Redknapp

[DHSF]

All this future talk is funny because i bet the same people will also be lambasting whoever is in charge that we didnt finish top four etc.

We talk a great deal about building for the future but just out of interest when does the future arrive? I mean when will the future be the present? When will we arrive if the future is constantly the future?

I am happy to build for the future but ill be honest I want success NOW also.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

I agree, at the time Keane was vital. He was a leader when we didn't have one.
Agree re: Palacios.
Agree re: Bassong, but this is where Harry first started to take his eye off the ball as he did not man-manage him as well as he could have.
Agree re: Crouch, and again, for me he should either have kept Crouch this past season or Pav. Instead he sold Crouch and proceeded to marginalize Pav. Poor man management. By the end, Pav had to go because he was awful focus, but in fairness, he'd had the life and confidence sucked out of him by a manager who had clearly given up on him.
Agree re: Pienaar and, IMHO, is the one which will haunt Harry forever. Had he found a way to keep him happier/rotate him, we'd have had right/left balance in lennon's absence, Luka could've stayed in the middle, bale could've stayed left and we'd have got an extra points from the season IMHO. That Harry allowed him to go points to someone who just wasn't as focussed as usual...

I would also say that his pick-up of Gudjohnsen was inspired.

Having said all that, they are mostly short-term solutions. Harry doesn't look long. That's an issue and a big one IMHO...

Sandro, Walker, Naughton?

And why are people glossing over the obvious fact that when Redknapp took us over the squad and first team were too young and we desperately needed experience added to it? And when you look at it now, the same still rings true.

 

[billyiddo]

All this future talk is funny because i bet the same people will also be lambasting whoever is in charge that we didnt finish top four etc.

We talk a great deal about building for the future but just out of interest when does the future arrive? I mean when will the future be the present? When will we arrive if the future is constantly the future?

I am happy to build for the future but ill be honest I want success NOW also.

it's a continuous cycle, today we benefit from the plans put in place yesterday - tomorrow we benefit from the plans put in place today etc etc

no one is suggesting we do a Football Manager and solely rely on young talent we have brought in previously, it's a fine balance which needs to be struck and at this moment it is an area i feel we have neglected, no qualms with sorting the fiorst team problems at all - but at the same time we need to be maximizing our efforts to bring in potential for the future - the position we are in as a club means we will rarely be able to sign a top level player to go straight in to the first team - we need to be one step ahead and try to catch them before the reach their peak

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

that's one of the most stupid statements i have ever seen in my entire life

don't build for the future ! spend all you money now ! in the moment ! who cares what happens a couple of seasons down the line - it'll be someone else's problem by then ! don't buy young players on the cheap who can potentially mature in to world class players that we can't attract now !

yea what a ridiculous notion

Name me ONE team that has built for the future? The only team I can think of in recent years is Arsenal and they've done pretty well but have been trophyless. Utd never did it. City and Chelsea didn't do it (nor did they have to). Liverpool when dominant never did it. So who the fudge builds for the future and is successful?

It does not happen. It's a myth. You buy a great 18 year old now, if you aren't successful by the time he is 20 he wants to fudge off. The best way to build for the future, in fact the ONLY way to build for the future is to be successful in the now. That keeps your best players interested in staying and means that equally good players will join you.

We had a good run of buying youngsters a few seasons ago, but they weren't just youngsters. They were good enough to walk straight into the first team and stay there, partly down to their ability but also down to the fact that the first team regulars weren't of the standard as they are now.

I wish you could go back in time on this forum and see the same posters from 7 or 8 years ago with their fantasy Spurs teams in 5 years times including those whizzkids we failed to sign but were linked with (especially as most of those whizzkids didn't make it). fudging pathetic and laughable.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

All this future talk is funny because i bet the same people will also be lambasting whoever is in charge that we didnt finish top four etc.

We talk a great deal about building for the future but just out of interest when does the future arrive? I mean when will the future be the present? When will we arrive if the future is constantly the future?

I am happy to build for the future but ill be honest I want success NOW also.

Exactly. Players don't stick around for very long. Doesn't matter if they are 21 or 31, most won't be at the club in 5 years time or even 3 years time. The main benefit with buying them young is the re-sale value. But a 33 year old player who was brilliant in their prime and still very good now is always a better purchase than a 21 year old journeyman.

 

[parklane1]

Indeed. I can't believe after all these years that people STILL believe in building for the future is a viable strategy ](*,) Building for the future starts at academy level. It is impossible to build for the future in terms of the first team squad.

That part of your post is spot on, the first thing Fergie did when he walked into Old Trafford was overhaul the youth set up there. He said for a club of Utd's size it was really poor and he sorted it out. However it is possible to plan your first team squad for the future as Fergie has shown over the years, for many years Spurs have looked at short term buys and with no plan for the future, we are now at a stage when we should be looking forward and that is what i hope will happen.

 

[billyiddo]

there are plenty of clubs which build for the future and it would be a pointless exercise listing them all as it's such a blindly obvious thing that all successful clubs do to one extent or another that i can't believe anyone is trying to oppose that view

 

[thfcsteff]

Sandro, Walker, Naughton?

And why are people glossing over the obvious fact that when Redknapp took us over the squad and first team were too young and we desperately needed experience added to it? And when you look at it now, the same still rings true.

Sandro not his find/signing. He wanted to loan him out at the start of 2011. Thankfully, due to a variety of things, it didn't happen. Walker? Bang on, you're right, he and the coaching staff did a great job there (as he and the staff have with Livermore -Tim Sherwood take a bow)...Naughton, let's see shall we?

Nobody's "glossing over the obvious" fact that we needed experience. What I would question is your terminology. What we needed when he arrived, and what we needed for the last three months of the season, was LEADERSHIP. In several areas. Experience is not always enough.

Why do you have such an enormously hard time accepting the man has faults? BTW, hope you're paying attention to what's rumbling...trumpers eh? WTF do they know!

 

[parklane1]

there are plenty of clubs which build for the future and it would be a pointless exercise listing them all as it's such a blindly obvious thing that all successful clubs do to one extent or another that i can't believe anyone is trying to oppose that view

Of course they do.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

there are plenty of clubs which build for the future and it would be a pointless exercise listing them all as it's such a blindly obvious thing that all successful clubs do to one extent or the other that i can't believe anyone is trying to oppose that view

Please name one in English football that has been successful. I don't need you to list them all, just one team that was built for the future that won a major trophy or challenged for the title. Arsenal are the closest I can think of, and even then most of their first XI was not made up of youth that was purchased and burst into the first team a few seasons later.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Sandro not his find/signing. He wanted to loan him out at the start of 2011. Thankfully, due to a variety of things, it didn't happen. Walker? Bang on, you're right, he and the coaching staff did a great job there (as he and the staff have with Livermore -Tim Sherwood take a bow)...Naughton, let's see shall we?

Nobody's "glossing over the obvious" fact that we needed experience. What I would question is your terminology. What we needed when he arrived, and what we needed for the last three months of the season, was LEADERSHIP. In several areas. Experience is not always enough.

Why do you have such an enormously hard time accepting the man has faults? BTW, hope you're paying attention to what's rumbling...trumpers eh? WTF do they know!

No, he was Broomfields. Who brought Broomfield to the club?

I'd be surprised if any player outside of the league a Manager operates in meets your criteria to be honest. Scouts find almost all the players.

 

[thfcsteff]

Name me ONE team that has built for the future? The only team I can think of in recent years is Arsenal and they've done pretty well but have been trophyless. Utd never did it. City and Chelsea didn't do it (nor did they have to). Liverpool when dominant never did it. So who the fudge builds for the future and is successful?

It does not happen. It's a myth. You buy a great 18 year old now, if you aren't successful by the time he is 20 he wants to fudge off. The best way to build for the future, in fact the ONLY way to build for the future is to be successful in the now. That keeps your best players interested in staying and means that equally good players will join you.

We had a good run of buying youngsters a few seasons ago, but they weren't just youngsters. They were good enough to walk straight into the first team and stay there, partly down to their ability but also down to the fact that the first team regulars weren't of the standard as they are now.

I wish you could go back in time on this forum and see the same posters from 7 or 8 years ago with their fantasy Spurs teams in 5 years times including those whizzkids we failed to sign but were linked with (especially as most of those whizzkids didn't make it). fudging pathetic and laughable.

1) :ross:

2) IF YOU HAVE SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION POUNDS AND A MASSIVE NEW STADIUM! Otherwise you CANNOT adopt that policy unless you want to become she next Leeds Utd.

3) Isn't it just mate...isn't it just!

 

[thfcsteff]

No, he was Broomfields. Who brought Broomfield to the club?

I'd be surprised if any player outside of the league a Manager operates in meets your criteria to be honest. Scouts find almost all the players.

...and who left? And where did that scout go? And who did that scout find? Love Sandro BTW, wish Harry loved him as much...

 

[thfcsteff]

Please name one in English football that has been successful. I don't need you to list them all, just one team that was built for the future that won a major trophy or challenged for the title. Arsenal are the closest I can think of, and even then most of their first XI was not made up of youth that was purchased and burst into the first team a few seasons later.

Manchester United - Scholes, Giggs, Beckham, Neville, Butt (err, the other Neville)...from within admittedly, but inter-woven with some key purchases. See, again, Harry did a GREAT thing with Carroll, Lancaster, etc, in the League and Uefa Cups, yet fudged them off second half of the season. Andros Townshend; WHY not keep him in the squad? Pace-a-plenty and useful when on as a sub?

 

[billyiddo]

Please name one in English football that has been successful. I don't need you to list them all, just one team that was built for the future that won a major trophy or challenged for the title. Arsenal are the closest I can think of, and even then most of their first XI was not made up of youth that was purchased and burst into the first team a few seasons later.

if you are asking me to name a club that has won a title or challenged etc on the back of purely signing players for the future then i can't answer that because that is not what i am saying happens, i am saying that whilst not only taking care of business for the first team it is important to be looking for players that can develop in to the players of the future - most clubs do this (to varying levels of 'success') Manchester United, Liverpool, Chelsea the list is endless

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

...and who left? And where did that scout go? And who did that scout find? Love Sandro BTW, wish Harry loved him as much...

What does that mean about Sandro? I was always under the impression Redknapp rated Sandro very highly or are you suggesting that Redknapp doesn't or has other reasons as to why he doesn't want him. Does Redknapp want him out? Why did he play Sandro so much at the back end of last season? Was he forced too against his will? Redknapp has seriously got to go if he wants Sandro gone for some personal agenda.

And Broomfield's left Spurs?! When did that happen?!

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

if you are asking me to name a club that has won a title or challenged etc on the back of purely signing players for the future then i can't answer that because that is not what i am saying happens, i am saying that whilst not only taking care of business for the first team it is important to be looking for players that can develop in to the players of the future - most clubs do this (to varying levels of 'success') Manchester United, Liverpool, Chelsea the list is endless

But sure that is what we're aiming for? We aren't a lower level team looking for a way to break into the Premiership or make a profit on young players to keep us afloat?

And of course buying youngsters is a good idea if they seem good enough. We do it a LOT. We purchase a lot of young players for the academy. And we purchase young players for the first team squad. We wanted Phil Jones remember? Made a bid for him, he went to Utd.

 

[The Moonlit Knight]

Manchester United - Scholes, Giggs, Beckham, Neville, Butt (err, the other Neville)...from within admittedly, but inter-woven with some key purchases. See, again, Harry did a GREAT thing with Carroll, Lancaster, etc, in the League and Uefa Cups, yet fudged them off second half of the season. Andros Townshend; WHY not keep him in the squad? Pace-a-plenty and useful when on as a sub?

And they haven't managed to replicate that, which suggests to me it was a fluke as much as anything else.

Those kids you just mentioned, aren't good enough. Carroll looked like a tidy player, but no great shakes. Livermore and Townsend in my opinion simply aren't good enough. Neither is Rose FWIW. Livermore may have a career in the Premiership, but I don't think it'll be with us.

And you certainly wouldn't want any of them "kids" (I use that term loosely, Livermore is 23 this year, Townsend will be 21 by the time the season starts again - hardly youngsters anymore) near the first team unless we had some serious injuries. Look at Norwich at home.

 

[billyiddo]

But sure that is what we're aiming for? We aren't a lower level team looking for a way to break into the Premiership or make a profit on young players to keep us afloat?

And of course buying youngsters is a good idea if they seem good enough. We do it a LOT. We purchase a lot of young players for the academy. And we purchase young players for the first team squad. We wanted Phil Jones remember? Made a bid for him, he went to Utd.

did - we did do it a lot, under Redknapp in 22 signings 3 have been under 21.

can't say i recall the Phil Jones bid but i was abroad last summer (thankfully) so i'll take your word for that one.

i don't want to see us focus on youth to the extent where it is detrimental to our first team strategy - i just want to see a strategy of sorts in youth (18-23 for example) recruitment - it can only be of benefit imv

anyway, i don't think this is going anywhere (as usual, lol) so Im happy to leave this one here

 

[DHSF]

it's a continuous cycle, today we benefit from the plans put in place yesterday - tomorrow we benefit from the plans put in place today etc etc

I agree to an extent if this was an ideal world but it really isnt. I mean think about it, you buy ten players now - one maybe two may succeed into established players the other eight or nine you need to get rid. So you will have wasted three or four years waiting for them to prove themselves giving them an opportunity etc. In the meantime you are not succeeding cos these so call potentials are either not realising it or are actually a bit brick.

It will go in cycles but bare in mind that there will be good times and bad times and lets be honest us lot are an impatient lot because we have suffered relatively anyways quite a bit