• 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

Thomas Frank’s coaching staff

So? The point that's repeatedly been made is that the coaching staff Ange chose were not good enough. It's a similar point that's been made about Scott Munn, without anyone know what his job actually was.

People see a result (Spurs finished 17th) and extrapolate from there: everyone involved must be terrible at their jobs.
Well we could clearly see on the pitch that someone wasn’t doing their job correctly. Maybe the coaches just went with what Ange said and didn’t add any of their own input to try and change it? Maybe they are not that great? Being a manager is completely different to being a coach, even if they were a coach originally i doubt they will have as much time to coach with all the other responsibilities they have.
 
So? The point that's repeatedly been made is that the coaching staff Ange chose were not good enough. It's a similar point that's been made about Scott Munn, without anyone know what his job actually was.

People see a result (Spurs finished 17th) and extrapolate from there: everyone involved must be terrible at their jobs.
let-it-go-elsa.gif
 
So? The point that's repeatedly been made is that the coaching staff Ange chose were not good enough. It's a similar point that's been made about Scott Munn, without anyone know what his job actually was.

People see a result (Spurs finished 17th) and extrapolate from there: everyone involved must be terrible at their jobs.
The fact that Ange, his coaching staff and according to reports Munn have all gone tells me they weren't very good at their jobs. I have nothing else to base it on other than performances on the pitch which were also not very good
 
The fact that Ange, his coaching staff and according to reports Munn have all gone tells me they weren't very good at their jobs. I have nothing else to base it on other than performances on the pitch which were also not very good

GrjzEyjXYAElMnL
 
So? The point that's repeatedly been made is that the coaching staff Ange chose were not good enough. It's a similar point that's been made about Scott Munn, without anyone know what his job actually was.

People see a result (Spurs finished 17th) and extrapolate from there: everyone involved must be terrible at their jobs.

Ange's coaching staff were mostly junior (regardless of if rated our not), they didn't have experience with his system (he didn't bring long time staff with him), so they had to learn the system/expectations at same time as players, there was a lack of specialization or support (see the set piece and analysts roles for Frank) that could help blind spots. This isn't about people being brick, it's about did Ange have the right set of people around him to give him the best chance at success.

The statement by Lange that the focus immediately after picking Frank was who they could get to support him, i.e. give him best chance of success to be says, lesson learned.
 
Ange's coaching staff were mostly junior (regardless of if rated our not), they didn't have experience with his system (he didn't bring long time staff with him), so they had to learn the system/expectations at same time as players, there was a lack of specialization or support (see the set piece and analysts roles for Frank) that could help blind spots. This isn't about people being brick, it's about did Ange have the right set of people around him to give him the best chance at success.

The statement by Lange that the focus immediately after picking Frank was who they could get to support him, i.e. give him best chance of success to be says, lesson learned.
Not forgetting that before you get to individuals ability..... that If you don't bring a crew with you and employ everyone fresh you are relying on working relationships being good between you and the new staff, and the new staff with each other from a standing start.
 

Thomas Frank​

"Let's start with the assistant coaches - Justin Cochrane, who comes from Brentford and worked with me before: he will be in charge of the offensive part of the game and some training planning – getting that smooth and running. Then we’ve got Andreas Georgson, from Manchester United - but I also worked with him previously at Brentford. He’ll be an assistant coach focused mainly on set-pieces, restarts, and some culture work. Matt Wells, who will be responsible for the defensive part of the game, also contributing to training. I think the way we split the roles is really good and covers all the abilities we’d like to have.

"Then we’ve added Cameron Campbell as an individual coach - big on how we develop players. That was a big wish from Johan and me, something we talked about that we thought was crucial. Not many clubs have nailed that. Hopefully, we can take it to the next level. We’ve also got Fabian Otte in as a goalkeeping coach – really excited about him coming in. He’s got great experience working with some of the best goalkeepers in the world and hopefully he can push the goalkeepers. Finally, Chris Haslam is the Head of Performance – first-team coach. That’s the physical part of football training but also the link to everything. So overall, I think we’ve got a very exciting group together."

Johan Lange​

"Thomas referenced it. I think it’s important to have specialists. We’re very fortunate as a club to be able to attract some of the best specialist coaches in the world. As you say, we’ve also made a couple of internal promotions. Stuart Lewis will come into a new role as Transition Coach between the First Team and the Academy. As Thomas said around Cameron coming in as the Individual Coach, we want players of all ages to have that development mindset, strengthening even more the bond between the First Team and Academy is something we’ve worked on for a number years, and with this hire of Stuart coming in this new role, we believe it’ll be even stronger in the years to come, because we have some very exciting young players that will come through and push in the upcoming years, and they need that special attention to bridge that big gap that is to go from Academy football to the Premier League.

"We also have Dean Brill coming in as assistant goalkeeper coach – he was head of Academy goalkeeper coaching for the last four years and did a very good job. It shows that we want to show both players but also staff – whether they’re coaches, medical, performance analysis, scouting – that if you coming into our Academy and getting the DNA under the skin, we can have good exciting pathways for coaches, specialists, in this football club."

 
How can you or I possibly answer that?

Well to the points I made before and others have made

- If you appoint a mostly junior support team who is neither familiar with the manager at a tactical or personal level, who doesn't have a value add of their own (where they may be significantly better at the manager than something, vs. learn on the job)

I don't think you are giving yourself "the best chance" at success
 
Well to the points I made before and others have made

- If you appoint a mostly junior support team who is neither familiar with the manager at a tactical or personal level, who doesn't have a value add of their own (where they may be significantly better at the manager than something, vs. learn on the job)

I don't think you are giving yourself "the best chance" at success

Sure but you see the same thing said of Pochettino on the other side. Apparently one of his biggest issues was that he has the same group of coaches everywhere he goes.

It's just people look for simple explanations to things that can't be explained that simply.
 
Why is that a bad thing?
Because it's another unknown, and if people didn't get on or a colleague is not quite up to the job it's another thing you have to deal with or sort out.

If you role up with a load of you own people (eg like Conte) ...those dynamics and relationships are set and filtered already.
 
Because it's another unknown, and if people didn't get on or a colleague is not quite up to the job it's another thing you have to deal with or sort out.

If you role up with a load of you own people (eg like Conte) ...those dynamics and relationships are set and filtered already.

Or having fresh people and fresh ideas can challenge how you see things, and make you improve that way.

There's no right or wrong. No one can say Ange bringing in a fresh group of coaches was inherently a negative.
 
Or having fresh people and fresh ideas can challenge how you see things, and make you improve that way.

There's no right or wrong. No one can say Ange bringing in a fresh group of coaches was inherently a negative.
I've not said that, one path has potential of negatives the other path does not.
A new manager on the way in, is coming with a pretty strong ideology and culture (as we saw).

Im going to park this. I've never known anyone to be so raw and defensive about something.
 
I've not said that, one path has potential of negatives the other path does not.
A new manager on the way in, is coming with a pretty strong ideology and culture (as we saw).

Im going to park this. I've never known anyone to be so raw and defensive about something.

It’s not about Ange though. Seems that no one can look past any of my posts without thinking they are these days.

As I said above, I find the same comments on the other side (Poch) just as silly.
 
The Poch coach thing was that after X amount of years it could have done with freshening up - which was a valid argument/point of debate. I don't think it's an answer to the topic at hand though
Clearly the most important factor is that Jesus Perez’s faraway stare made me think of Brick Tamland from Anchorman
 
Back