O/T Capello Resigns / New England Manager Speculation Thread

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

i'm sure he'd rather run the U18's side

 

[totman]

I think you should write IMO after every post just like Arabs roll eyes smiley. Although a few sensitive souls have already moaned about it.

My new signature

imo

 

[mick cooper]

Utter clowns in our support!

Ohh well, all enhances the fabric of what is Tottenham Hotspur Football Club, bigger than any man.

don't be so caustic, you grumpy fecker

Totmans just as entitled to express himself as anyone else

lets be fair - he does it without insulting anyone (by and large) its just that he annoys people by sticking to his POV

- and why should he change his mind?

 

[totman]

It took balls to have the clear out when he sacked Ramos. He was decisive and the change of system was needed. But the mess that he had to clear out was of his making.

True, though to be fair, no one really knows why Ramos starting managing like a madman!

imo

 

[milo]

Remember when we waited 18 months for a manager!!? Since then, we've rolled pretty quickly on these issues...I think if Harry goes (in the summer), we'll have someone in within the week.

imo

Do you mean the half a season under Pleat after Hoddle was sacked? After which he replaced Pleat with Arnesen one of the best DoFs in Europe but refused to back his choice of manager and his choice failed and walked after a handful of games.

 

[totman]

don't be so caustic, you grumpy fecker

Totmans just as entitled to express himself as anyone else

lets be fair - he does it without insulting anyone (by and large) its just that he annoys people by sticking to his POV

- and why should he change his mind?

Im doing the Bale heart with my hands at the screen for you Mick

 

[totman]

Do you mean the half a season under Pleat after Hoddle was sacked? After which he replaced Pleat with Arnesen one of the best DoFs in Europe but refused to back his choice of manager and his choice failed and walked after a handful of games.

I thought it was 18 months for some reason. Anyway, he made his bed, but he was also prepared to lie in it.

I think we actually are actually agreeing.

imo

 

[Roy1983]

Do you mean the half a season under Pleat after Hoddle was sacked? After which he replaced Pleat with Arnesen one of the best DoFs in Europe but refused to back his choice of manager and his choice failed and walked after a handful of games.

I think it's common knowledge that Jol was always the first choice but Levy disguised it with Santini as the fickle fans wanted a big name manager after Hoddle.

 

[jimmyb]

Do you mean the half a season under Pleat after Hoddle was sacked? After which he replaced Pleat with Arnesen one of the best DoFs in Europe but refused to back his choice of manager and his choice failed and walked after a handful of games.

As I said in an earlier post, I'm pretty sure that the plan all along was to get Jol in as manager as soon as possible. Santini was just a dummy to pacify the fans.

 

[milo]

True, though to be fair, no one really knows why Ramos starting managing like a madman!

imo

The appointment of Ramos was a disaster. If the board had lost faith in Jol he should have gone at the end of the previous season. Undermining the manager in the way they did was amateurish and the club shot itself in the foot.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Yes I probably would as I think that Harry's real weakness is re tactics. He's sent out some really bizarre line-ups in his time at Spurs which look wrong to everyone from the start and then has to try to correct them mid-game. That said, those managers which I listed dont have some of Harry's strengths

See I can't agree with you on a lot of those. I am not saying Redknapp is tactically superior, but he is nowhere near as bad as people try and make out (if he was, he wouldn't even have a job as a manager, let alone a professional one who has managed to survive for 30 years).

Fergie - Is a shining example to me as to why tactics are over rated. He isn't a tactical manager. He has a system he sticks too and its been successful. Man Utd's style of play hasn't changed now for 25 years, and generally neither have the formations. In fact everytime Fergie does deviate from his favoured formation Utd look weaker and tend to blow the League.

Mancini - I think he is a bit of a clown to be honest. Mancini or Redknapp in charge of Wolves, then under Redknapp Wolves survive. Under Mancini, they don't. With the amount of money Mancini has spanked, the League should already be a formality. Avram Grant proved that with excellent players an average Manager can look good.

Rodgers - Isn't it a bit early to say? The season isn't even over yet. And Swansea's squad is so small that Rodgers can't rotate or change systems (not a bad thing in my opinion). Redknapp did well with both West Ham and Portsmouth in the Premiership.

Wenger - Arsenal fans would currently disagree with you. One of the biggest complaints I've heard Gooners making right now is that Wenger, even through inability or pure arrogance, refuses to adapt. He has one style of play, one system of play. And even if it means forcing players into a style or system they aren't suited to, he'll do it. Arsenal also have competed in the Champions League for years without really ever looking like a team that was good enough to win it. Same applies to Man Utd to an extent though. Considering how many times they've been in the competition English teams really haven't work it anywhere near as much as they should have.

Moyes - Once again, I think if Redknapp was in charge of Everton he'd have got more out of them simply because he'd have got in more astute transfers.

I do think the role of a Manager is over stated. A Manager is a bit like the drive in an F1 car. Clearly they make a difference, and can mean the difference between a win and second place in a Grand Prix. But over the course of a season it's usually the best car that wins the title, regardless of the drivers. In this analogy, the car being the players. The real skill for a Manager isn't coming in and turning around an underperforming team in weeks. It's about building a team for the future, or maintaining the form of a team in form over more than a couple of seasons.

We've seen it countless times in recent seasons how Managers can take over clubs with good players and get them performing, only then to tail off once they've started to build a team of their own. Chelsea have certainly had a few. Even Mourinho you could argue took over a team that Ranieri had built and did amazing things with it but a couple of seasons down the line with his own players they started to falter. Keeping the Chelsea theme, you also have the likes of Gullit and Vialli who, initially, looked as if they were going to have amazing careers as Managers but then fell away sharply once the inherited team needed an overhaul. O'Leary at Leeds is another, and we have examples of our own. Gerry Francis's first two seasons in charge were fantastic. but mainly with inherited players. To an extent the same can be applied to Jol AND Ramos.

I think Redknapp has bucked that trend here. He inherited a very strong (but unbalanced) side that was massively underachieving. He quickly identified the exact problems and plugged the holes, and we've actually gone from strength to strength under him. We never get turned over by anyone anymore (at least not in England, and I am purposely ignoring the Emirates Marketing Project game from earlier this season as that really wasn't our team!).

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I think you should both define what you mean by tactics, add some context - because its a wide and varied matter and, for example, I wouldnt consider Wenger a "tactical" manager at all - not in the slightest.

For me the way a team is set up shows their native system. Which is of course a set of predefined tactics, but its the starting position.

So when you talk about tactics for me you are talking about changes and tweaks to that core system designed to beat the opposition, exploit some weakness you see.

For example, Redknapp having us sit deep against Arsenal, pushing them to the flanks where they are weak and then breaking into the space left behind was an excellent use of tactics.

Where as, our more standard set up beating a team without any tweaking doesnt show tactics as such.

In this context Wenger is useless as a tactician. He has plan A, not plan B and no will to change anything. Plan A is all he has got...

 

[Spaceman]

I think it's common knowledge that Jol was always the first choice but Levy disguised it with Santini as the fickle fans wanted a big name manager after Hoddle.

rubbish. santini was france manager and jol at some unknown club in holland. if levy wanted jol at that time he would have appointed him, like he did when it went tits up

 

[milo]

I think it's common knowledge that Jol was always the first choice but Levy disguised it with Santini as the fickle fans wanted a big name manager after Hoddle.

I think that it is common knowledge that Jol was Arnesen's first choice but Levy had already said that he was going to appoint a "name" and couldn't go back on that.

 

[Spaceman]

I think you should both define what you mean by tactics, add some context - because its a wide and varied matter and, for example, I wouldnt consider Wenger a "tactical" manager at all - not in the slightest.

For me the way a team is set up shows their native system. Which is of course a set of predefined tactics, but its the starting position.

So when you talk about tactics for me you are talking about changes and tweaks to that core system designed to beat the opposition, exploit some weakness you see.

For example, Redknapp having us sit deep against Arsenal, pushing them to the flanks where they are weak and then breaking into the space left behind was an excellent use of tactics.

Where as, our more standard set up beating a team without any tweaking doesnt show tactics as such.

In this context Wenger is useless as a tactician. He has plan A, not plan B and no will to change anything. Plan A is all he has got...

good post

 

[Leeds Spur]

don't be so caustic, you grumpy fecker

Totmans just as entitled to express himself as anyone else

lets be fair - he does it without insulting anyone (by and large) its just that he annoys people by sticking to his POV

- and why should he change his mind?

I will defend any man to stick to his guns, I for one am not prone to changing my mind when it's set.

The point is, IMO! That Totman constantly tried to portray himself at the best fan as he would never consider moving to Stratford, and now that we will lose Harry it's down to those who have criticised him, they have driven him out the club. gonadS.

This holier than thou brick is doing my head in, I don't like having my loyalty and affection for the club questioned by anyone, so I said so.

 

[totman]

The appointment of Santini was a disaster. If the board had lost faith in Jol he should have gone at the end of the previous season. Undermining the manager in the way they did was amateurish and the club shot itself in the foot.

The way he dealt with Jol was awful, but Ramos' appointment was'nt a bad one, until he lost the plot and started mis-managing the team....for whatever reason. Some say he was trying to get sacked. Who knows.


imo

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

Always though he did a great job as England manager and that he could still do a great job, but media hate him. Even when he played for us and England they always focused on what he didn't do rather than he was the only player who could do certain things. In an country in the world they would have built a team round him but we rather have Captain Marvelous Robson unbelievable.

 

[Spaceman]

spot on leeds

 

[totman]

rubbish. santini was france manager and jol at some unknown club in holland. if levy wanted jol at that time he would have appointed him, like he did when it went tits up

Calm down. Roy is just stating his opinion. What gives you the right to say he's talking rubbish?