Welcome Ange: To Dare is to Didgeridoo

[glorygloryeze]

True everywhere - manager fails and the players he does have/did sign weren't good enough and the couple he missed out on 'that definitely would have come if it wasn't for the evil club higher ups' would have made all the difference.

I look at a long-term view of how we operate. If Ange is given the boot is is because he has underachieved with what he has.
It still doesn't (for me) distract from the fact that the business done last summer wasn't one for a club with lofty ambitions to push on from last season.
In fact, you could argue that actually the season is going as planned (i.e. not as good as last season) and as such should buy Ange time...

 

[glorygloryeze]

100%, the stadium was supposedly aimed to address the gap but in reality all we have done is keep up with the status quo.

A healthy profitable company is more likely to get an offer higher than its real value and I think that’s always been Levy’s plan.

The model in my opinion has always been don’t get relegated, try to get the most out of player sales and purchases, without eating into finances. Build the best infrastructure possible and attract a buyer who will pay over the odds for a turn key business.

Don’t blame him as you only live once but like I’ve said before he’s gone stale and can’t keep flogging a dead horse to the fans in terms of actually pushing the boat out and genuinely trying to win.

Shake my hand and all the best Danny you have done really well to get us this far but the next step is beyond your capabilities.

My worry is that the business model has reached a point now where football success is immaterial as the Beyonce concerts, F1 and NFL stuff mean revenues from that make it that it doesn't really matter how we do on the football side..

 

[Finney Is Back]

Ange got 130M+ in summer, somewhere around 280M+ in 18 months

You think that is us being cheap?

When the manager wants some proven players and we don't get them because we won't pay the wages then yes.

@Bedfordspurs - made a great post a few weeks ago showing the players we have jettisoned and the ones who have come in. We have got rid of a bunch of full internationals with lots of experience and mostly replaced them with kids who are at least a year and probably more like 2 or 3 years away from being good PL players. We have done this despite having at least a dozen games more this season than last season.

I hope it doesn't happen but I expect Postecoglou will probably eventually pay the price for actually being prepared to play a long term game and allow his wage bill to be significantly cut and the experience level of his squad to be significantly reduced in order for us to improve in the long term.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Like I said mate, >130M spent on top of > 150M

63M striker while keeping previous 60M striker, meant team went from no backup CF, to upgrading existing and having backup
40M Championship young player of year that the manager has said in last week he was not willing to pass on, even for an established player
30M on tricky winger to add variety to wide attack

That's ignoring Vic, VDV, Udogie, Dragusin would all be playing their 2nd season in PL (so should improve)
Spence gets re-integrated
Bentancur come back expected

Injuries aside, that team should be better this year, even if you argued it was only enough to maintain status quo, that still isn't 11th with the same amount of losses only bettered by bottom 4 ..

We kept our previous 60m striker because nobody wanted him. We were punting him out like mad and trying to persuade him to move to Saudi.

Looking at your list above - we basically added one proper first team player and added some kids who will likely be great in the long term.

Go back to @Bedfordspurs excellent post he made a few weeks' back. Look at the level of experience and first team games that we lost and look what we added. Our squad is significantly weaker than last season even though we're going to be playing 20 to 25 percent more games this season.

 

[billyiddo]

I look at a long-term view of how we operate. If Ange is given the boot is is because he has underachieved with what he has.
It still doesn't (for me) distract from the fact that the business done last summer wasn't one for a club with lofty ambitions to push on from last season.
In fact, you could argue that actually the season is going as planned (i.e. not as good as last season) and as such should buy Ange time...

But you think Ange is doing a poor job right? So what would a good job look like?

I'm pretty sure if he corrected all the mistakes that you point out that he is making in his approach we'd be sitting quite further up the table than we are - so if he was doing a good job and had us around the EL places and threatening top 4, where would the argument come from then that the club isn't doing enough?

 

[DeanoAustin]

100%, the stadium was supposedly aimed to address the gap but in reality all we have done is keep up with the status quo.

A healthy profitable company is more likely to get an offer higher than its real value and I think that’s always been Levy’s plan.

The model in my opinion has always been don’t get relegated, try to get the most out of player sales and purchases, without eating into finances. Build the best infrastructure possible and attract a buyer who will pay over the odds for a turn key business.

Don’t blame him as you only live once but like I’ve said before he’s gone stale and can’t keep flogging a dead horse to the fans in terms of actually pushing the boat out and genuinely trying to win.

Shake my hand and all the best Danny you have done really well to get us this far but the next step is beyond your capabilities.

I honestly think Levy wants football success and a profitable, well-run business. It's a question of how he prioritises both and I don't believe he's prepared to risk enough of the latter to achieve the former. I don't think he's some sort of evil genius who is taking us for every penny.

His strategy and work have brought us a long way but they won't take us any further unless he has a massive stroke of luck (as he almost did with Poch and other clubs underperforming).

 

[Finney Is Back]

Mate, pick a better example, Neto was a no go for us due to injuries, said it earlier, in an Ange system?

Chelsea is paying Neto same as we are paying Werner, the difference was (besides clubs), Chelsea gave an injury prone player a 7 year contract, the guy would have taken that over fudging City/Barca

Eze is still at Palace mate, nobody beat us to his signature, Palace sold the player they needed to sell and that door closed.

Lol..... and there is Neto fit for Chelsea while Odobert has a serious injury.

 

[glorygloryeze]

But you think Ange is doing a poor job right? So what would good job look like?

I'm pretty sure if he corrected all the mistakes that you point out in his approach we'd be sitting quite further up the table than we are - so where would the argument come from then that the club isn't doing enough?

If he corrected his mistakes we would indeed be further up imo, maybe 7th/8th. The point is that we didn't do enough/show enough ambition to be pushing on from last season and that cycle of lack of footballing ambition would likely continue anyway

 

[Bedfordspurs]

We kept our previous 60m striker because nobody wanted him. We were punting him out like mad and trying to persuade him to move to Saudi.

Looking at your list above - we basically added one proper first team player and added some kids who will likely be great in the long term.

Go back to @Bedfordspurs excellent post he made a few weeks' back. Look at the level of experience and first team games that we lost and look what we added. Our squad is significantly weaker than last season even though we're going to be playing 20 to 25 percent more games this season.

And that’s the gamble we took
I think it was sensible… at the time
What I didn’t get was paining out players with some actual experience and keeping others with none and then not playing them
Dorrington and Lankshear are clearly players Ange won’t play … they should have gone out and we should have kept Philips and Veliz
That, in hindsight, makes no sense to me
Gonna be fun on Sunday see Ben Davies hamstring ping out of the stadium as he chases after Cunha (assuming his ban hasn’t happened)

 

[Bedfordspurs]

If he corrected his mistakes we would indeed be further up imo, maybe 7th/8th. The point is that we didn't do enough/show enough ambition to be pushing on from last season and that cycle of lack of footballing ambition would likely continue anyway

I think we should be 4/5 points better off based on the way games went and how we played earlier
But that still wouldn’t fix any of the depth issues today
Sunday we are possibly seeing a back 4 of…
Porro, Gray, unfit Ben and udogie
3 players who are currently not fit to play for varying reasons and a kid. That’s criminal to be in that position, but that’s where we are

 

[Finney Is Back]

I'm always surprised by how often this gets overlooked. Transfer fees are only one part of the equation and, with the Bosman ruling and length of contract heavily influencing the size of the fee, not the big part.

To sign quality players, you need to pay big wages. You have to incentivise a player to come to your club and the amount of money his former club gets isn't going to influence a player. How much money he gets in his back pocket will and we seem to be very rigid on what we pay.

Levy is famed for bonuses - if the club does well, the players do well. If we don't, the players don't. Do we pay anyone the type of wages that Liverpool pay VVD and Salah? Do we pay anyone the wages Man U pay Rashford and Casemiro? Do we pay anyone what Woolwich pay Rice?

Until we start paying big wages, we won't get big players. Levy knows the minute he pays a big salary, he'll have Son, Romero and so on at his door looking for more. He knows it throws out his wages to revenue ratio and he knows it is a big risk to our profitability if the team doesn't perform on the pitch.

Companies are always worth more to the shareholders when they keep their "core" costs as low as possible. It's not really a surprise that we consistently have the lowest wage to turnover ratio in the premier league.

 

[billyiddo]

If he corrected his mistakes we would indeed be further up imo, maybe 7th/8th. The point is that we didn't do enough/show enough ambition to be pushing on from last season and that cycle of lack of footballing ambition would likely continue anyway

we're 6 points away from 5th - looking at the games we've dropped points in and the performances that have gone along with them i think we could easily be around that position if the manager was doing a competent job and if we were in that position then I'd be more than happy with the overall progress being made on & off the field, assuming that performances & bedding in of tactics were also further along.

The managers poor performance to date is the real problem.

 

[DeanoAustin]

Companies are always worth more to the shareholders when they keep their "core" costs as low as possible. It's not really a surprise that we consistently have the lowest wage to turnover ratio in the premier league.

Exactly right.

Also, as far as I know, Levy gets paid about £3m to £5m a year. That's £60k - £100k a week. Nice salary.

But you'd also have to wonder with his business head on, is he thinking "hang on a minute. I run this place, I live and breathe it 24 hours a day and I have lads being paid more than me for just kicking a ball around a pitch and some of them don't even do that much".

 

[glorygloryeze]

we're 6 points away from 5th - looking at the games we've dropped points in and the performances that have gone along with them i think we could easily be around that position if the manager was doing a competent job and if we were in that position then I'd be more than happy with the overall progress being made on & off the field, assuming that performances & bedding in of tactics were also further along.

The managers poor performance to date is the real problem.

As i've said, i can seperate out the poor performance of Ange from the ongoing way our club is run. We can get rid of Ange but we will still have to same issues long-term: i.e. a board who are not very ambitious on the football whom will likely have to employ someone similar (and 'back' in a similar way and on the cycle we go..)

 

[Finney Is Back]

I honestly think Levy wants football success and a profitable, well-run business. It's a question of how he prioritises both and I don't believe he's prepared to risk enough of the latter to achieve the former. I don't think he's some sort of evil genius who is taking us for every penny.

His strategy and work have brought us a long way but they won't take us any further unless he has a massive stroke of luck (as he almost did with Poch and other clubs underperforming).

Reverse the order of the things in your first sentence and you're there I'd say. He wants a business with a high valuation and would like to have football success on top of that if it happens to fits in with keeping the core costs as low as possible.

 

[lurker of old]

Re the manager's "poor performance", the Board's perspective on our performance will be heavily influenced by data. Just started reading "How to win the Premier League" by a guy who worked for Decision Technology, (contracted to Spurs by Damien Comolli) before being head hunted by FSG to work for Liverpool. It's essential reading - and if and when a decision is made to replace Ange, it will be because the stats show that the team is underperforming, not because we are in the bottom half of the league or the fans are fed up.

 

[billyiddo]

As i've said, i can seperate out the poor performance of Ange from the ongoing way our club is run. We can get rid of Ange but we will still have to same issues long-term: i.e. a board who are not very ambitious on the football whom will likely have to employ someone similar (and 'back' in a similar way and on the cycle we go..)

I don't think you can tbh

Like I said if the manager was doing a compete job then we'd be around where you would expect the club to be at this stage of things. If we were in that position and people were still moaning about the club because of missed players in a transfer window like there always are for every club then they would just be being unreasonable. Right now the poor performance of the manager is exasperating things.

 

[Finney Is Back]

And that’s the gamble we took
I think it was sensible… at the time
What I didn’t get was paining out players with some actual experience and keeping others with none and then not playing them
Dorrington and Lankshear are clearly players Ange won’t play … they should have gone out and we should have kept Philips and Veliz
That, in hindsight, makes no sense to me
Gonna be fun on Sunday see Ben Davies hamstring ping out of the stadium as he chases after Cunha (assuming his ban hasn’t happened)

I've watched both Lankshear and Dorrington for the youths several times. They are both good, promising players but neither are yet ready for the PL. Both probably need a couple seasons out on loan to lower level (Div 1 or champtionship) teams. You are correct that they probably should've gone out, though I think there were extenuating circumstances for both.

For Lankshear, I suspect that as well as Ange knowing that we were trying to punt Richarlison on, as well as him constantly being injured, that means we'd only have Solanke as a number 9 option. I suspect it was also felt that Lankshear would still get something out of playing age group football (which I agree with). I suspect Veliz wasn't retained because of Europa league squad position would've meant he was only in the PL squad. You already know my opinion on us leaving ourselves very short for our PL squad and I would've happily retained Veliz for that but maybe, again, Ange is looking long term and feeling Veliz playing lots of games at the top level in Spain is better for his and our future than him getting a few bits and pieces of minutes in the premier league?

For Dorrington, I think he was injured at the start of the season so perhaps not really likely to get a loan. He will also still benefit from age-group football IMO, I don't think he has yet quite outgrown that level. With Phillips, again, I think the manager is thinking long term and considering the fact that Phillips playing every game for a club in the Championship was better than him sitting around at Spurs with 4 central defenders ahead of him in the pecking order and therefore only playing age-group football that he has now clearly outgrown. Of course this looks like a bad decision now but that's because we've had a bit of a freak run of injuries in that position.

 

[glorygloryeze]

I don't think you can tbh

Like I said if the manager was doing a compete job then we'd be around where you would expect the club to be at this stage of things. If we were in that position and people were still moaning about the club because of missed players in a transfer window like there always are for every club then they would just be being unreasonable. Right now the poor performance of the manager is exasperating things.

Ok then, if we sacked Postecoglou tomorrow, how do YOU think things would pan out? What do YOU think club would do this January and in the summer?

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I've watched both Lankshear and Dorrington for the youths several times. They are both good, promising players but neither are yet ready for the PL. Both probably need a couple seasons out on loan to lower level (Div 1 or champtionship) teams. You are correct that they probably should've gone out, though I think there were extenuating circumstances for both.

For Lankshear, I suspect that as well as Ange knowing that we were trying to punt Richarlison on, as well as him constantly being injured, that means we'd only have Solanke as a number 9 option. I suspect it was also felt that Lankshear would still get something out of playing age group football (which I agree with). I suspect Veliz wasn't retained because of Europa league squad position would've meant he was only in the PL squad. You already know my opinion on us leaving ourselves very short for our PL squad and I would've happily retained Veliz for that but maybe, again, Ange is looking long term and feeling Veliz playing lots of games at the top level in Spain is better for his and our future than him getting a few bits and pieces of minutes in the premier league?

For Dorrington, I think he was injured at the start of the season so perhaps not really likely to get a loan. With Phillips, again, I think the manager is thinking long term and considering the fact that Phillips playing every game for a club in the Championship was better than him sitting around at Spurs with 4 central defenders ahead of him in the pecking order and therefore only playing age-group football that he has now clearly outgrown. Of course this looks like a bad decision now but that's because we've had a bit of a freak run of injuries in that position.

Whole heartedly agree with all of that
I’m on gardens leave so just dine an analysis again if what we have brought in and sold.loaned
I’ll posit it now