• 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 - Former Head Coach

DubaiSpur said:
I will die on the hill of him being a decent coach. Nothing earth shattering, but a decent coach and (by most accounts) a good man who tried to get to know the staff and get the players to also get to know them.

But those types just don't work at Spurs. Never have, never will. You need to be a nutcase messiah. You need to believe, make everyone believe. And you need to have political acumen - at least, to the extent of navigating the backroom battles, keeping the fans onside, and keeping the players happy.

All those soft skills are where failed. He'll do well at a smaller club where things are set up like they were at Brentford - where the coach is just a cog, and not an important one.
Click to expand...
He imo failed at more things than one. I agree he seems like a decent coach, just how good imo remains to be seen.

He has done really well at one club, in one set of circumstances. About as well suited to us as a seagull brick into a summer's dessert.

Luckily for him and us it didn't end in a complete disaster, but the longer it is until we make another appointment like him the better.
 
Lemonade Money said:
Eh?, I'm talking about the kids you coach football.
Click to expand...

Yeah, youth football is a different sport to PL football, it’s a game, to be enjoyed fairly by all with respect for those involved.

PL football is not a game, it’s a business, an aggressive one where only the result matters.

Two distinctly different coaching attitudes and approaches.
 
DubaiSpur said:
I will die on the hill of him being a decent coach. Nothing earth shattering, but a decent coach and (by most accounts) a good man who tried to get to know the staff and get the players to also get to know them.

But those types just don't work at Spurs. Never have, never will. You need to be a nutcase messiah. You need to believe, make everyone believe. And you need to have political acumen - at least, to the extent of navigating the backroom battles, keeping the fans onside, and keeping the players happy.

All those soft skills are where failed. He'll do well at a smaller club where things are set up like they were at Brentford - where the coach is just a cog, and not an important one.
Click to expand...

You have just described every elite football club that wins things. Show me one which is not those.
BTW (and I don't think you're saying this because, like me, I believe you too were an acolyte) Poch was not a 'nutcase messiah' he simply believed.
I do think this club is different to all others with regards to the pressure vs presence vs expectations dynamic. He was not remotely able to step up.
 
tommysvr said:
It’s quite funny the difference between this and the Ange threads. Ange made people feel something, whether they remember the joy he brought or still refer to him as a ‘fat clam’

Thomas Frank is just…that unfortunate blip. No worse than that. Unfortunate with injuries where Ange caused them. Still a good coach where Ange is a clueless idiot from a footballing backwater.

Being incredibly bland has its benefits I guess.
Click to expand...

There’s like a really weird code of silence with Frank. In the media especially. It’s like everyone is unwilling to front up and acknowledge what an absolutely disastrous appointment it was. And you can do that without attacking the man so personally, but I see no one really doing it. There’s nods to it - description of bad form, reminders of the negative atmosphere at home, but no one quite puts it all together and says it how it is. He was an absolutely atrocious fit, and very nearly got us relegated.

The treatment of Ange by contrast, given he actually did achieve 5th and a trophy, is very clear. Equally even Tudor, treated like a laughing stock for managing a few games of a team suffering a massive injury crisis and extremely low on confidence. Was Tudor the saviour like De Zerbi? No! But why is he the laughing stock and the person that produced genuinely the worse football we have played in the PL era and who systematically destroyed the confidence of the team getting off with nothing?

It’s completely odd, the biggest example for me is when Spence and Micky ignored him. Even then it was written off as ‘they’re just frustrated about a bad performance in a derby at home’. There was no examination of what it meant to be ignoring the manager at that time. Deeply weird code of silence to protect this guy.
 
Surfless said:
Wrong fit, and if he is interviewed in years to come, he took the wrong approach from day one and didn't improve. His pragmatism for which he was famed, his ability to set a team up to beat whoever the opposition are, was found to be desperately short of imagination, especially when shorn of what little creativity he actually had at his disposal. Any manager would have a hard time without Madders, Kulu, Kudus, Solanke etc but De Zerbi has shown what you can do if you have players who give you work rate over technical prowess. Frank was literally just happy to grind a point per game for the rest of the season and stay up on 40 odd.

For all the faux pas moments, gooner cups etc, his biggest misstep was actually not connecting with the fans and what they were asking of his team.
Click to expand...

Not directed at you as such but it bugs me that Frank is described as pragmatic. He wasn’t, by any definition of the word. He was completely risk averse.

De Zerbi inverting Palinha and the left full back’s positions so we have an out ball from the back, with the better receiver and passer taking the ball in a central area…that is pragmatic. It’s making the best of the resources at your disposal. Accentuating the strengths and masking the weakness. Frank was just scared.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
There’s like a really weird code of silence with Frank. In the media especially. It’s like everyone is unwilling to front up and acknowledge what an absolutely disastrous appointment it was. And you can do that without attacking the man so personally, but I see no one really doing it. There’s nods to it - description of bad form, reminders of the negative atmosphere at home, but no one quite puts it all together and says it how it is. He was an absolutely atrocious fit, and very nearly got us relegated.

The treatment of Ange by contrast, given he actually did achieve 5th and a trophy, is very clear. Equally even Tudor, treated like a laughing stock for managing a few games of a team suffering a massive injury crisis and extremely low on confidence. Was Tudor the saviour like De Zerbi? No! But why is he the laughing stock and the person that produced genuinely the worse football we have played in the PL era and who systematically destroyed the confidence of the team getting off with nothing?

It’s completely odd, the biggest example for me is when Spence and Micky ignored him. Even then it was written off as ‘they’re just frustrated about a bad performance in a derby at home’. There was no examination of what it meant to be ignoring the manager at that time. Deeply weird code of silence to protect this guy.
Click to expand...



It's not really hard to understsnd, Frank didn't hoodwink people in to thinking he was the messiah so now that he's gone there isn't much to talk about. His record was poor and he was deservedly sacked.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
There’s like a really weird code of silence with Frank. In the media especially. It’s like everyone is unwilling to front up and acknowledge what an absolutely disastrous appointment it was. And you can do that without attacking the man so personally, but I see no one really doing it. There’s nods to it - description of bad form, reminders of the negative atmosphere at home, but no one quite puts it all together and says it how it is. He was an absolutely atrocious fit, and very nearly got us relegated.

The treatment of Ange by contrast, given he actually did achieve 5th and a trophy, is very clear. Equally even Tudor, treated like a laughing stock for managing a few games of a team suffering a massive injury crisis and extremely low on confidence. Was Tudor the saviour like De Zerbi? No! But why is he the laughing stock and the person that produced genuinely the worse football we have played in the PL era and who systematically destroyed the confidence of the team getting off with nothing?

It’s completely odd, the biggest example for me is when Spence and Micky ignored him. Even then it was written off as ‘they’re just frustrated about a bad performance in a derby at home’. There was no examination of what it meant to be ignoring the manager at that time. Deeply weird code of silence to protect this guy.
Click to expand...
I think it's partly because

1) A lot of the media were wrong about Frank, and they are always more quiet about things they get wrong

2) Frank is just very non descript, nice guy but no great personality/doesn't sell stories

3) Frank was very media friendly, wouldn't upset anyone. Where as someone like Ange would give it back to them so when it goes wrong the media will have a field day

If/when it goes wrong with RDZ, you will be hearing plenty about it for that very reason....
 
billyiddo said:
It's not really hard to understsnd, Frank didn't hoodwink people in to thinking he was the messiah so now that he's gone there isn't much to talk about. His record was poor and he was deservedly sacked.
Click to expand...

He was always excellent at courting the media and being everyone's 'friend'. It absolutely helped him weather the self-inflicted storm. His media mates were never going to call him out.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
There’s like a really weird code of silence with Frank. In the media especially. It’s like everyone is unwilling to front up and acknowledge what an absolutely disastrous appointment it was. And you can do that without attacking the man so personally, but I see no one really doing it. There’s nods to it - description of bad form, reminders of the negative atmosphere at home, but no one quite puts it all together and says it how it is. He was an absolutely atrocious fit, and very nearly got us relegated.

The treatment of Ange by contrast, given he actually did achieve 5th and a trophy, is very clear. Equally even Tudor, treated like a laughing stock for managing a few games of a team suffering a massive injury crisis and extremely low on confidence. Was Tudor the saviour like De Zerbi? No! But why is he the laughing stock and the person that produced genuinely the worse football we have played in the PL era and who systematically destroyed the confidence of the team getting off with nothing?

It’s completely odd, the biggest example for me is when Spence and Micky ignored him. Even then it was written off as ‘they’re just frustrated about a bad performance in a derby at home’. There was no examination of what it meant to be ignoring the manager at that time. Deeply weird code of silence to protect this guy.
Click to expand...

What's also being forgotten is that we got more points this season. This season was unprecedented in the amount of points you could have and still finish 18th. You didn't have the comfort blanket of knowing that there were 3 awful teams who were getting relegated and every game from about March onwards was a dead rubber. Last season would have been very different if the bottom of the league table had the same dynamics as this year. It's why Hammers have been very unlucky to go down on that amount of points.

Ange has actually tinkled me off this week. After our club spent £400m on players in 2 years for him, he then had the front to sit there with those pricks at Sky and say that the club didn't back him. He listed 5 players including Guehi and Semenyo and then had a side swipe at buying the 3 amazing kids. Whether you believe that or not, you act professionally and have a bit of class about yourself. You don't go slagging your ex employers off ever. You keep a dignified, classy silence like Frank and Tudor have done. Not Ange though. He lacks class in the moments it matters. Always did. It's not about being right or wrong. It's about conducting yourself with class.

I've spoken for years and years about this quality over quantity problem with transfers at Spurs. That is what Ange should have spoken about. That's what I'm hoping RDZ advocates for with his bosses. Just tell them he'll nurture this existing squad but needs 2 or 3 big transfers each year to go with the promotion of youngsters.
 
thfcsteff said:
You have just described every elite football club that wins things. Show me one which is not those.
Click to expand...

Bayern, to a lesser extent PSG, and Chelsea.

Hear me out here -

Bayern - basically win the league every year even with a plank of wood in charge. Kompany isn't exactly Conte in terms of emotional intensity.

PSG - see above. Their elevation to European success came with Luis Enrique, but they're rich enough that anyone can coach them and win Ligue 1 at a minimum.

Chelsea - they win things even when in utter chaos, and regardless of the manager. Dour Avram Grant won something with Chelsea, iirc. So did di Matteo, later of West Brom. Enzo Maresca, quiet systems coach from Leicester. And so on. Comes down to them always spending billions on the best squad, that (until recently, anyway) just worked to keep them winning.

In all these cases, the clubs have structural advantages that allow them to win regardless of the coach. We aren't that - we have no advantages relative to the rest of the big boys. So we need a messiah to pull us over the line.

thfcsteff said:
BTW (and I don't think you're saying this because, like me, I believe you too were an acolyte) Poch was not a 'nutcase messiah' he simply believed.
I do think this club is different to all others with regards to the pressure vs presence vs expectations dynamic. He was not remotely able to step up.
Click to expand...

For sure mate. I don't mean nutcase messiah pejoratively - more that you need to be a little bit crazy to believe in Spurs and what you can do at the club, even when no one else does. In my experience, all those that inspire loyalty in others have that attribute - a slightly crazy amount of self belief and the ability to make others believe, too.

Someone who comes in saying 'we will lose games' is right, analytically speaking. But all wrong, personality wise. Poch, Ange and now (looks like) de Zerbi - all of them know how to get people believing in impossible causes. You need that at Spurs. You don't elsewhere.
 
billyiddo said:
It's not really hard to understsnd, Frank didn't hoodwink people in to thinking he was the messiah so now that he's gone there isn't much to talk about. His record was poor and he was deservedly sacked.
Click to expand...

This might be the most accurate take actually. British people just cannot handle anyone with a modicum of self-confidence. Anyone with that will be tolerated for as long as they do well, but as soon as there are bumps they will absolutely come for you, claim you're making yourself "the messiah" and look to bring you back down to earth. Even more points if they're Australian!

Frank was a reasonable coach without any stand out personality traits, and therefore didn't ruffle any feathers. His Spurs team was a reflection of that (they didn't like him) as much as Ange's was of him (they loved him).
 
billyiddo said:
It's not really hard to understsnd, Frank didn't hoodwink people in to thinking he was the messiah so now that he's gone there isn't much to talk about. His record was poor and he was deservedly sacked.
Click to expand...
It's just rear view mirror stuff...and by virtue of surviving, can thankfully be forgotten.

Similarly, over at United...are they dissecting Amorin?..or just focusing on Carrick?
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
It's just rear view mirror stuff...and by virtue of surviving, can thankfully be forgotten.

Similarly, over at United...are they dissecting Amorin?..or just focusing on Carrick?
Click to expand...

Well Amorim left than in 5th, it’s no where near the level of disaster that Frank was. And I think that’s my point…for Frank to even be compared to Amorim shows how differently he is treated relative to how bad he actually was for us.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Well Amorim left than in 5th, it’s no where near the level of disaster that Frank was. And I think that’s my point…for Frank to even be compared to Amorim shows how differently he is treated relative to how bad he actually was for us.
Click to expand...
I'm not comparing them as managers and outcomes.

Its the wider point of fan behaviour.
(Btw I have no clue as to United fans dissection of Amorin, hence the question marks)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back