• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Levy - End Of Season Letter

milo said:
He has us doing slightly above par. In terms of league finishes this is one of the most sustained successful periods in our club's history.

The next step up is phenomenally difficult because of the gulf in budget between us and Arsenal, Liverpool, United, City and Chelsea. I cannot think of a team who has broken into the top four for more than one season in the Premier League era without matching their spending. Apart from us under Redknapp. Can you?
Click to expand...

Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Leeds are the only examples and both are a stark reminder of the risks involved. I think if there were some actual examples of sides breaking the top 4, showing us how it should be done, then id be more understanding of the argument that Levy isn't doing a good job
 
billyiddo said:
Although our natural ranking is 6th there's every chance through good hard work and careful planning we can't get ourselves in a better position - 11/12 was, IMV, the culmination of several years work - pleat/arnesen/levy/redknapp all provided a great team worthy of fighting it out at the top - in the end we fell short but that isn't a slight on the chairman as he isn't the one in the dugout - he played his part off the field giving those he employed the platform to build the squad etc
Click to expand...

so why not stick with Redknapp....yes he flirted with England, but just like with players if a manager if successful he is going to be courted by bigger fish. Why take the decision to remove Redknapp, when things were going very well on the pitch, we finished 4th, we were playing lovely football, and instead we ended up with AVB, then Sherwood, and now GHod knows who. Weve gone fro 4th in 2012, to 5th in 2013, and now 6th in 2014, plus the football and entertainment has gotten worse and worse. Levys decision to remove Redknapp has taken us backwards
 
milo said:
He has us doing slightly above par. In terms of league finishes this is one of the most sustained successful periods in our club's history.

The next step up is phenomenally difficult because of the gulf in budget between us and Arsenal, Liverpool, United, City and Chelsea. I cannot think of a team who has broken into the top four for more than one season in the Premier League era without matching their spending. Apart from us under Redknapp. Can you?
Click to expand...

No...he only has us above par if the only thing that counts in your argument is the turnover. If we count the fact that Liverpool were absolutely dire for 3 to 4 years which puts us up a notch merely by being where we should be, and the fact that Chelsea put us up another notch in 11/12 by default, then we aren't doing anything spectacular at all. We are performing averagely.

A really great achievement would be to crack the top 4 consistently on our budget. I'm not saying Levy is bad because he hasn't done so, I'm saying simply that he isn't as great and infallible because of where we've been the last few years. It's entirely average, with a great season thrown in with 09/10 and a really poor league season when we won the League Cup. It's average.
 
indianspur said:
so why not stick with Redknapp....yes he flirted with England, but just like with players if a manager if successful he is going to be courted by bigger fish. Why take the decision to remove Redknapp, when things were going very well on the pitch, we finished 4th, we were playing lovely football, and instead we ended up with AVB, then Sherwood, and now GHod knows who. Weve gone fro 4th in 2012, to 5th in 2013, and now 6th in 2014, plus the football and entertainment has gotten worse and worse. Levys decision to remove Redknapp has taken us backwards
Click to expand...

It's about the coach he wanted, in terms of type. What kind of signings would he want? How often would he throw in the youth products? It's a strategic decision rather than simply getting rid of Redknapp for it's own sake IMO
 
billyiddo said:
Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Leeds are the only examples and both are a stark reminder of the risks involved. I think if there were some actual examples of sides breaking the top 4, showing us how it should be done, then id be more understanding of the argument that Levy isn't doing a good job
Click to expand...

My argument is he's doing an average one, but gets so much praise as if he's doing a great one. On the business side, finances, training ground, negotiations, he is brilliant, but translating to football he is just average and has done nothing to suggest he's great.
 
indianspur said:
so why not stick with Redknapp....yes he flirted with England, but just like with players if a manager if successful he is going to be courted by bigger fish. Why take the decision to remove Redknapp, when things were going very well on the pitch, we finished 4th, we were playing lovely football, and instead we ended up with AVB, then Sherwood, and now GHod knows who. Weve gone fro 4th in 2012, to 5th in 2013, and now 6th in 2014, plus the football and entertainment has gotten worse and worse. Levys decision to remove Redknapp has taken us backwards
Click to expand...

It's all opinions and mine is that Redknapps decision to court the England job and then publicly demand a new contract at the end of the season is what set us back - finish 3rd+ that season like he should have and we're likely to still be there now. Act with a bit of humility at the end of the season and he likely would have still had a job with us ...
 
BrainOfLevy said:
It's about the coach he wanted, in terms of type. What kind of signings would he want? How often would he throw in the youth products? It's a strategic decision rather than simply getting rid of Redknapp for it's own sake IMO
Click to expand...

well, the decision has backfired.....whatever the strategy was, its hasnt worked
 
billyiddo said:
It's all opinions and mine is that Redknapps decision to court the England job and then publicly demand a new contract at the end of the season is what set us back - finish 3rd+ that season like he should have and we're likely to still be there now. Act with a bit of humility at the end of the season and he likely would have still had a job with us ...
Click to expand...
i was never the biggest fan of Redknapp and his way of operating, but football wise on the pitch he got most things right....yes we should have finished 3rd in 2012 but we can also say that last season we should have finished 4th. Just because Redknapp courted the England job and then demanded a new contract is siply the way he operates. He had us finishing 4th, 5th, 4th in a row with good football to watch at the same time. Spurs, punching above their weight, why would the chairman change things???Thats why we are a laughing stock with the media, other fans, football observers. Levy is a great businessman, but as has been said before he is not a football man. Like you said, Levy provides the platform off the pitch, he should then allow the football men to do their job on it. Give Redknapp a new deal and let him continue until he proves to be doing a bad job. Its not so difficult is it.
 
With all due respect IS i don't really intend to take this thread down that route it only ends in old arguments resurfacing - i will just say that i back Levy with his decision to sack Redknapp - equally id have been happy for him to sign a new contract back in Jan '11 when the England stuff first came about. A real sliding doors moment that.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
My argument is he's doing an average one, but gets so much praise as if he's doing a great one. On the business side, finances, training ground, negotiations, he is brilliant, but translating to football he is just average and has done nothing to suggest he's great.
Click to expand...

When there are no examples of clubs doing better with the same constraints as us and we've shown ourselves capable of building sides good enough to be where we want how can you say that is 'average'

Where are the examples of clubs surpassing us that show we should be asking for more?
 
billyiddo said:
When there are no examples of clubs doing better with the same constraints as us and we've shown ourselves capable of building sides good enough to be where we want how can you say that is 'average'

Where are the examples of clubs surpassing us that show we should be asking for more?
Click to expand...

Remains to be seen what happens when they return to European competition, but Everton.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
No...he only has us above par if the only thing that counts in your argument is the turnover. If we count the fact that Liverpool were absolutely dire for 3 to 4 years which puts us up a notch merely by being where we should be, and the fact that Chelsea put us up another notch in 11/12 by default, then we aren't doing anything spectacular at all. We are performing averagely.

A really great achievement would be to crack the top 4 consistently on our budget. I'm not saying Levy is bad because he hasn't done so, I'm saying simply that he isn't as great and infallible because of where we've been the last few years. It's entirely average, with a great season thrown in with 09/10 and a really poor league season when we won the League Cup. It's average.
Click to expand...

By that argument, Liverpool's achievements this season don't count because Chelsea and United underachieved. By definition, if we are to finish in the top four, one of the better funded sides need to under perform.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
No...he only has us above par if the only thing that counts in your argument is the turnover. If we count the fact that Liverpool were absolutely dire for 3 to 4 years which puts us up a notch merely by being where we should be, and the fact that Chelsea put us up another notch in 11/12 by default, then we aren't doing anything spectacular at all. We are performing averagely.

A really great achievement would be to crack the top 4 consistently on our budget. I'm not saying Levy is bad because he hasn't done so, I'm saying simply that he isn't as great and infallible because of where we've been the last few years. It's entirely average, with a great season thrown in with 09/10 and a really poor league season when we won the League Cup. It's average.
Click to expand...

And sometimes teams with less financial power than us will over perform. Why is that ignored in your argumentation, but richer teams under performing is considered?
 
I've annotated the following post to add the managerial changes:
NWND said:
THFC Premiership era final league finish pre Levy/ENIC

92/93 8th (new manager in summer (May): Livermore/Clemence)
93/94 15th (new manager in summer (June): Ardiles)
94/95 7th (new manager midseason (Nov): Francis)
95/96 8th
96/97 10th
97/98 14th (new manager midseason (Nov): Gross)
98/99 11th (new manager midseason (Sept/Oct): Graham)
99/00 10th
00/01 12th

Levy/ENIC era

01/02 9th (new manager midseason (Mar/Apr): Hoddle)
02/03 10th
03/04 14th (new manager midseason (Sept): Pleat as caretaker)
04/05 9th (new manager in summer (Santini, July) and midseason (Nov): Jol)
05/06 5th
06/07 5th
07/08 11th (new manager midseason (Oct): Ramos)
08/09 8th (new manager midseason (Oct): Redknapp)
09/10 4th
10/11 5th
11/12 4th
12/13 5th (new manager in summer (July): AVB)
13/14 6th (new manager midseason (Dec): Sherwood)
Click to expand...

1. It doesn't paint a pretty picture of stability.
2. We've had few seasons where an existing manager has continued and completed the season.
3. These seasons are unquestionable the most successful (the exception being Francis's first season).
4. Levy and Enic seem no more trigger happy than the previous regime.

The problem is that one can argue two ways. The manager stability is essential for success and we keep shooting ourselves in the foot. Alternatively, the chairman could have identified the problem and acted to correct it, with success following in the next full season
 
jts1882 said:
I've annotated the following post to add the managerial changes:


1. It doesn't paint a pretty picture of stability.
2. We've had few seasons where an existing manager has continued and completed the season.
3. These seasons are unquestionable the most successful (the exception being Francis's first season).
4. Levy and Enic seem no more trigger happy than the previous regime.

The problem is that one can argue two ways. The manager stability is essential for success and we keep shooting ourselves in the foot. Alternatively, the chairman could have identified the problem and acted to correct it, with success following in the next full season
Click to expand...

Well, it's rather obvious that the seasons where a manager gets sacked won't be the most successful. If a manager is kept around it's usually because he's delivering results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back