ENIC

[Raziel]

Fair point.

However how can our club expect perfection from managers when they themselves are far from perfection?

Cannot tell me our expectations surely are not as high as Chelsea or Madrid as mentioned. Countering this … why have their model of manager merry-go rounds work where ours have failed miserably?

I also acknowledge that the club moved quickly to recognise a mistake … again though there seems to be far too many in comparison.

Money

- Chelsea lost 1M/week for 13 years under RA, they made tons of bad buys, bad manager decisions, and were able to simply move on (see Lukaku as ultimate example), and the jammy fudges have had a 2nd owner come in like Charlie Sheen in brothel to build on that.
- RM is in another league money wise, plus years of very questionable (alleged) government benefits

All these discussions need context/nuance
- The very biggest clubs (RM) spend stupid amounts of money but the expectation is different, 2nd place or even one trophy is failure
- We spend way more that lots of clubs in our league/Europe but not quite top level, our expectations have been being in Europe, challenging for top 4, making a run in cups, not doing that, or not looking like you will do that is failure
- Similarly, clubs at the bottom (Wolves as e.g. probably makes our manager changes seem really stable) where the failure is relegation, the trigger gets pulled super quick (if you were to look at average manager tenure for a club in bottom 6 of table, it probably be less than a season)
- Clubs like Brighton, Brentford, Palace who spend enough to usually be comfortably safe, can afford to potentially not pull the trigger as often.

 

[Gazza]

And you ignore the part about the caretaker for a week or two isn't really an issue, the issue is getting the next manager right after the caretaker. If you moaned about taking too long to replace a caretaker, that is fair enough in a couple of cases. If you moaned about ending up with Nuno after a caretaker again, fair enough. But moaning about haveing caretakers, that's flim flam.

A caretaker taking over a week or two? How many on that list are we talking about? In a week or two we could have played up to 4 league games and a cup game … there didn’t seem to be any succession strategy or urgency in appointing a caretaker. And even worse is appointing the most in the league.

Going back to 5 games its accepting defeat and it’s such a loser mentality. Surely we should be fighting for points and wins in every game not just sticking some caretaker in in hope.

Or managerial recruitment is shocking, the fact that we have needed so many caretakers shows this. Do you not agree?

On the flip side please enlighten me why we have needed so many, no matter the length of time. You can start by telling me “nothing to do with levy and wrong decisions either in the transfer market or initial appointment”

 

[Gazza]

Money

- Chelsea lost 1M/week for 13 years under RA, they made tons of bad buys, bad manager decisions, and were able to simply move on (see Lukaku as ultimate example), and the jammy fudges have had a 2nd owner come in like Charlie Sheen in brothel to build on that.
- RM is in another league money wise, plus years of very questionable (alleged) government benefits

All these discussions need context/nuance
- The very biggest clubs (RM) spend stupid amounts of money but the expectation is different, 2nd place or even one trophy is failure
- We spend way more that lots of clubs in our league/Europe but not quite top level, our expectations have been being in Europe, challenging for top 4, making a run in cups, not doing that, or not looking like you will do that is failure
- Similarly, clubs at the bottom (Wolves as e.g. probably makes our manager changes seem really stable) where the failure is relegation, the trigger gets pulled super quick (if you were to look at average manager tenure for a club in bottom 6 of table, it probably be less than a season)
- Clubs like Brighton, Brentford, Palace who spend enough to usually be comfortably safe, can afford to potentially not pull the trigger as often.

Now that’s a top quality response.

So essentially summed up we are not really ever going to actually go and try to win things not just accept that we are happy being a top 8 team.

The pressures of winning is not something that we can handle as a club? Our recruitment in managers and the first team show this.

The number of managers being sacked has always been undertaken when the crowd turn on levy … this is why I feel that we have yet another caretaker in coming this season

 

[DubSpur]

A caretaker taking over a week or two? How many on that list are we talking about? In a week or two we could have played up to 4 league games and a cup game … there didn’t seem to be any succession strategy or urgency in appointing a caretaker. And even worse is appointing the most in the league.

Going back to 5 games its accepting defeat and it’s such a loser mentality. Surely we should be fighting for points and wins in every game not just sticking some caretaker in in hope.

Or managerial recruitment is shocking, the fact that we have needed so many caretakers shows this. Do you not agree?

On the flip side please enlighten me why we have needed so many, no matter the length of time. You can start by telling me “nothing to do with levy and wrong decisions either in the transfer market or initial appointment”

Did I say it wasn't because of Levy. So you'd rather we sacked a manger and just got in the first available replacement instead of waiting a couple of months and got the right manager in? That's a short term view v long term view. I'd hope we'd be looking more long term and get the appointment right and if that means having a caretaker for a few weeks until the end of the season and the right target becomes available I'd prefer that approach.

No, I don't agree our managerial recruitment is shocking. Levy has got it badly wrong post Poch, that was the point he took a short term view and expected those mangers could win now instead of someone that would rebuild. Before that (Jol - Poch) we were generally on an upwards trajectory with each manager mostly being an improvement on the last besides a couple of appointments. Hopefully he has now accepted that we are in rebuild phase and leaving it to the new structure and people in place to do that.

I don't see Ange being sacked, he'll be here until the end of the season at least. If he is sacked before then the question is who is behind the sacking (Levy or Lange/Munn) and has our model really changed.

 

[Raziel]

Now that’s a top quality response.

So essentially summed up we are not really ever going to actually go and try to win things not just accept that we are happy being a top 8 team.

The pressures of winning is not something that we can handle as a club? Our recruitment in managers and the first team show this.

The number of managers being sacked has always been undertaken when the crowd turn on levy … this is why I feel that we have yet another caretaker in coming this season

So nitpicking, we are a top 6 side (not 8), have been for almost 19 years more consistently than almost anyone else (we have only been outside top 6 twice in that time, United, Pool, Arsenal, Chelsea have all been outside that equal/more times).

We would have to spend like a title challenging side to have title challenging expectations and our current ownership model doesn't do that. The pressure we have traditionally put on our managers is with a top 6/7 spend, achieve a top 4/5 result.

Yes, fans influence the ownership (I think the big example of that is Nuno). I don't think Ange is under real pressure but at this level, lose 3 games on the bounce and that always can change.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Did I say it wasn't because of Levy. So you'd rather we sacked a manger and just got in the first available replacement instead of waiting a couple of months and got the right manager in? That's a short term view v long term view. I'd hope we'd be looking more long term and get the appointment right and if that means having a caretaker for a few weeks until the end of the season and the right target becomes available I'd prefer that approach.

No, I don't agree our managerial recruitment is shocking. Levy has got it badly wrong post Poch, that was the point he took a short term view and expected those mangers could win now instead of someone that would rebuild. Before that (Jol - Poch) we were generally on an upwards trajectory with each manager mostly being an improvement on the last besides a couple of appointments. Hopefully he has now accepted that we are in rebuild phase and leaving it to the new structure and people in place to do that.

I don't see Ange being sacked, he'll be here until the end of the season at least. If he is sacked before then the question is who is behind the sacking (Levy or Lange/Munn) and has our model really changed.

Except we bring in a caretaker and then get the wrong man anyway.

Levy has appointed three good managers who overachieved, he sacked all three anyway.

Ange will get sacked soon after the home supporters turn on Levy/ENIC

 

[Finney Is Back]

So nitpicking, we are a top 6 side (not 8), have been for almost 19 years more consistently than almost anyone else (we have only been outside top 6 twice in that time, United, Pool, Arsenal, Chelsea have all been outside that equal/more times).

We would have to spend like a title challenging side to have title challenging expectations and our current ownership model doesn't do that. The pressure we have traditionally put on our managers is with a top 6/7 spend, achieve a top 4/5 result.

Yes, fans influence the ownership (I think the big example of that is Nuno). I don't think Ange is under real pressure but at this level, lose 3 games on the bounce and that always can change.

Nuno was sacked because the fans turned on the owners not the manager.

 

[DubSpur]

Except we bring in a caretaker and then get the wrong man anyway.

Levy has appointed three good managers who overachieved, he sacked all three anyway.

Ange will get sacked soon after the home supporters turn on Levy/ENIC

Pleat was caretaker before Santini/Jol, which turned out to be the kick start of our improvement.
The post Poch years have been a brickshow with managers and caretakers, hopefully we are moving past that but only time will tell.

You think Levy sacked those three managers because of results, I think there was more to each one. It's been done to death, not getting into that dance again.

 

[Raziel]

Nuno was sacked because the fans turned on the owners not the manager.

It's related but you know that ..

The fans were unhappy because their expectations were more than Nuno (hindsight is a bit of a bitch isn't it?), yes they took it out on the owners but simultaneously they didn't give Nuno a chance, result was inevitable.

Southampton game was the first game I've seen the fans have a dig at owners and back the manager. Reality, if Ange loses next 3 games they will be back on his back as well, Owners could feel pressure to change and if they brought in a shiny name and a couple of new signings, it would appease the mob for another x number of months/year. Stupid cycle continues

 

[parklane1]

It's related but you know that ..

The fans were unhappy because their expectations were more than Nuno (hindsight is a bit of a bitch isn't it?), yes they took it out on the owners but simultaneously they didn't give Nuno a chance, result was inevitable.

Southampton game was the first game I've seen the fans have a dig at owners and back the manager. Reality, if Ange loses next 3 games they will be back on his back as well, Owners could feel pressure to change and if they brought in a shiny name and a couple of new signings, it would appease the mob for another x number of months/year. Stupid cycle continues

Is the ri ght answer and we will continue to go around and around in circles.

 

[Bullet]

When should we expect to see us competing with the top tier teams for the signing of players, given that we have this new shiny money making machine of a stadium? We've had it 5 years now. Are we still paying off a loan, or is it Levy penny pinching again? I get that we won't do a Chelsea, of course, but shouldn't we be able to sign better and more competitive players than we have? Basically, when will we see the benefits of the stadium income on the field? Because surely, that must've been the point of the stadium?

I'll get this wrong, but here I go anyway... someone else can correct me.

I think it is still being fine tuned, but something like...in 6 months' time the Premier League's profitability and sustainability rules (PSR) will be replaced by 'Squad Cost Ratio' which aligns with UEFA's FSR (Financial Sustainability Regulations) which states a club [that plays in Europe] can only spend 70% of turnover on the squad (transfer fees, wages, agents, basically the money that is p*ssed out of the game for good).
Clubs that don't play in Europe can spend 85% rather than 70%.

Many clubs are operating way higher than that in terms of wages. But I don't know deeper details like whether it is spread over X years or how they amortise player costs etc.
See this 2022-23 image for WAGES ONLY I THINK which says Spurs are down at 46% so we have a lot of headroom to get new players.

 

[Raziel]

I'll get this wrong, but here I go anyway... someone else can correct me.

I think it is still being fine tuned, but something like...in 6 months' time the Premier League's profitability and sustainability rules (PSR) will be replaced by 'Squad Cost Ratio' which aligns with UEFA's FSR (Financial Sustainability Regulations) which states a club [that plays in Europe] can only spend 70% of turnover on the squad (transfer fees, wages, agents, basically the money that is p*ssed out of the game for good).
Clubs that don't play in Europe can spend 85% rather than 70%.

Many clubs are operating way higher than that in terms of wages. But I don't know deeper details like whether it is spread over X years or how they amortise player costs etc.
See this 2022-23 image for WAGES ONLY I THINK which says Spurs are down at 49% so we have a lot of headroom to get new players.

Yes, we have headroom, always have had in recent years

Headroom isn't cash flow though, so we pay more, we don't necessarily have the money in bank to do it.

It's the reason why an equity stake investment that could be channeled directly to squad investment could completely change Spurs, no infrastructure investment needed (Pool, United, Chelsea all need), already global brand, have a competitive (if not challenging side), ability to ramp those wages to 60% plus add 2-3 $70M+ players, you would have a title challenging squad

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Southampton game was the first game I've seen the fans have a dig at owners and back the manager. Reality, if Ange loses next 3 games they will be back on his back as well, Owners could feel pressure to change and if they brought in a shiny name and a couple of new signings, it would appease the mob for another x number of months/year. Stupid cycle continues

Probably in the main because we had a new song to sing

Rinsing the manager out though on the previous visit to the south coast.

 

[Bishop]

Stating there are 6 ever presents is ignoring there are two others beside Arsenal, Utd, Chelsea and us? Ok, if you can't figure out 6 - 4 =2....

Teams never relegated from the PL. Arsenal, Chelsea, Everton, Manchester United, Liverpool and Tottenham Hotspur.

Forgetting the numbers you were ignoring the possibility that Everton and Liverpool were also possible options for having lots of caretaker managers. For some reason after you excluded Man United and Arsenal you decided that Liverpool and Everton also didn't count...

 

[Bishop]

Just a thought but it is the sheer speed that the manager has lost the dressing room that has created the necessity for the caretaker to do more than one or two games? There is actually only one manager, Redknapp, that finished a season and left by mutual consent. I know Sherwood, Mason and others did but they were interim appointments. Way too many autumn/winter departures in my opinion.

I'm also wondering whether the same logic adds fuel to the process of finding quality replacements. In an ideal world, you know you're parting ways with your manager. The season ends, you've already done all of the due diligence and negotiations and the next guy turns up on July 1st for pre-season training. They've already been working in the background with you on summer transfer targets.

It seems our transitions haven't been anything like we've just seen with Klopp / Slot or Pellegrini / Pep. They are very reactive transitions and that can't help.

Interestingly we did appear to go for that kind approach with our last appointment. We approached Slot initially but after we settled on Ange his appointment wasnt rushed and I do think he was confirmed in all but name quite some time before the official announcement. I imagine he had some pre conversations and work done before he joined to get the transfer ball rolling.

 

[Baleforce]

Nuno was sacked because the fans turned on the owners not the manager.

Nah, the booing was due to subs Nuno made.

That the booing was coming from idiots that don’t understand football isn’t relevant, most fans in the stadium don’t.

 

[DubSpur]

Teams never relegated from the PL. Arsenal, Chelsea, Everton, Manchester United, Liverpool and Tottenham Hotspur.

Forgetting the numbers you were ignoring the possibility that Everton and Liverpool were also possible options for having lots of caretaker managers. For some reason after you excluded Man United and Arsenal you decided that Liverpool and Everton also didn't count...

No I didn't exclude them. From my post "the odds are it was going to be us or Chelsea with the most". If you don't understand that that's your prob.

 

[Gazza]

Did I say it wasn't because of Levy. So you'd rather we sacked a manger and just got in the first available replacement instead of waiting a couple of months and got the right manager in? That's a short term view v long term view. I'd hope we'd be looking more long term and get the appointment right and if that means having a caretaker for a few weeks until the end of the season and the right target becomes available I'd prefer that approach.

No, I don't agree our managerial recruitment is shocking. Levy has got it badly wrong post Poch, that was the point he took a short term view and expected those mangers could win now instead of someone that would rebuild. Before that (Jol - Poch) we were generally on an upwards trajectory with each manager mostly being an improvement on the last besides a couple of appointments. Hopefully he has now accepted that we are in rebuild phase and leaving it to the new structure and people in place to do that.

I don't see Ange being sacked, he'll be here until the end of the season at least. If he is sacked before then the question is who is behind the sacking (Levy or Lange/Munn) and has our model really changed.

I think the main point is that we have not really appointments in the first instance right for us to have to be in desperate waters to have to sack them writing off another season with another caretaker.

Further to this the succession planning doesn’t look like it’s ever been in place.

I don’t believe for a second anyone but Daniel Levy would give that decision to hire and fire managers over to anyone else. After all he will have to write off contracts and compensation etc and then money to get another manager in.

We can’t seem to get a manager in that aligns with the clubs stringent strategy. Apart from Pochettino on the back of not getting Van Gaal seems to be a good fit. Jol was decent as was harry on the back of Juande Ramos … but again those two mentioned were on the back of some silly transfer business.

 

[Bishop]

No I didn't exclude them. From my post "the odds are it was going to be us or Chelsea with the most". If you don't understand that that's your prob and your usual of trying to nitpick with a post.

I nitpicked because your post has no logic to it. You excluded them and made that as justification for why it would be ourselves or a Chelsea. The truth is it could be any of the ever presents but it was ourselves because of the various decisions we have made.

You're for some reason looking at the end result and using that as justification for our position when it's the opposite. It is the decisions that have been made that have led to the larger number of caretakers. Not just some innate "well it was obviously going to be Spurs or Chelsea, innit".

 

[Muttley]

Interestingly we did appear to go for that kind approach with our last appointment. We approached Slot initially but after we settled on Ange his appointment wasnt rushed and I do think he was confirmed in all but name quite some time before the official announcement. I imagine he had some pre conversations and work done before he joined to get the transfer ball rolling.

That's right, and Ange started on day 1 of pre-season. He's made it as far as Jose and Conte did already and signs are good that we might have another Poch or Harry length tenure on our hands. Even if we let Ange go, here's hoping it will be at the end of a season and we've done that due diligence.

My only challenge with the transition was Stellini. It was clear that we needed to clear Conte's team out and manage the end of the season ourselves. We had Mason and Wells who were more than competent. In fact one of my favourite moments was when the Mason/Wells duo conjured up the new free-kick routine on the training ground. Kane must of put 100 dead ball free-kicks into the crowd or wall over the last few seasons, so they got Hoj to roll it first and Harry to strike it as a moving ball into the top corner. It was a thing of beauty and you could tell the entire team and coaching staff come together over it.

I know Mason gets some stick, but he has done a pretty decent job of unscrambling the player's heads very quickly after the toxic Jose and Conte left the club.