• 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!

Transfers Summer Transfer Thread 2023! - Closed (Maybe)

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Rate this window out of 10

  • 1

  • 2

  • 3

  • 4

  • 5

  • 6

  • 7

  • 8

  • 9

  • 10

Results are only viewable after voting.
Airfixx said:
...Not "I said I didn't want him", but "I said OK"

It's weird that people are trying to remove Conte from the process even more than he has.

"Club signing" is a meme that has gained WAY too much gravitas.

People whinge about needing a DOF and were in uproar when they felt we weren't going to get one........ DOFs have final say..... Suck it up.

Mo Salah was a "club signing"... Klopp said no, but they bought him anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, as far as I can tell from what he said - and let’s face it, he wasn’t always the easiest guy to understand - they asked him if it was ok to buy him and he ok’d it. But that quote in isolation could be taken as ‘OK, I’ll have him’ or ‘OK, you guys buy him and I’m sure he’ll come good in the future’.

The next part of what he says can’t be removed from the first and which is why I’m inclined to think it was more the latter:

“I said ‘OK, this player is young but he showed he can become a good, important player for us’. The club decided to buy him.”

To me that implies that that he thought Spence had future potential but not immediate value. The club decided to nab him before he came good and his price rose accordingly. They asked Conte to try him out. Conte obviously didn’t see enough from him so he was loaned out and everything’s got a bit blown out of proportion imo.

I agree that the manager should never get the whole say. That’s why a club has to have a philosophy and a vision to build around, ideally one that, if one manager doesn’t work out or chooses to leave, another of a similar mindset and style can slot in with as little disruption as possible (see Brighton). Unfortunately, that’s been absent this past few years as the man at the top has been incapable of implementing it.
 
LeParisien said:
From the beginning there were people politicising Conte’s appointment.

“Now we’ve hired a winner - there’s nowhere left to hide”

“What I like most about Conte is he tells it how it is - he won’t take any shit from Levy”.

Anything other than success was framed as a way to hold Levy accountable.

The problem with that of course is that it’s not as easy as hiring a successful manager and then success comes as some kind of natural consequence. There are more successful managers than trophies available.

The evidence (rather than narrative) tells us that Conte did not manage to coach the side effectively and that we never looked like a side where the talents available were being used well. To illustrate that, here are the teams Conte was knocked out by:

Chelsea
Middlesbrough
Nottingham Forest
Sheffield united
AC Milan

I’d say a top coach bringing some fairy dust should have been able to win 4 of those games. I’d expect even Nuno to have won 3 of those games.

The fact is Conte did a poor job. Conte wasn’t the only reason - Levy must also take responsibility… but the quality of the coaching was poor and has been since Poch left.

Fortunately the early signs seem to be very good under Ange. We won’t need to rely on fairy dust because we’ll be able to see the results of the coaching on the pitch.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The counter point to this of course is to argue that the teams league performance (traditionally a better measure of a teams overall form) under Conte most definitely improved - we'd finished 6th, 7th and were sitting in 9th on 15 points when he joined. We then finished 4th on 71 points which was not the norm and a huge improvement.

Even last season despite the sudden death of his fitness coach and two close friends and former colleagues which clearly affected his focus, injuries to his best CB, CM and every forward bar Kane, and his own serious ill health, he still left with the team in 4th place. They finished 8th.

So saying he did a poor job requires some nuance - I'm quite happy for the style of play to be criticized but the league placing doesn't suggest he did a poor job - in fact in recent years it's an outlier. And yes you can come back and argue about cups and style and rants with some validity which to my mind shows that it's not cut and dry.

As for the early signs being good for Ange, that will only be properly evaluated by results and, depending on people's personal desire for a particular brand of football, the style of play. We all hope Ange does the business of course but like any manager he'll be judged on results and not much else. Right now, there's really not much to evaluate outside of some nice sound bites about him in his first week - something Conte also received.
 
Jaynola said:
**Not claiming to be an expert or anything**

But Valverde is an incredible player. Hard-working, super tactically astute, can run/pass/score...I love him. Hed be a total ledge at Spurs in no time. Defo worth 80 bags.

Tchouameni no thanks, especially not at that price.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I would have a teenage throb on if we signed Valverde. As you say, he's as near to the complete player as you can get. Astonished that Madrid would want to sell him (if it's true of course).

Agree about Tchouameni as well.
 
Steve73 said:
The counter point to this of course is to argue that the teams league performance (traditionally a better measure of a teams overall form) under Conte most definitely improved - we'd finished 6th, 7th and were sitting in 9th on 15 points when he joined. We then finished 4th on 71 points which was not the norm and a huge improvement.

Even last season despite the sudden death of his fitness coach and two close friends and former colleagues which clearly affected his focus, injuries to his best CB, CM and every forward bar Kane, and his own serious ill health, he still left with the team in 4th place. They finished 8th.

So saying he did a poor job requires some nuance - I'm quite happy for the style of play to be criticized but the league placing doesn't suggest he did a poor job - in fact in recent years it's an outlier. And yes you can come back and argue about cups and style and rants with some validity which to my mind shows that it's not cut and dry.

As for the early signs being good for Ange, that will only be properly evaluated by results and, depending on people's personal desire for a particular brand of football, the style of play. We all hope Ange does the business of course but like any manager he'll be judged on results and not much else. Right now, there's really not much to evaluate outside of some nice sound bites about him in his first week - something Conte also received.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Conte's failure was in not doing anything to rebuild the squad - at best he kept it standing still, and sadly I cannot think of ANY player who looked better under Conte than before. And the short term view of immediate results, once past the 'one game a week' in his first half season is 'meh'

Conte's refusal to make the best use of players at his disposal, including those bought for him in summer - and lack of interest is coaching is what would result in him being dismissed in most businesses

No surprise he went and delighted he did.
 
To Dare Is To Do. said:
Can you post the data?

If you’re right I’m happy to rescind my comment.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

See yesterday's shit-fest.......

I've posted this info over and over but people still prefer the myth that Arse have vastly outspent us in recent seasons.

Fucking bored of it tbh.

(No knock on; you mate... I know you're not a bad-faith poster, but I"m suprised you've never clocked it before....)
 
Steve73 said:
The counter point to this of course is to argue that the teams league performance (traditionally a better measure of a teams overall form) under Conte most definitely improved - we'd finished 6th, 7th and were sitting in 9th on 15 points when he joined. We then finished 4th on 71 points which was not the norm and a huge improvement.

Even last season despite the sudden death of his fitness coach and two close friends and former colleagues which clearly affected his focus, injuries to his best CB, CM and every forward bar Kane, and his own serious ill health, he still left with the team in 4th place. They finished 8th.

So saying he did a poor job requires some nuance - I'm quite happy for the style of play to be criticized but the league placing doesn't suggest he did a poor job - in fact in recent years it's an outlier. And yes you can come back and argue about cups and style and rants with some validity which to my mind shows that it's not cut and dry.

As for the early signs being good for Ange, that will only be properly evaluated by results and, depending on people's personal desire for a particular brand of football, the style of play. We all hope Ange does the business of course but like any manager he'll be judged on results and not much else. Right now, there's really not much to evaluate outside of some nice sound bites about him in his first week - something Conte also received.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Nice post.

I agree that it’s of course too early to judge Ange.

My principal and somewhat devastating critique of Conte’s coaching is this. When he took over he put in place patterns of play that were unusual and effective. We picked up 5 more points than Woolwich in the 18 games Conte was in charge that season which is excellent given he came mid-season and there was cause for optimism.

The problem is that those SAME patterns of play were being used the following season. Specifically, as late as Milan away, Kane was still dropping into the space to receive the ball from the defence to play a first time flicked ball into the wide forward. To jog your memory, this was being used very early in Conte’s reign and was how we scored Kulu’s first goal for the club against Man City.

People praised Kjaer for his performance against Kane that night but the truth is it’s very easy to spot Conte’s patterns of play. They have shock factor for a few months but at any level where teams can scout, they CANNOT be used for one year +. They need to be constantly refreshed to retain that shock factor.

That’s one example but there are other examples of stale, predictable patterns of play being used. Part of my optimism was that after the first half season, he would renew the playing approach given a full preseason. He did not do that and there are no mitigating factors for that summer.

I know Conte had some mitigation - his last 6 months would have been tough on anyone. But this is also a profound criticism of his coaching methodology that runs deeper than any extenuating circumstances.

Ange’s philosophy is something like the opposite. Instead of intensely drilling specific patterns of play until they’re automatic, he is teaching positional play. It takes a lot longer for players to develop the cues and intelligence to play it well - some players probably aren’t capable - but when it’s in place it’s far harder to stop. It’s a more sustainable strategy.
 
Last edited:
Spursidol said:
Conte's failure was in not doing anything to rebuild the squad - at best he kept it standing still, and sadly I cannot think of ANY player who looked better under Conte than before. And the short term view of immediate results, once past the 'one game a week' in his first half season is 'meh'

Conte's refusal to make the best use of players at his disposal, including those bought for him in summer - and lack of interest is coaching is what would result in him being dismissed in most businesses

No surprise he went and delighted he did.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Exactly. Conte needed the perfect shaped player to fit into his tactical schema. He didn’t show any capacity to mold the players at his disposal into what he needed. That is a huge failing for a coach.
 
Joan Thomas said:
I know your replying to someone else mate but honestly, it's reached the point where people can't even mention the L word now for fear of being jumped all over by the mob on here... . Like you with your reply to the innocuous post by nicoclaesen .

It really does feel like the forum has been hijacked by a dozen or so self styled vigilantes trying to act the role of forum moderator and decide what is and isn't relevant.

The fact is, L***y and E**C are relevant to other threads. Particularly this one.

People are burying their heads in the sand and then getting angry and upset if others don't do the same.

You're new here. But I can tell you now there's an awful lot of good, passionate long standing posters who now rarely, if ever take part because quite frankly they're sick and tired of it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Im sure there are, and I'm sure they have a lot of great insight into Spurs.

I may be new to this forum but not to Spurs ones and certainly not to the internet. my experience has been that the bulk of threads and conversations the last few years. are filled with the same kind of comments over and over and over again. Match threads, players threads, transfer threads... Some are interesting and lend to insightful conversations, most are unfunny, repetitive, boring attempts at getting a couple of agrees or likes by commenting in various different, but largely the same ways that Levy is tight, Levy is bald, levy is short, dier is shit. It's boring and I have no problem in calling it out when I see it.

Perhaps people are calling it out because it's annoying.
 
Spursidol said:
Conte's failure was in not doing anything to rebuild the squad - at best he kept it standing still, and sadly I cannot think of ANY player who looked better under Conte than before. And the short term view of immediate results, once past the 'one game a week' in his first half season is 'meh'

Conte's refusal to make the best use of players at his disposal, including those bought for him in summer - and lack of interest is coaching is what would result in him being dismissed in most businesses

No surprise he went and delighted he did.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

the fact that numerous managers have struggled to get a tune out of our players suggest they cannot improve upon what they are. The likes of Lloris, Doherty, Dier, Sanchez, Tanganga Davies, Reguilon, Sessegnon, Hojberg, Winks, Ndombele, LoCelso, Moura and others couldn't improve under Mourinho, Nuno, Conte......Ndombele was bit part under Spalleti, Simeone didn't do much with Doherty and Reguilon, LonCelso performed well for Emery but he was helped by being back in Spain

Gill looks happier backing Spain than he does here, Sarr is still young, Bentancur was good under Conte, Emerson has improved whilst Conte was here....... Romero is Romero always a booking or brain fart possible at any time. Lenglet has been average for years way before he came here and will continue to be wherever he goes

Don't you think we simply have a very average group of players with Kane and maybe Son the exception? That's why we are struggling to offload so many players, think about it. The problems run much deeper than whoever the manager is.
 
Last edited:
LeParisien said:
Nice post.

I agree that it’s of course too early to judge Ange.

My principal and somewhat devastating critique of Conte’s coaching is this. When he took over he put in place patterns of play that were unusual and effective. We picked up 5 more points than Woolwich in the 18 games Conte was in charge that season which is excellent given he came mid-season and there was cause for optimism.

The problem is that those SAME patterns of play were being used the following season. Specifically, as late as Milan away, Kane was still dropping into the space to receive the ball from the defence to play a first time flicked ball into the wide forward. To jog your memory, this was being used very early in Conte’s reign and was how we scored Kulu’s first goal for the club against Man City.

People praised Kjaer for his performance against Kane that night but the truth is it’s very easy to spot Conte’s patterns of play. They have shock factor for a few months but at any level where teams can scout, they CANNOT be used for one year +. They need to be constantly refreshed to retain that shock factor.

That’s one example but there are other examples of stale, predictable patterns of play being used. Part of my optimism was that after the first half season, he would renew the playing approach given a full preseason. He did not do that and there are no mitigating factors for that summer.

I know Conte had some mitigation - his last 6 months would have been tough on anyone. But this is also a profound criticism of his coaching methodology that runs deeper than any extenuating circumstances.

Ange’s philosophy is something like the opposite. Instead of intensely drilling specific patterns of play until they’re automatic, he is teaching positional play. It takes a lot longer for players to develop the cues and intelligence to play it well - some players probably aren’t capable - but when it’s in place it’s far harder to stop. It’s a more sustainable strategy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's what I'm.most excited about seeing from Ange. Some more intelligent, spontaneous football that isn't super easy to defend against.
 
Spursidol said:
Conte's failure was in not doing anything to rebuild the squad - at best he kept it standing still, and sadly I cannot think of ANY player who looked better under Conte than before. And the short term view of immediate results, once past the 'one game a week' in his first half season is 'meh'

Conte's refusal to make the best use of players at his disposal, including those bought for him in summer - and lack of interest is coaching is what would result in him being dismissed in most businesses

No surprise he went and delighted he did.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You've not addressed anything i've said and ending with 'I'm glad he's gone' just underlines that as that wasn't even under discussion by me or La Parisien (although implied of course).

Para was in charge of recruitment and along with Levy was responsible for bringing in an 'improve results very quickly' manager.
Conte wasn't hired to improve the squad, (it was Para's job) it's never been his remit anywhere so why would it be now? He was given a short term contract which implied a short term improvement in results which he managed. We also have come out of Conte's time with a stronger squad than before he arrived probably in part to him quite rightly pushing for better players.

Writing off his first season as due only to playing one game a week but conveniently ignoring all the deleterious factors I pointed out last season shows an inability to consider all the factors and just choose the points that back up your 'preference'. Which undermines the validity of your opinion ultimately.

And yes some players improved, Davies and Dier were hopeless under Nuno and were for a time rehabilitated under a fit and healthy and fully focussed Conte as were new signings Kulu and Benta. Emerson absolutely improved during Conte's time. Some improved and then regressed but some of that can be correlated with the things I described previously that absolutely had an impact on Conte's ability to manage successfully.

For the record, I agree it's better he's gone, he doesn't fit a club like ours for all sorts of reasons, but in recent years there's been bigger problems than him - worse managers, poor stewardship from Levy resulting in a loss of identity, terrible recruitment, lack of a coherent structure, a lack of a long term plan (demonstrated by recruiting Conte in the first place after the Nuno and Jose debacles).

He absolutely arrested temporarily a spiralling decline and yes that wasn't a long term solution - but then Levy surely knew what he was doing when he recruited him - he was in the shit because we were terrible, 9th and with home attendances falling. None of that was on Conte.
 
Last edited:
Airfixx said:
...Not "I said I didn't want him", but "I said OK"

It's weird that people are trying to remove Conte from the process even more than he has.

"Club signing" is a meme that has gained WAY too much gravitas.

People whinge about needing a DOF and were in uproar when they felt we weren't going to get one........ DOFs have final say..... Suck it up.

Mo Salah was a "club signing"... Klopp said no, but they bought him anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah I don't know what that was meant to prove, he literally gave his approval and at the same time acknowledged that it was a 'club signing' whatever the fuck that meant.
 
ElTel said:
But in January it was pretty clear to almost everyone that Conte had no long term future at the club. He didn't want to sign a new contract, he was still living in a hotel, his family was still in Italy, already there were issues between him and the club, his whole demeanor was weird. The club should have said just make do with what you have and we will look at the RB situation in the summer or at least have negotiated a deal with Sporting without an obligation to buy.

Conte made it clear he didn't want Spence, but the club bought him anyway. Iirc Levy had some kind of connection with Spence's agent and it seemed he was on a mission to get the deal done no matter what Conte wanted.

How can a club invest so heavily in players when it employs managers who play such different systems, there is no continuity in thinking and planning. Yes buy wing backs if you know you will always hire managers who believe in playing 3 at the back and use wing backs. If you are not committed to that style as a club, you are just asking for trouble.

Since 2019 the club has been a disaster, wrong managerial appointments, huge amounts of money wasted on the wrong players, no plan, let's hope that with Ange we have the right guy and he is backed by the club and the fans with trust and patience.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think Kulu, Bentacour, Bissouma, and Porro were excellent buys, and Spence still unproven but very good.

Certainly better decisions than Lo Celso, N'Dombele, Sess and Sanchez.
 
ElTel said:
the fact that numerous managers have struggled to get a tune out of our players suggest they cannot improve upon what they are. The likes of Lloris, Doherty, Dier, Sanchez, Tanganga Davies, Reguilon, Sessegnon, Hojberg, Winks, Ndombele, LoCelso, Moura and others couldn't improve under Mourinho, Nuno, Conte......Ndombele was bit part under Spalleti, Simeone didn't do much with Doherty and Reguilon, LonCelso performed well for Emery but he was helped by being back in Spain

Gill looks happier backing Spain than he does here, Sarr is still young, Bentancur was good under Conte, Emerson has improved whilst Conte was here....... Romero is Romero always a booking or brain fart possible at any time. Lenglet has been average for years way before he came here and will continue to be wherever he goes

Don't you think we simply have a very average group of players with Kane and maybe Son the exception? That's why we are struggling to offload so many players, think about it. The problems run much deeper than whoever the manager is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's incredible how far people are willing to go to discredit Conte now.
He was given a shit squad and got it into Top 4. He was given "some" additions and broke the record for our points in the first 10 games. We were a poor penalty decision away from a comfortable 3rd place when he had a meltdown.

It was poor management from the top of the club to not see that coming. We could all see it. It wasn't at all unjustified.

Had he had the squad that finished 3rd and 2nd under Poch, he'd have won at least 1 of those titles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top