The decision to fire AVB

[mudshark]

Yup. Everyone says 'look at Barca, Madrid, Bayern, PSG, City, they all change their coaches' and are trying to make out this is part of the modern game. That any club that wants to be successful should be able to do it immediately and accept rapid change as part of that requirement.

But that's not acknowledging the truth of where we want to be. We aren't a club with unlimited finances for whom punching at our weight is finishing in the top 2 every year. We are a club who's actual weight is 6th, and are looking to push on without the finances of others. Dortmund took a season of 6th and 5th (in the less impressive German league) before Klopp got them firing again. Barca had a couple of years mid-table before their academy players exploded onto the scene. We need to do something different to push on, and everyone seems to want to refuse the fact that we may need to take some pain in terms of short term results to ultimately feel the benefits of the medicine that will be the long term structure.

I'm sure it'll have been said before, but you've only got to look at Rodgers and Liverpool. If we'd brought him here instead of AVB, would Levy's trigger finger have twitched again after we only finished seventh or eighth last year? You've got to suspect it would have.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

I'm sure it'll have been said before, but you've only got to look at Rodgers and Liverpool. If we'd brought him here instead of AVB, would Levy's trigger finger have twitched again after we only finished seventh or eighth last year? You've got to suspect it would have.

No doubt in my mind it would have, and that's a massive problem.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

It is more the relationship with Baldini, Levy, Freund and the medical staff that I was referring to. Freund was Sherwood's man, so maybe that explains the issues there but it doesn't account for the others.

I think that you are also overstating AVB's brief. He was first team coach, it was not his job to overhaul the club.

I wasn't saying his job was to overhaul the whole club, but he was brought in to affect change and put in place a structure at a club that has previously given it's players a lot of individual freedom.

He wanted to replace the medical staff, and as for Baldini, he was probably frustrated that he didn't push back hard enough on Levy for signings.

 

[braineclipse]

Yup. Everyone says 'look at Barca, Madrid, Bayern, PSG, City, they all change their coaches' and are trying to make out this is part of the modern game. That any club that wants to be successful should be able to do it immediately and accept rapid change as part of that requirement.

But that's not acknowledging the truth of where we want to be. We aren't a club with unlimited finances for whom punching at our weight is finishing in the top 2 every year. We are a club who's actual weight is 6th, and are looking to push on without the finances of others. Dortmund took a season of 6th and 5th (in the less impressive German league) before Klopp got them firing again. Barca had a couple of years mid-table before their academy players exploded onto the scene. We need to do something different to push on, and everyone seems to want to refuse the fact that we may need to take some pain in terms of short term results to ultimately feel the benefits of the medicine that will be the long term structure.

I agree in principle, but even though a long term strategy is put in place (something I think Levy has attempted several times by the way) there has to be signs of it working and signs of improvement.

Since this is the AVB thread, I really didn't think the signs of improvement were all that many. We struggled to create proper chances, this was more or less a constant for 18 months. Bale was brilliant for us, particularly in the second half of his first season, but we didn't create clear cut chances and our buildup play was severely lacking. Our pressing was good at the start of both seasons I thought, but within months it started failing. I was hoping the second time around that another pre-season and more time in charge would have kept that from happening, but it didn't. Our defensive solidity was a great positive at the start of this season, but even that started falling apart towards the end. Whereas our attacking play didn't really improve.

Edit: Just wanted to add. Long term planning is good, as long as there's progress and a tangible way to reach those long term targets. If there isn't then keeping the same person in charge really isn't a great idea. Ferguson is often mentioned as someone who was given time and achieved massive success. However, had the manager before him been kept in charge for 2-3 more years United most likely would never have ended up with Ferguson in the first place.

I'm sure it'll have been said before, but you've only got to look at Rodgers and Liverpool. If we'd brought him here instead of AVB, would Levy's trigger finger have twitched again after we only finished seventh or eighth last year? You've got to suspect it would have.

First of all Rodgers more or less maintained Liverpool where they had been before he took over, as AVB did with us. It's not like Liverpool were very close to CL football under Daglish and that they slipped back under Rodgers. Levy really doesn't have a history of firing managers after a single season in charge btw.

Second I thought there were real progress made in Liverpool's play under Rodgers. Myself and other posters pointed this out at the time iirc. Their attacking play without Suarez lead many of their fans to think that they could get rid of Suarez last summer in fact. And their results without him were easily comparable to results with him iirc. Watching them play there was a real sense that their buildup play and attacking play was taking shape, although they were still vulnerable at the back. Their results against the bottom half clubs illustrated this I thought, with them not only picking up more points than us against the bottom half, but scoring significantly more too (46 against our 32). In short they were ripping teams apart, at least at times, their superstar in Suarez was a part of a functional attacking unit that also functioned without him. I don't think the same could be said about Spurs under AVB at all.

Of course Rodgers and AVB had different philosophies and approaches, it's not entirely fair to directly compare goals scored and points against bottom half teams. But the improvement shown under Rodgers in his first season was clearly noticeable and noticed by many.

 

[chancer]

Clearly. But if you've been brought in to affect change, you're always going to **** some people off. Probably people who were influential in the previous regime. It then becomes about whether you have the guts to stay the course or whether you want to give up. And with Levy, keeping the guys like Sherwood around that keep pulling him in the other direction (I'm not suggesting anything sinister here, just stating the fact that AVB and Sherwood will have different ideas) he never really committed to letting AVB see through the change he was brought in to do.

I don't see any evidence that AVB's tenure was about trying to effect some kind of profound "change".


> He wanted to bring in Moutinho and Hulk for €40m each on some of the highest wages in the world. Not exactly revolutionary to want to sign the world's elite players.

> He played a pretty standard 4-2-3-1 that many other major teams play. No revolution that I can see, even if the tactics had worked. Which they didn't

> He didn't seem to have a lot of time for our new development signings: Eriksen, Vlad, Lamela and Chadli, unless he was in a pinch, as he was on the left hence the amount of game time Chadli got. That's not exactly joined-up thinking between DoF and coach and hardly the kind of change any club would want.

> He failed to integrate a £28m striker who he himself requested be bought.

> He got anaemic performances from a 1st team Brazil regular.

> He didn't bring on the likes of Kane, Bentaleb and Vejkovic etc. from the development squad, as was likely part of DL's brief and job spec. There's no revolutionary change without young blood.

> I have not seen evidence that AVB had particularly revolutionary approaches to diet, physical conditioning or medical/physio stuff. All just pretty par-for-the-course as far as I know.

> Nor do I see any particular culture change he desired. He seemed happy we were a well run, professional club with serious ambition (cf new training ground). It's not like we had a drinking culture or too much ketchup in the canteen. Our culture was fine.


So I just don't see what the grand "change" agenda was. Looks to me like AVB was just doing the standard stuff a coach does, only not doing it terribly well.

 

[milo]

I wasn't saying his job was to overhaul the whole club, but he was brought in to affect change and put in place a structure at a club that has previously given it's players a lot of individual freedom.

He wanted to replace the medical staff, and as for Baldini, he was probably frustrated that he didn't push back hard enough on Levy for signings.

He was brought in to develop the first team. He wasn't brought in to put a structure in place at the club. His predecessor had the job title of manager whereas AVB was first team coach, this was done for a reason and makes it pretty clear where his responsibilities lay.

It is reasonable that he would want to makes changes on the medical side but you can understand why the club might have wanted to hold back on this until the DoF was in place because presumably they come under his remit.

The disagreements with Baldini that I have seen reported were due to the atmosphere and intensity at the training ground, AVB's handling of Lloris' head injury and at the debrief after the Liverpool game.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

I don't see any evidence that AVB's tenure was about trying to effect some kind of profound "change".


> He wanted to bring in Moutinho and Hulk for €40m each on some of the highest wages in the world. Not exactly revolutionary to want to sign the world's elite players.

> He played a pretty standard 4-2-3-1 that many other major teams play. No revolution that I can see, even if the tactics had worked. Which they didn't

> He didn't seem to have a lot of time for our new development signings: Eriksen, Vlad, Lamela and Chadli, unless he was in a pinch, as he was on the left hence the amount of game time Chadli got. That's not exactly joined-up thinking between DoF and coach and hardly the kind of change any club would want.

> He failed to integrate a £28m striker who he himself requested be bought.

> He got anaemic performances from a 1st team Brazil regular.

> He didn't bring on the likes of Kane, Bentaleb and Vejkovic etc. from the development squad, as was likely part of DL's brief and job spec. There's no revolutionary change without young blood.

> I have not seen evidence that AVB had particularly revolutionary approaches to diet, physical conditioning or medical/physio stuff. All just pretty par-for-the-course as far as I know.

> Nor do I see any particular culture change he desired. He seemed happy we were a well run, professional club with serious ambition (cf new training ground). It's not like we had a drinking culture or too much ketchup in the canteen. Our culture was fine.


So I just don't see what the grand "change" agenda was. Looks to me like AVB was just doing the standard stuff a coach does, only not doing it terribly well.

No you're right, AVB was just here to keep things ticking over from the Harry days. 8-[

 

[chancer]

No you're right, AVB was just here to keep things ticking over from the Harry days. 8-[

By definition any new coach represents change in the most literal sense when they go to a new club.

But the word "change" as you used it seemed to suggest AVB was doing something more profound and far-reaching than that. Root-and-branch stuff.

And for me the evidence simply isn't there to support that - AVB simply acted like a normal coach doing normal things when he arrived at a new club. No more "change" than when Mark Hughes joined Stoke or Gary Monk took over from Laudrup. Just totally standard.

 

[BrainOfLevy]

By definition any new coach represents change in the most literal sense when they go to a new club.

But the word "change" as you used it seemed to suggest AVB was doing something more profound and far-reaching than that. Root-and-branch stuff.

And for me the evidence simply isn't there to support that - AVB simply acted like a normal coach doing normal things when he arrived at a new club. No more "change" than when Mark Hughes joined Stoke or Gary Monk took over from Laudrup. Just totally standard.

No way.

Monk is an example of the excellent Swansea hiring system in that they hire managers with continuity in mind. Hughes bought a few ideas I would say although Stoke were saying when they hired him he was a good choice because he wouldn't rip up everything Pulis had done. He's a nice transition manager after Pulis had stagnated there.

AVB was in no way a continuity hire from what has gone on previously. It wasn't so much the structure of the entire club. It was mindset. Mentality. Preparation. Tactical work. Moving from an individualist culture to a collective one. And that is quite far reaching.

 

[NWND]

And so what is wrong with wanting to sprinkle that potential with some proven talent if you have been given an objective that's looking pretty difficult to achieve considering how many times we've achieved it before?

But we HAD just achieved it. We WERE the 4th best team in the country. It is not unreasonable to expect us to continue to compete for Top 4 but at the same time we simply cannot afford to buy players like Hulk and even Moutinho is a big ask.

AVB supposedly wowed Levy and co with a scouted list of young talent he'd identified but didn't seem interested in players other than Hulk, Willian , Moutinho etc

 

[NWND]

No you're right, AVB was just here to keep things ticking over from the Harry days. 8-[

Precisely what he was brought in for, to keep things going (they'd been going pretty well) but maybe bring a bit more planning and structure so we didn't see the tired second half of the season tail-offs in Harry's teams

There was probably a sense that Redknapp had too much control at the club, too many of his "top lads" in the team, too many old boys in the coaching staff, too many of his journo mates hanging around the training ground. Levy probably tolerated it when he felt Redknapp was commited but he saw how vulnerable the club was to imploding when Redknapp flirted with the England job so he restructured the club.

AVB was a head coach he was to get themost out of the first team squad with players the club had agreed to buy (with his input) - he wasnt brought in to make changes at all - he was part of the changes the club made.

 

[milo]

AVB supposedly wowed Levy and co with a scouted list of young talent he'd identified but didn't seem interested in players other than Hulk, Willian , Moutinho etc

I could be wrong but thought that he wowed Levy and co with his PowerPoint presentation which prompted the notorious "genius or a fraud" comment from an unnamed board member. I thought that it was at Chelsea where he had the impressive dossier of players that the club continued to sign after he had been sacked.

 

[Baleforce]

there are definitely levels, if he'd been after Zlatan or Ronaldo then that's one thing, but for a club of our stature Moutinho/Hulk/Willian are all in the ballpark

 

[milo]

I was asked in the Sherwood thread for a source for the rumour of a disagreement between AVB and the medical staff around Lloris' head injury but I will answer it here rather than take that thread further off topic.

Greg Stobart (normally considered to be reasonably fair and well sourced) wrote about it here

http://www.goal.com/en/news/1717/ed...a-fraud-tottenham-still-searching-for-answers

I read about it somewhere else too but I cannot find it at the moment

 

[milo]

there are definitely levels, if he'd been after Zlatan or Ronaldo then that's one thing, but for a club of our stature Moutinho/Hulk/Willian are all in the ballpark

We got very close to signing two of them but I doubt that we could afford to have more than one of them on the wage bill

 

[NWND]

I could be wrong but thought that he wowed Levy and co with his PowerPoint presentation which prompted the notorious "genius or a fraud" comment from an unnamed board member. I thought that it was at Chelsea where he had the impressive dossier of players that the club continued to sign after he had been sacked.

Well what i read was AVB had spent his time out of football post-Chelsea travelling around watching games and preparing scouting reports on lesser known or young players, which he used with his comprehensive powerpoint to wow the Spurs board.

There was then ITK that the club had agreed a transfer list of players to fit AVB's system but he became stubborn and started asking for Hulk, Moutinho and the like rather than the players that wre on his list like Ganso, Gaston Ramirez, Dzagoev etc

 

[Robspur12]

No way.

Monk is an example of the excellent Swansea hiring system in that they hire managers with continuity in mind. Hughes bought a few ideas I would say although Stoke were saying when they hired him he was a good choice because he wouldn't rip up everything Pulis had done. He's a nice transition manager after Pulis had stagnated there.

AVB was in no way a continuity hire from what has gone on previously. It wasn't so much the structure of the entire club. It was mindset. Mentality. Preparation. Tactical work. [/B]Moving from an individualist culture to a collective one. And that is quite far reaching[/B].

Ironic then that his tactic for the majority of last season was to get the entire team to pass to Bale.

 

[NWND]

there are definitely levels, if he'd been after Zlatan or Ronaldo then that's one thing, but for a club of our stature Moutinho/Hulk/Willian are all in the ballpark

They're worth going for in case we can pull it off but they're not realistically going to have a high chance of happening

 

[Robspur12]

They're worth going for in case we can pull it off but they're not realistically going to have a high chance of happening

And unless you have access to our transfer budget how the hell does any fan know who is in our budget? When have we ever bought established foreign players who either already command big wages, or a huge transfer fee?

 

[Robspur12]

^^^

before we got the Bale money that is