Come on mate. this is our standard now? we looked ok for a little bit against Bournemouth?
We didn't dominate the game, we didn't own possession, their keeper had one notable save, we still fudge up basics like throw ins, the manager was slow on subs (RKM should have come off at HT)
Where the fudge is
@DubaiSpur to back me up, this is our ambition, 3 wins in last 12 PL games and well at least we didn't get tonked is the sentiment?
I'm here mate, though I mainly lurk these days.
Fact is, Frank isn't the problem. Give him enough time and he'll look better, only because nearly any coach looks better once he's given time. And he's a good bloke - humble and truthful, which always counts for something in my book.
Whether his system has much upside beyond, say, 10th-12th every year - that's still to be decided, given his high water-mark at Brentford was finishing midtable.
But ultimately, keep Frank or sack Frank, neither will really fix the hole we're in. Only money can fix that - moving on poor players and buying good ones, in positions that make sense, to keep the squad constantly improving, getting better.
What has happened at Spurs has been the opposite - starting from the high water-mark in 2017, our approach has been to consistently buy backups and downgrades to the players we used to have, and then watch as those players became starters and the older, better players left.
Walker -> Aurier -> Doherty -> Porro,
Kane -> Richy,
Son-> Tel/Odobert,
Eriksen -> Lo Celso -> Maddison -> now Simons,
Dembele->Sissoko/Winks-> Ndombele -> Hojbjerg -> Bentancur/Palhinha,
Lloris -> Vicario,
...and so on.
In each case, a better player was replaced by a worse one, who ended up becoming our starter. It's rare a player now even remotely compares to the Poch team of 16-17 - not even a decade ago. Because of the above cycle.
Take Udogie as an example. He's a sicknote, and on/off when he does play. It's clear we need a second left-back to rotate with him, possibly even replace him.
But those players cost money and wages - first-team left backs won't leave their clubs to compete with Udogie without being paid, and we don't pay wages to get them.
So we settle on instead buying a backup to plug the gap when he's out, who obviously won't be as good, but (typically) whom we hope can come good over time - so, a youngster. This window's version seems to be that Brazilian kid Souza. When he's put in, standards will inevitably fall, just because he's raw and untested. And thus the standards are lowered to a new baseline, and the cycle begins again.
Whereas, imagine if we went and got a starter to challenge Udogie instead - if Udogie can't cut it, he drops to the bench, simple as. A top-class left-back.
The opposite happens. Standards rise. Everyone around the club gets a lift - players know they have to perform or lose their place. Managers have options to pick. Suddenly the club looks ambitious again.
Do this enough times and you have a virtuous cycle. No player can take his place for granted, the squad is full of talent, and basically any manager can succeed - this is exactly what happened at Woolwich, and they're going to win the league because of it.
Until I see us engaging in that sort of behaviour, I don't expect anything to change mate. And so I don't get annoyed about it any more - it's plain as day to see our direction, and until it changes, I won't let my mental health be destroyed by agonizing over it. These days it hurts a little less when we lose than it used to, and that's worth something. To me, at least.
