shots as Potter's team, but from worse places, and he combines that with an in some respects, best in Europe defence. Fonseca's team attacks better, but also gives up more shots, and those happen to be quite good shots. Lopetegui is in the same region as Potter and Galtier in defence, but takes fewer, crappier shots. Kovacs manages roughly the same shots as Potter, but of much better quality, while being maybe slightly ahead on defence. Nagelsmann combines a lot of good shots with giving up very few, crappy shots.

In terms of possession, I wanted to know how much of the ball they had (%), but I also want to know who is passing into the final third more. That's just a stylistic thing, but the Spurs way is heavy on the possession, and heavy on the pass and move FORWARD. So, I wanted to know who was making the most progressive passes forward per 90. I also wanted to know who was the most active in the final third, so I wanted to see who had the most touches in the final third. And finally, we know we want a pressing team, so which team had more successful pressures per 90.

Potter Possession 51.5 (40th) ProgPass/90 34.5 (40th) F1/3T/90 171.3 (22nd) Press 43.1 (33rd )
Galtier Possession 54.1 (24th) ProgPass/90 41.9 (11th) F1/3T/90 174.6 (18th) Press 42.3 (37th)
Fonseca Possession 52.3 (35th) ProgPass/90 36.6 (27th) F1/3T/90 156.5 (36th) Press 41.0 (50th)
Lopetegui Possession 61.7 (5th) ProgPass/90 35.3 (37th) F1/3T/90 169.8 (23rd) Press 39.8 (66th)
Kovacs Possession 56.1 (17th) ProgPass/90 42.2 (9th) F1/3T/90 169.3 (24th) Press 46.6 (14th)
Nagelsmann Possession 59.9 (11th) ProgPass/90 48.8 (8th) F1/3T/90 201.5(10th) Press 51.3 (3rd)

So, Nagelsmann has more possession, plays the ball forward more, has his team doing more in the final third, and pressing more than anyone else. So, the stylistic gold star goes to him. Galtier's Lille passes the ball forward much more often than Potter's Brighton, with slightly higher possession, but Potter's team is doing stuff more often in the final third than Lille, and is pressing more. Fonseca's team is in-between Potter and Galtier on posession and forward passing, but does significantly less in the final third, and presses less as well. Lopetegui's Seville has a LOT more of the ball, but passes it forward and uses it in the final third only as much as Potter's Brighton, and presses massively less. Wenger's infamous sterile possession? Kovacs has more possession than Potter or Galtier, passes it forward as much as Galtier, but works with it in the final third as much as Potter, and presses significantly more.

So, your mileage may vary, and opinions will differ. I think Kovacs is interesting as an unmentioned guy, but if Monaco are seeking to replace him with Galtier, then if he is available he could be a very interesting choice, who seems to tick the same boxes that Nagelsmann or Potter do. Fonseca and Lopetegui look interesting, but flawed. Lopetegui's team looking much less proactive than we'd like, and Fonseca perhaps having too much of the Bobby Martinez about him (as in, we'd get put the sword by a good team too often).

Potter is interesting for me in that despite working with Brighton's resources, he is getting a team to play like a "big team." Stylistically, they very much play like what we want a European giant to do, and it seems like bar a complete inability for their forwards to even hit the broadside of a barn, they would be impressively far up the table and he would be getting a lot more attention.

Even if some egos in our squad might be put off, I think those players might be leaving anyway. If they're willing to give it a go, I think Potter stands out as a very good match. If they aren't then we need to make sure we have someone quite ruthless as a forward to make use of what he would get the team to do.

But don't sleep on Niko Kovacs. He might be a great dark horse idea.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
FYI for future analysis, there is a table function here on the forum. Makes for a better presentation and an easier read. But love this stuff even if it doesn't fit my narrative!
 
Juicy Sushi said:
I like doing my own data digging on playing styles to see what different managers have to offer. Yes, xG is nice, but there are other things too I think which show a manager's style and tactical thinking. If the brief really is possession-based attacking football, then it should be something that shows up in their body of work. So I went and looked up a few different things for different managers to get an idea of what they look like, and then see how they compared across Europe's Top 5 Leagues (so, England, France, Spain, Germany, and Italy, totaling 98 teams), to get a rough idea of everyone in a single group. All data is from FBref. I included one guy not mentioned by anyone who might be a good fit, and I included Nagelsmann to see why he was so highly rated.

So, first off, the classic xG. I wanted to see it as a constant rate, so it's per 90, but I also wanted to see both for and against (xG/90 and xGA/90). A guy with a good difference could be a mediocre attacking team but brilliant defensively, or vice versa. I'm also including Shots/90 to get an idea of which guys coach teams to do more active attacking, or leaky sieve defending. We're Spurs, and we want people to be on the front foot all game long, but good teams don't give up a lot of shots in return.

Potter xG/90 1.43 (33rd) xGA/90 0.98 (13th) S/90 12.82 (28th) SA/90 8.76 (9th)
Galtier xG/90 1.33 (44th) xGA/90 0.70 (1st) S/90 12.94 (27th) SA/90 8.77 (11th)
Fonseca xG/90 1.84 (13th) xGA/90 1.31 (48th) S/90 13.79 (18th) SA/90 10.15 (24th)
Lopetegui xG/90 1.36 (40th) xGA/90 0.91 (6th) S/90 12.00 (38th) SA/90 8.76 (10th)
Kovacs xG/90 1.80 (14th) xGA/90 0.91 (7th) S/90 12.49 (31st) SA/90 8.60 (7th)
Nagelsmann xG/90 1.90 (10th) xGA/90 0.81 (3rd) S/90 15.68 (4th) SA/90 7.26 (2nd)

So, Potter combines an top 1/3 in Europe attack to a roughly top 10 defence, with Galtier's attack taking about as many shots as Potter's team, but from worse places, and he combines that with an in some respects, best in Europe defence. Fonseca's team attacks better, but also gives up more shots, and those happen to be quite good shots. Lopetegui is in the same region as Potter and Galtier in defence, but takes fewer, crappier shots. Kovacs manages roughly the same shots as Potter, but of much better quality, while being maybe slightly ahead on defence. Nagelsmann combines a lot of good shots with giving up very few, crappy shots.

In terms of possession, I wanted to know how much of the ball they had (%), but I also want to know who is passing into the final third more. That's just a stylistic thing, but the Spurs way is heavy on the possession, and heavy on the pass and move FORWARD. So, I wanted to know who was making the most progressive passes forward per 90. I also wanted to know who was the most active in the final third, so I wanted to see who had the most touches in the final third. And finally, we know we want a pressing team, so which team had more successful pressures per 90.

Potter Possession 51.5 (40th) ProgPass/90 34.5 (40th) F1/3T/90 171.3 (22nd) Press 43.1 (33rd )
Galtier Possession 54.1 (24th) ProgPass/90 41.9 (11th) F1/3T/90 174.6 (18th) Press 42.3 (37th)
Fonseca Possession 52.3 (35th) ProgPass/90 36.6 (27th) F1/3T/90 156.5 (36th) Press 41.0 (50th)
Lopetegui Possession 61.7 (5th) ProgPass/90 35.3 (37th) F1/3T/90 169.8 (23rd) Press 39.8 (66th)
Kovacs Possession 56.1 (17th) ProgPass/90 42.2 (9th) F1/3T/90 169.3 (24th) Press 46.6 (14th)
Nagelsmann Possession 59.9 (11th) ProgPass/90 48.8 (8th) F1/3T/90 201.5(10th) Press 51.3 (3rd)

So, Nagelsmann has more possession, plays the ball forward more, has his team doing more in the final third, and pressing more than anyone else. So, the stylistic gold star goes to him. Galtier's Lille passes the ball forward much more often than Potter's Brighton, with slightly higher possession, but Potter's team is doing stuff more often in the final third than Lille, and is pressing more. Fonseca's team is in-between Potter and Galtier on posession and forward passing, but does significantly less in the final third, and presses less as well. Lopetegui's Seville has a LOT more of the ball, but passes it forward and uses it in the final third only as much as Potter's Brighton, and presses massively less. Wenger's infamous sterile possession? Kovacs has more possession than Potter or Galtier, passes it forward as much as Galtier, but works with it in the final third as much as Potter, and presses significantly more.

So, your mileage may vary, and opinions will differ. I think Kovacs is interesting as an unmentioned guy, but if Monaco are seeking to replace him with Galtier, then if he is available he could be a very interesting choice, who seems to tick the same boxes that Nagelsmann or Potter do. Fonseca and Lopetegui look interesting, but flawed. Lopetegui's team looking much less proactive than we'd like, and Fonseca perhaps having too much of the Bobby Martinez about him (as in, we'd get put the sword by a good team too often).

Potter is interesting for me in that despite working with Brighton's resources, he is getting a team to play like a "big team." Stylistically, they very much play like what we want a European giant to do, and it seems like bar a complete inability for their forwards to even hit the broadside of a barn, they would be impressively far up the table and he would be getting a lot more attention.

Even if some egos in our squad might be put off, I think those players might be leaving anyway. If they're willing to give it a go, I think Potter stands out as a very good match. If they aren't then we need to make sure we have someone quite ruthless as a forward to make use of what he would get the team to do.

But don't sleep on Niko Kovacs. He might be a great dark horse idea.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

One more thing to add, I think these numbers are great as they show you the blueprint of how a manager plays.

But we have to account for the league in which they play in. RBL for example play in a league that is wide open, attack attack attack, so the numbers are going to be different, especially when considering quality in each of these squads.

The point still remains, the blueprints are there via the stats.
 
FightingIllini said:
Yeah but why don't we hire someone with a good CV?

Like, I buy that Brighton have had just poor luck to not have better results this season, and that xG reflects that.

But....that's the best argument? We're going to hire a guy because advanced stats say his relegation fodder team isn't THAT bad?

If playing swashbuckling expansive football across multiple divisions to no particular effect is our criteria, Ian Holloway would be happy to take the job, I'm sure.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
or bring Ossie back.
 
TheRealTI said:
it's hyperbole to say Saints were a lot better or more accomplished than Brighton. Yes they were upper midtable as opposed to lower midtable.

And are you suggesting the Potter hasn't made players like Bissouma, Lampety and Sanchez look like great players? He is getting the absolute most out of that Brighton side and has them playing great football while doing so. You could say the exact same things about Poch's time.

The point is you need to get the right guy with the right vision who can get the most out of the side you have.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Lamptey grew up in the Chelsea Academy, Potter has nothing to do with his development.
 
FightingIllini said:
I don't know if any of them are better choices than Potter, but it seems to me that Thomas Frank at Brentford, Daniel Farke at Norwich, and I'm sorry but Steven Gerrard all have the same sort of attractive football and player development characteristics and no one is mentioning them at all.

Regardless, if Max Allegri would take the job I don't understand how any of these nobodies are even a discussion.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Gerrard is done to death. Not worth it. He could win the champions league next season and he still wouldn't be worth it because the moment the bin dippers phone he's gone.
 
FightingIllini said:
I don't know if any of them are better choices than Potter, but it seems to me that Thomas Frank at Brentford, Daniel Farke at Norwich, and I'm sorry but Steven Gerrard all have the same sort of attractive football and player development characteristics and no one is mentioning them at all.

Regardless, if Max Allegri would take the job I don't understand how any of these nobodies are even a discussion.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Allegri has been discussed a lot. The guy can't speak English for shit and has never worked outside of Italy in any capacity. He's a great manager... in Serie A, as Emery is great in La Liga, but some managers don't travel well, and I definitely think Allegri is likely to fall in to that category.
 
Paul Gascoigne said:
Cannot understand why Potter is SO popular.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Everyone jumping on the bandwagon. A few stats about attacking and everybody is drooling. I'd rather look at the fact that he's probably won about 20 games in two seasons. If we're going shopping down the bottom half of the premier league table then what nuno or dyche has done is far more impressive to me.
 
Cravenspurs said:
Sure he does. He gave him the chance.

By that logic, Pep gets no credit for Foden.

Poch get's no credit for Kane.

Shit, by that logic, no transfer who succeeds at their new club can be linked to the current coaching they are receiving. Their success is all due to their upbringing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
He picked him, he played well so he kept picking him.

If selecting him is the only criteria for developing his game then I guess Potter is also responsible for ruining the big money (for them) Brazilian guy they signed at about the same time then sacked off to Austria on loan.
 
Yiddy said:
Everyone jumping on the bandwagon. A few stats about attacking and everybody is drooling. I'd rather look at the fact that he's probably won about 20 games in two seasons. If we're going shopping down the bottom half of the premier league table then what nuno or dyche has done is far more impressive to me.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's also the style of it though. Potter has played attacking, possession-based football with a shit team and stayed up. That is what is unusual. Most small teams playing that style get relegated in short order (hello Daniel Farke's Norwich!). Those that stay up usually park the bus and play Burnley-esque bitter, defensive football.

Which we don't want. We've had that, and it was properly shit. If we want attacking, high-possession football we need a guy who can coach that, to the level we require in the modern game. There are a few guys who do that, and most of them already work at top clubs who are in a better place than we are right now. So they're not coming to us. Of those who are potentially available, Potter stands out for both attainability (it's fucking Brighton), and potential upside (first big job, so might catch fire like Poche did, or Tuchel at Dortmund).

Not many alternative offer that. None of the people available for us are a sure thing.
 
FightingIllini said:
I don't know if any of them are better choices than Potter, but it seems to me that Thomas Frank at Brentford, Daniel Farke at Norwich, and I'm sorry but Steven Gerrard all have the same sort of attractive football and player development characteristics and no one is mentioning them at all.

Regardless, if Max Allegri would take the job I don't understand how any of these nobodies are even a discussion.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Agree on Allegri... And if these nobodies are in the discussion, why is Mason just dismissed?
 
Juicy Sushi said:
It's also the style of it though. Potter has played attacking, possession-based football with a shit team and stayed up. That is what is unusual. Most small teams playing that style get relegated in short order (hello Daniel Farke's Norwich!). Those that stay up usually park the bus and play Burnley-esque bitter, defensive football.

Which we don't want. We've had that, and it was properly shit. If we want attacking, high-possession football we need a guy who can coach that, to the level we require in the modern game. There are a few guys who do that, and most of them already work at top clubs who are in a better place than we are right now. So they're not coming to us. Of those who are potentially available, Potter stands out for both attainability (it's fucking Brighton), and potential upside (first big job, so might catch fire like Poche did, or Tuchel at Dortmund).

Not many alternative offer that. None of the people available for us are a sure thing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
OK, it's only a 2 game sample, but attacking, high possession football seems to be exactly what Ryan wants us to play.
 
Jenny Talia said:
OK, it's only a 2 game sample, but attacking, high possession football seems to be exactly what Ryan wants us to play.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yup. But as you said, it's a 2-game sample. Also, I am not sure if it is Ryan, Chris Powell, or Ledley who is making the biggest difference. Perhaps the three of them could actually be the coaching team we need. We don't have enough info to make that judgement. Of the choices who seem to be on the table that we have that kind of information for, Potter seems like one of the best options, to me. I realize that others will have different opinions, and that is fine. But I can only call it like I see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top