Some thoughts on Ange:
> influential in persuading players to sign. Unfortunately the issue there is that it has been a very mixed bag (for every Bergvall, there's a Dragusin). But still, thank you for Bergvall if you did make the difference there.
>talent id in general has been also very mixed - aside from the signings, failing to play Spence for so long looks very poor, despite the spin he puts on it. I give him credit for Solanke.
>he achieved buy-in and loyalty from senior players like Son, Romero and Kulusevski. Of course this is now under significant strain. But vs Bournemouth I could see the players still trying at least.
>the early football had an identity, and one that was in line with Spurs' heritage - attacking football, even if a bit too Ossie Ardiles-like for some. If a good version of Angeball is going to come back, it needs to start very soon. Unsure if its flaws are too deep tactically, or if he can adapt.
>started well with the media, but now feeling the pressure. I do like that he publicly defends the players, unlike some of his predecessors.
I realise any hint of balance/praise for Ange is met with howls of derision on here. It's probably too late for him anyway, too much damage done to recover from. But I think we may as well keep him until summer and reassess then at this point.