Really? He blew a two goal lead.
Can see it now...
Reguilon 7' (OG)
-
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...
Management So (hypothetically) who replaces Ange then?
- Thread starter Shadydan
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Really? He blew a two goal lead.
Reguilon 7' (OG)
Again, what I'm objecting to is this nonsense rationale that because Levy has failed to supply the investment needed at the most important times (and a host of other valid complaints, including high ticket prices) it is:
1. Futile to sack the worst performing manager in at least 2 generations.
2. Solely Levy's fault we're having the poor season we're having.
I've said it a dozen times - it's Levy's fault we aren't 4th or better, and Levy's fault we're not winning trophies.
It's Ange's fault that we're 13th and have had our worst 18 month run in the league in nearly 20 years, whilst having our largest net spend in transfer activity and our largest wage budgets ever. (Our 2 season wage bill under Ange is ±£266M, much higher than any 2 season period in club history).
Levy needs to go, 100%. But it's asinine to pretend like replacing Ange won't have a positive effect, even if Levy stays, or that keeping Ange would be positive if Levy were replaced.
Jol, Redknapp, AVB, Sherwood, Poch, Mourinho, Mason, Nuno, Conte - all more successful with significantly less financial investment working under the same Chairman than Ange.
So, yes, things can be a lot better even with Levy around.
Both things can be true: Levy needs to be replaced, at minimum as the ultimate authority on the football side, and Ange needs to be sacked and replaced by a competent manager.
He's not in the EL squad so not sure even Spurs could pull that one off
It's hilarious to see those who were, or still are, in Ange bandwagon go "elbows too pointy; 2/10" when it comes to other managers. Let's hold others the most extreme standards while getting all excited when Ange wins a football match or two with a squad worth hundreds of millions of pounds. There's endowment effect, and there's this.
"Anybody better than Ange" would admittedly be an extremely weak and loose criterion in choosing the next manager, but anybody who thinks/had previously thought Ange is the man should have no qualms about most of the people mentioned here.If you actually find it in yourself to believe in Ange you can believe in pretty much anybody.
"Anybody better than Ange" would admittedly be an extremely weak and loose criterion in choosing the next manager, but anybody who thinks/had previously thought Ange is the man should have no qualms about most of the people mentioned here.If you actually find it in yourself to believe in Ange you can believe in pretty much anybody.
Last edited:
Sure, he should've smashed Tottenham 4-0 with fucking Christie and Adams in midfield. They also have Lewis fucking Cook, proper player mate. What about that guy Hill, he's miles better than Danso or Romero, right?
They have some shit players and they still slapped us around. If Kepa didn't gift us a penalty we most likely would've lost and deservedly so.
I agree mate, I was so keen to keep Ange but it's gone too far.
New owners who are interested in football and a new manager with a plan of action.
Id go with Benítez until the end of season, while we're still in the Europa anyway. He's won it and much more, and as an interim appointment would be better than Mason.
I'm just ever skeptical we're going to get new owners. Happy the protests seem better organized now, hoping they effect change.
zero chance
I'd like to see someone who is first and foremost, a coach. The amount of young talent we are seemingly stock piling should really point to getting a top class coach who has shown to play players in their natural position and be able to develop young talent.
You could say Frank, McKenna & Iraola fit that remit.
I'm not overly sold on Frank for some reason. McKenna is a bit of a punt at this stage, though clearly a good coach and has Spurs connections and Iraola is flavour of the month for good reason.
I'd imagine it will be a coach with premier league experience at the very least.
As Iraola got 20 goals out of Solanke last season, and thats generally how you win games (scoring goals) then I'd lean in to him. He also had over 550 playing appearences. Though only a 39% win ratio across his managing career, albeit with 'un-fashionable' sides.
You could say Frank, McKenna & Iraola fit that remit.
I'm not overly sold on Frank for some reason. McKenna is a bit of a punt at this stage, though clearly a good coach and has Spurs connections and Iraola is flavour of the month for good reason.
I'd imagine it will be a coach with premier league experience at the very least.
As Iraola got 20 goals out of Solanke last season, and thats generally how you win games (scoring goals) then I'd lean in to him. He also had over 550 playing appearences. Though only a 39% win ratio across his managing career, albeit with 'un-fashionable' sides.
Pure speculation on this point- we can’t know this, but it doesn’t make sense that they’d be bad simply playing a different system. The somewhat slower Danso would prob do better in a low block system.
So just looked and Bourneouth has averaged 46% possession this year. One of the big complaints against Nuno, Conte, and Jose was lack of possession. Could we really deal with this style of play without losing our shit?
Not speculation in anyway.
They are pacey, ball carriers. You lose their biggest strengths by asking them to sit deep and head it out of the box and clear crosses for 85 mins.
Yeah, if we’re winning games.
It’s if we lose that people will lose their shit
Danso is not a pacy ball-carrier. I don’t know where you are getting this from but it seems made up.
How straightforward is the relationship between possession and chance creation? More importantly, do the supporters of big clubs care more about the former or the latter? I assume it's the latter, because the former has no intrinsic value. No one wants to watch players pass it sideways and backwards all the time.In fact I'd argue that having possession for possession's sake, so that your opponents won't get a sniff of the ball, is a defensive measure. Best way to defend is to not give the ball away if you think about it.
We were the 2nd in possession last season behind City. Apparently we still are 3rd in this shambolic season. Yet a good portion of our matches during that period have been borefests, "great for the neutrals" gimmick notwithstanding. Teams let us have possession because they knew we weren't going to do anything creative with it, and they were proven right more often than not.
Van Gaal's United teams were an even bigger case in point. They actually led the league in possession in both of his seasons there. Yet their goal scoring numbers were hardly reflecting this. 4th highest goal scorers in his first season, and a shocking 10th in his second. Their fans were bored to tears watching that team pass the ball around aimlessly. They certainly don't remember him fondly or as an attacking minded manager just because they were setting new records in possession rates each week.
So no, possession by itself is not what makes or breaks a manager's reputation. Nor should it.
We were the 2nd in possession last season behind City. Apparently we still are 3rd in this shambolic season. Yet a good portion of our matches during that period have been borefests, "great for the neutrals" gimmick notwithstanding. Teams let us have possession because they knew we weren't going to do anything creative with it, and they were proven right more often than not.
Van Gaal's United teams were an even bigger case in point. They actually led the league in possession in both of his seasons there. Yet their goal scoring numbers were hardly reflecting this. 4th highest goal scorers in his first season, and a shocking 10th in his second. Their fans were bored to tears watching that team pass the ball around aimlessly. They certainly don't remember him fondly or as an attacking minded manager just because they were setting new records in possession rates each week.
So no, possession by itself is not what makes or breaks a manager's reputation. Nor should it.
Last edited:
I think our xG is slightly behind Bournemouth this year and the GD is I think one different.
Not much point in possession if you do bugger all with it..
