It was only semi recently that I said they had a better team than us and was greeted with absolute fury, people couldn't accept it. I wondered at the time if they'd been watching them play games, because if so you can see how much better they are on average on a technical level. Most of their players do the basics well, they have intelligent footballers capable of playing a modern style to a high standard. Nothing exceptional but all good pieces forming a strong unit.
-
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...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
It was only semi recently that I said they had a better team than us and was greeted with absolute fury, people couldn't accept it. I wondered at the time if they'd been watching them play games, because if so you can see how much better they are on average on a technical level. Most of their players do the basics well, they have intelligent footballers capable of playing a modern style to a high standard. Nothing exceptional but all good pieces forming a strong unit.
Not setting a bar...... Just comparimg to the teams around us.
No sense point comparing us to teams that occupy a different financial stratosphere.
Dunno tbh..... Saka + 1.
On their day a number of their players are still pretty shit..... Zhaka, Partey, Lacazette, Nketia. Still think their FBs are over-rated.
Regardless, I think it's clear the point I'm making...... Most teams have key players.
But we're comparing our team to West Ham's .. we're in a pretty different financial stratosphere to them! We're closer to Woolwich (ahead aren't we, by revenue? with the much lower wage budget..) and again, if they lose their 2 key players I think you'll still find a well functioning unit which isn't a chore to watch. That's the difference there IMO.
Without Kane and Son, I'd back most mid-table sides against us. Not sure I'd say the same for Woolwich without Saka & Smith Rowe for example. They'd obviously struggle because yes, everyone misses key players, but I fancy the team as a whole to play to a higher level.
It was a good performance from most, but on another day we could have conceded three or four in the first half to Gundogan and Cancelo alone.
It probably helps that they are willing to play "creative" midfielders, whereas we ship those out and cling on to the likes of Stodgeberg and Wanks...
Probably the most important area of the pitch in terms of dictating the way the whole team is going to play, and we are routinely left with no alternative but to play a pair of cloggers who offer absolutely nothing in a progressive sense.
But it's ok because Conte relies on his wing backs as the attacking driving force in his sides an...
Oh bugger.
Yeah, this is true. In Smith Rowe, Saka and Odegaard they have an excellent creative trio. Kulusevski was at least a good pick up in this regard, he seems to be able to control and pass a football reliably, even if certain elements of his game are a little unsuited to the Prem.
Hopefully we revolutionise our wing backs in the summer .. we could sign 4 and it wouldn't be overkill.
Maybe, but we'll be severely hindered by the fact that Conte is rigidly sticking to a system that sees any kind of footballing ability restricted solely to the front 3.
3 of our 4 wingbacks are absolutely dog shit, there is literally no point in persisting with Emerson and Sessegnon any further, nothing has improved with them and it doesn't seem likely it will, Doherty is probably the same story but has the benefit of seemingly being marginally more useful in an attacking sense than Emerson.
I'm losing respect for Conte tbh for consistently putting them out, thought given his history of converting the likes of Perisic/Moses etc to wing backs that he might have thought outside the box and used Lucas and Bergwijn in the interim until we can ship out the shite and replace them with proper players (yeah right...). Even more baffling when you consider we were after Adama to play at rwb...
I thought maybe we were about to see it last night but then Lucas took Kulusevski's spot and Kulusevski went to rwb.
Honestly, probably would have worked out better had Lucas came on instead of Wanks and then moved Kulusevski into cm for Bentancur, at least we would have had someone that can play a bit of football in the middle, then Emerson off for Begwijn to really go for it.
Instead we have to suffer Stodge/Wanks and an inverted wingback with no pace, what is it about this club that causes managers to lose all sense???
We have a striker buddy, what do you want us to do, go out and buy another?
So that we have 2??
Are you some kind of fucking madman???
What drugs are you on????
Dele.....
We won't come summer.....
The diff between us and these club is far less significant than it is if we're to be compared man-for-man vs City, Chavs & Utd.
The point I responded to was about man-for-man strength of squads.... Not whether or not they are a better functioning unit.
They have a better functioning unit because man for man the average level of their players is higher. Their backline is more comfortable with the ball (ditto the keeper) for example, their midfield has a much better balance to it than ours, going forward they're weak at CF but their supporting cast are better footballers than ours. A combined XI made by neutrals would not go well for us, and I'd be surprised if any of our players other than Son & Kane made it.
I get your general point (than anyone is severely weakened when you take out 2 key players) but this applies much more to us than Woolwich, or almost any side up there other than West Ham, who have far less resources than we do. Which says a lot about how we've been using our level of resources, really.
Might have been you (can't recall for sure), but someone was saying a couple of months ago, how it's unfair to compare our trf activity (or lack of) to Arse & Utd as Conte had (at the time pre-Jan) none of his own players and that it's only right that he be blessed with the chance to ring some changes (whereas Arteta & Ole didn't need to)....... So on that same basis, doesn't that prove a factor in what you're talking about (balance/unit etc.)?
Not to say Arteta is a better coach (he obv. isn't), but he's had 4/5 windows (?) and 2 1/2 years with those players. That will be playing a significant role in them operating better as a unit.
Beyond that, I think you just rate some of their individuals more than I do.
Depending what you allude to by supporting cast; I'd say Kane, Son, Lucas, Berg & Kulu stands again against their mix of ST/AMs.
IMO, the main diff is they have Odegard & ESR, and we don't really have anyone of that kind.
Yes, this makes sense. If Conte gets 150m to spend net in the summer then great .. but do any of us expect anywhere near that?
Seems we do rate them differently if you think Kulu, Berg or Lucas get near their XI. Who out of Saka, Smith Rowe or Odegaard would any of those 3 be dislodging from the team?
Lack of options.
Even all your suggestions are all hopes and moving guys into positions that they don't naturally play because we don't have a variety of players to fit roles that we need.
Against Burnley we see again another massive indictment of how poorly our team is constructed.
Against a parked bus we had no player in the starting 11 or on the bench that can unlock a defense with passing. Kane was the closest but of course then the problem is we are missing someone up front to convert chances.
Down a goal we had zero options on the bench to bring in to help with goal scoring. Bergwijn and Moura both who have struggled to score in the PL were our top 2 options.
Also down a goal we had zero options in midfield or attack to bring on anyone who can change our attack, formation, tactics.
Conte hasn't all of a sudden lost all football sense he has gone to a team where tactics mean nothing because of the squad he has available.
We've spent roughly the same as them on trfs over the last 3 seasons.....
Point I'm making is if they'd all been Conte players and coached by Conte for 2.5 years (as has been the case with Arteta) you can bet we'd look more balanced and more of a unit than we do.... Probably a much better team than they are as Conte is by far the superior coach.
Ergo; there's a major factor here outside of how good their individuals are (or aren't).
You mis-understood what I said mate....
Kane, Son, Lucas, Berg & Kulu >>> Lacazette, Saka, Pepe, Martineli & Nkettia (IMO).
By "supporting cast" I assume you to mean their attacking depth.
As for Odegard & ESR; I literally just said, and "we don't really have anyone of that kind."
Maybe Pochettino was that damn good. It’s unbelievable how this team regressed in three years.
Similar ish sure, although again with the caveat of a significantly lower wage budget. But the point was we now have our new, long term (we hope) manager in place and he needs similar backing to Arteta who got 120m in net spend during the summer. Otherwise what's the point?
I agree Conte with more time may have this team in better shape. But Woolwich didn't start looking better till they shifted players who didn't suit Arteta, before that no amount of coaching would've improved them. We will resemble a well coached Conte team when we have players who can play Conte football, i.e not players like Emerson.
Gotcha. But the point stands that starting XI wise, they're looking a lot healthier than us. Their depth isn't great (and a few of our players would be useful to them) but that starting 11 is well balanced and fits the managers ideas.