• 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

The Hoddle Era 2001-2003

That looks like a side that could defend a lead and try and hit on the counter for the last 10 mins but there's no way that it could put a foot on the ball and keep possession or create anything.

Some interesting memories coming back though, I forgot about signings like Postiga and Acimovic. I must have been young enough to not know any better better but I'm sure I was happy with these signings and thinking he had an eye for potential, turned out not many of them made much of an impact.
 
Ducked and dived on the deals he could in order to do the best he could, again pre big spend era. We burnt out come the end of seasons because he had to sign the likes of Poyet, Sherringham and Redknapp to give us any class, and to some extent it worked. The start of the season we had Dean Richards and Freund as holding midfielder in that system, we were excellent at times. I know we died against United second half in the 5-3, but my GHod we were amazing first half. The problem is the team had no legs past Christmas but I honestly believe he did all he could with the budget and where the club was at the time.
 
I was really excited about Postiga but he wasn't ready, Acimovic looked absolute class at first then missed an open goal from a yard out (against Fulham I think) and never regained his confidence

similar to AVB we could get results most of the time, on occasion were brilliant but when it didn't work we got ripped to shreds
 
Back then, Hoddle's 352 looked incredible early on when both Carr and Ziege were fit, but they didn't get too many games together as one or the other was always out injured.
Their replacements weren't as good, Davies and Taricco, or it could be said they didn't fit the formation as well as Ziege and Carr who were world class wing backs.
Unlucky with not only the fitness of the wing backs, but also Dean Richards who were supposed to be the lynchpin of the defence having replaced Sol Campbell. In a time when we didn't have the squad depth of current days, Hoddle was struggling to play the way he wanted to and a lot of fan pressure for him to play a standard 442 (sounds familiar) made it a difficult task for him. It was when he turned on his own football philosophy that it was clear to me he had to go.
We were also a very slow and unenergetic team back then, as we didn't have much to spend on transfers and was left to sign a lot of veteran players.
Freund/Sherwood, Redknapp/Anderton, Poyet, Sheringham, Ferdinand. All in the latter stage of their careers - a lot of experience, but not enough leg work around them.
Like many/most Spurs managers, Hoddle started out well before everything turned sour (Hoddle, Jol, Ramos, Redknapp, AVB - certainly a pattern there). I'm not even sure any of our managers were better than the others, more a case of the results reflecting the quality of the squad. This is also a theory close to Harry Redknapp's heart, that it isn't too much a manager can do about the play, most comes down to the quality of players on the pitch.
 
Like many/most Spurs managers, Hoddle started out well before everything turned sour (Hoddle, Jol, Ramos, Redknapp, AVB - certainly a pattern there).

Things always end badly or they wouldn't end at all...
 
If AVB didn't get the players he wanted, the same could be said about Hoddle.
Hoddle tried to land a trio of Diego, Rivaldo and Eto'o. Diego and Eto'o pre world fame.
4-5 years later in the club progression, Levy would perhaps have been able to land Hoddle's top targets.

More negative part of Hoddle's transfer activity is the fact that he was closely tied to an agent, which lead to us signing guys like Bunjevcevic and Acimovic.
I'm not too fond of clubs being forced players upon them due to manager and agent (financial) connections.
 
Last edited:
I'm not even sure any of our managers were better than the others, more a case of the results reflecting the quality of the squad. This is also a theory close to Harry Redknapp's heart, that it isn't too much a manager can do about the play, most comes down to the quality of players on the pitch.

Agree with this theory 100%.....
 
Things always end badly or they wouldn't end at all...

Indeed, but we should perhaps stop expecting a messiah.
There are hardly any managers out there that stay with the club and enjoy success over a longer period.
More likely a new manager will only stay for 2-3 seasons at best before he has to move on.
The days of a Bill Nicholson are long gone, even Arsenal and United aren't likely to have another Wenger and Ferguson.
 
I went to every round of that league cup run and when we smashed Chelsea 5-1 it really felt like we were on the cusp of something great. Sadly it was not to last.

If I am honest the good things were probably overshadowed by the bad, you inevitably remember the things that happened towards the end of the reign when the wheels started to fall off.

Of course even with Glenn being a Spurs legend he was still fair game for the message board posters. Endless jibes about his "headscratching" comments... lol

That last paragraph rings too true unfortunately, him being a playing legend seemed to work against him and far from being given respect he was used to bait people and attention seek.
 
When people aren't happy they'll turn on anyone, even nicest guy in the world Chris "Clip Board Chris" Hughton felt the wrath of the supporters.
Even if they didn't have any clue what so every to what he actually did at the club. He just had always been around, and we'd never been any good, so he had to have been part of the problem ...
 
A big resounding NO! What's wrong with people. Glenn Hoddle? Seriously? You're living in the past.
 
This thread ought to be retitled with The Hoddle Era 2001-2003 (Viewed through Rose-Tinted Glasses).

Great player, club legend, but from what I hear Hoddle is not a good man-manager. He will probably end up alienating half the squad for being too egocentric. No thanks!
 
Last edited:
A big resounding NO! What's wrong with people. Glenn Hoddle? Seriously? You're living in the past.

:) Have you read any of the thread? It's discussing his stint as manager from 2001-2003, the whole point of the thread was to relive that past era! :)
 
This thread ought to be retitled with The Hoddle Era 2001-2003 (Viewed through Rose-Tinted Glasses).

Great player, club legend, but I don't think he's a good man manager. He will probably end up alienating half the squad for being too egocentric. No thanks!

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/444649/Rio-Ferdinand-Glenn-Hoddle-gave-us-a-real-identity

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17526672

Thats just a few
 
3-5-2 went out of fashion when 4-3-3 became popular. Reason being? Because as long as the team playing 4-3-3 has decent wing forwards, a team playing 3-5-2 will struggle badly because the wing backs will struggle. The wing back has a tricky job on their hands, if they go forward to support the attacks then they leave the wing forward unmarked, and we got badly punished by that a lot. However, if they sit back and mark the wing forward, then the team has no width and becomes much easier to defend against.

Having said that, crazy as this does look, I think there may be some merits for it in certain games

1527074_399012203535524_2016632532_n.jpg


Walker and Rose are very fast (certainly a lot faster than Ziege or Taricco were), so they could get back and cover quicker. You'd have comfortable ball playing defenders to carry the ball out. A wall of steel in Paulinho and Sandro. And the front three is where things get interesting. Because Townsend is a very direct player, if he gets the ball he'll start running at goal, and with two strikers that will also start making forward runs either side ahead of him, opposition centre-backs will know that if they stick close to the striker they're supposed to be marking, space will open up for Townsend to shoot in, whereas if they try to close him off he can play in one of the strikers. Could work. Or could **** up completely.

Hoddle came to Spurs the first time after years of us being ****ing awful to watch and sorted things out. The Chelsea 5-1 is the most famous one but I also remember us spanking Bolton 6-0 and Fulham 4-0. He had us top of the league at the start of the 02/03 season, and he signed Robbie Keane and Freddie Kanoute. But, he made a lot of mistakes. The Rebrov situation was farcical, if he didn't rate him he should have sold him instead of letting him rot on the bench. Instead of signing Jay-Jay Okocha who was available on a free transfer he went for Milenko Acimovic. He signed Helder Postiga. He did nothing for youth development. He regularly put out sides with absolutely no pace or ability to tackle. We had a habit of choking in the big games.

I think his failure to sign a defensive midfielder in the summer of 2003 was the final straw for me. It was so obviously what we needed, and I remember going to his last game, against his old team Southampton, who absolutely dingdonged on us at White Hart Lane and their fans were loving it. He was too stubborn to change his ways and ****ed off a lot of the senior players which is never a good thing. It wasn't a one off either, most of the England team of 1998 **** him off in their autobiographies, even though he had us playing good football.

I may be wrong, but I don't think this is a good idea.


Good post.
 
I'm just wondering who he'd put in his beloved 3-5-2 now with the injuries we have?? It's all just a waste of time if you don't have 3 fit CB's.

For me 4 at the back just makes the most sense. Kyle Walker almost forces you into it. He's been too good to take out of the 11.Why would we play 3 central defenders when we've got more talent and depth in CM? AVB wanted 2 competitors for every position and we've just about got it (save LB). Why go and change to a 3-5-2 when we don't have the depth positionally to support that?

I think if we're looking to go most attacking that suits the players we have now it's got to be something like a 4-1-2-3




or a 4-4-2 diamond (de Boer's Ajax)

 
Back