Mauricio Pochettino

[Raziel]

Got lucky?? Lol

I did feel there were limitations to Poch's 'Ktpton factor' methodology of out-running and out-muscling the opposition and in the end it proved to be so imo.

But to say Poch 'Got lucky' to put us in CL year after year after how many years of trying to just do it consecutively? If you were maybe talking about the run to the CL final, perhaps i'd disagree slightly be also see where you would be coming from. But to say 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th was 'lucky'???
Given all you say about how hard it is for Levy/ENIC to compete with 'doped clubs' and the 'historical top 4' that shows who you are contradicting yourself and using the same rules to blow smoke up Levy's butt whilst putting down Poch.
That is, total nonsense

Poch got lucky because

- He had the core of a great side to begin with, and was able to add to that with a few top level signings (Toby, Dembele, Dele, etc.)

Considering his track record post of being able to identify, and integrate (without taking 2 fudging years) new players into the side, it is quite clear without the "luck" of having a mostly complete side, he most likely would have struggled.

Does that luck negate how he got the team playing for primarily a 3 year period? = no, it just goes back to my point, right manager, right time and place ..

I think people get confused with my point of view, so to clarify

- Did I think Poch did a great job for us? = absolutely
- Did I think he overachieved = yes and no, yes in the league consistency, no due to not taking the chances he had to really win something
- Do I think he is a great manager = no, see my point above, right manager, right time and club. I simply don't see him going on to win lots of things with other clubs (he has real limitations)

My bitterness with Poch is (despite what Spurs fans seem to remember), he fudged us in the end, he hanged on with the team in a death spiral for almost 12 months, broke the team spirit and made Levy fire him and pay him out. If he had walked away after the CL (where it was already obvious he no longer wanted to be here), we all would rightly look back on his time with a lot more fondness.

 

[Bishop]

Poch was a more rounded coach as well though

Poch was the better coach no doubt, he actually achieved more with less so I give him all the credit. It's just to say that Harry had the full side front good defense, to the best midfield over seen at spurs to a fantastic am in VDV and Bale starting out. We literally just lacked a competent striker.

Defoe was ok but he was never a top striker, topping out at 11 goals a season is just below average to be honest and in that side with the amount of chances we created it was poor. I don't even want to get into Crouch who was just fudging brick. I still get angry when I think of all the chances that waste man used to fudge up.

But back to Poch, he really did an excellent job getting the very best out of a somewhat limited bunch. To the extent that even our own fans started to believe that the players were better than they truly well and that credit I have to give to Poch.

 

[glasgowspur]

It's been a long time since a multi trophy winning coach/manager walked into a club and a team from nothing/little.
Fergie was probably the last, did the rest all get lucky?

 

[billyiddo]

poch sure got lucky with all those big stars that had been there and done it prior to his arrival

 

[Baleforce]

no such thing as luck, its all process and work rate

 

[glorygloryeze]

Poch got lucky because

- He had the core of a great side to begin with, and was able to add to that with a few top level signings (Toby, Dembele, Dele, etc.)

Considering his track record post of being able to identify, and integrate (without taking 2 fudging years) new players into the side, it is quite clear without the "luck" of having a mostly complete side, he most likely would have struggled.

Does that luck negate how he got the team playing for primarily a 3 year period? = no, it just goes back to my point, right manager, right time and place ..

I think people get confused with my point of view, so to clarify

- Did I think Poch did a great job for us? = absolutely
- Did I think he overachieved = yes and no, yes in the league consistency, no due to not taking the chances he had to really win something
- Do I think he is a great manager = no, see my point above, right manager, right time and club. I simply don't see him going on to win lots of things with other clubs (he has real limitations)

My bitterness with Poch is (despite what Spurs fans seem to remember), he fudged us in the end, he hanged on with the team in a death spiral for almost 12 months, broke the team spirit and made Levy fire him and pay him out. If he had walked away after the CL (where it was already obvious he no longer wanted to be here), we all would rightly look back on his time with a lot more fondness.

I think the way things ended was indeed bitter: the comments in the media and perhaps his reluctance to rotate enough of the players he brought in in the end harmed us (though that could be said that those who came in were simply not good enough to dislodge the main starters: again that whole competition for a starter vs 'building up the squad' - two separate things imo).

But i don't think you should let how it unraveled detract from the good work HE DID DO: I'm sure if you go back to your own posts when he was appointed and in the first 18 months you wouldn't have EXPECTED Poch to have us get top 4 four years in a row given the team he inherited, after all his predecessors didn't.

What he did was NOT lucky or at least no more so than any other manager in the PL who was able to get top 4 consecutively with our resources (again, remember how you use our rescources vs our opponents to praise Levy..)

 

[glorygloryeze]

Poch was the better coach no doubt, he actually achieved more with less so I give him all the credit. It's just to say that Harry had the full side front good defense, to the best midfield over seen at spurs to a fantastic am in VDV and Bale starting out. We literally just lacked a competent striker.

Defoe was ok but he was never a top striker, topping out at 11 goals a season is just below average to be honest and in that side with the amount of chances we created it was poor. I don't even want to get into Crouch who was just fudging brick. I still get angry when I think of all the chances that waste man used to fudge up.

But back to Poch, he really did an excellent job getting the very best out of a somewhat limited bunch. To the extent that even our own fans started to believe that the players were better than they truly well and that credit I have to give to Poch.

Yeah, Redknapp's team with a certified 20-goal a season striker equals constant top 4 and a trophy imo.
Kane's rise is possibly one thing that Poch was lucky with (and even that is debatable because by all accounts he gave him extra attention etc in terms of how to better himself via individual motivation and also how to watch other stars and take interest in how they keep themselves at the top)

 

[Raziel]

no such thing as luck, its all process and work rate

That is either a very naïve or arrogant statement.

Luck/circumstance are part of any success, personal or professional, probably even more so in sport (an injury that gives a young and upcoming player a chance, an injury that weakens a team at just the wrong moment, a deflection that wins that point/game).

Again, if luck gives you the right circumstances, you have to take it (and that's on you, the work, effort, ability), but it's still there ..

 

[Baleforce]

That is either a very naïve or arrogant statement.

Luck/circumstance are part of any success, personal or professional, probably even more so in sport (an injury that gives a young and upcoming player a chance, an injury that weakens a team at just the wrong moment, a deflection that wins that point/game).

Again, if luck gives you the right circumstances, you have to take it (and that's on you, the work, effort, ability), but it's still there ..

Thats not luck, luck doesn’t exist.

That injury wasn’t a smiting by the universe, it was physics, a result of thousands of prior inputs, putting the body in that position, and the opposing forces that clash, likewise the deflection, maths doesn’t play favourites.

 

[Raziel]

Thats not luck, luck doesn’t exist.

That injury wasn’t a smiting by the universe, it was physics, a result of thousands of prior inputs, putting the body in that position, and the opposing forces that clash, likewise the deflection, maths doesn’t play favourites.

Luck, chance, circumstance are a thing, and math can prove that (the odds of something happening, does not equal it happening), hence if the odds of injuries to a squad are high (e.g. last December where 70+ were injured in the league), if your team got out of that fixture list with minimum injuries or no injuries to major players, you got lucky (of course you can pretend it was 100% under control based on rotation/medical teams, but it isn't)

The odds of a tackle breaking Son's arm in a way that prevents him from playing just after Harry blows his hamstring (first in his career) is a set of circumstances that can only be articulated as luck (bad luck in this case). We are taking about the very rare odds of something happening, actually happening in a way that has a material impact on a game or season, not about someone wearing their "lucky socks" on game day.

And if you believe all of these things are under control, predictable and will never affect you ..

 

[Baleforce]

Luck, chance, circumstance are a thing, and math can prove that (the odds of something happening, does not equal it happening), hence if the odds of injuries to a squad are high (e.g. last December where 70+ were injured in the league), if your team got out of that fixture list with minimum injuries or no injuries to major players, you got lucky (of course you can pretend it was 400% under control based on rotation/medical teams, but it isn't)

The odds of a tackle breaking Son's arm in a way that prevents him from playing just after Harry blows his hamstring (first in his career) is a set of circumstances that can only be articulated as luck (bad luck in this case). We are taking about the very rare odds of something happening, actually happening in a way that has a material impact on a game or season, not about someone wearing their "lucky socks" on game day.

And if you believe all of these things are under control, predictable and will never affect you ..

I'm not saying they are under control and predictable, I'm saying they are still the result of action.

Luck is the wrong word, its a complex cascade of interlinked events.

 

[Robspur12]

Yeah, Redknapp's team with a certified 20-goal a season striker equals constant top 4 and a trophy imo.
Kane's rise is possibly one thing that Poch was lucky with (and even that is debatable because by all accounts he gave him extra attention etc in terms of how to better himself via individual motivation and also how to watch other stars and take interest in how they keep themselves at the top)

I think the “Redknapp didn’t have a good enough striker, “ line doesn’t really cut it for me. At different times he had Keane, Defoe, Pav, Adebayor, Bent, Crouch and Saha (albeit old and slow). That list, whilst not world class should have been good enough to win a trophy in front of the fabulous midfield, Ledley in defence and decent full backs. The issue was that Harry’s skill was to build teams with magnificent balance, but he was not so great on the tactical side. That’s what cost him the trophies imho. Still his teams were fabulous to watch.

 

[glorygloryeze]

I think the “Redknapp didn’t have a good enough striker, “ line doesn’t really cut it for me. At different times he had Keane, Defoe, Pav, Adebayor, Bent, Crouch and Saha (albeit old and slow). That list, whilst not world class should have been good enough to win a trophy in front of the fabulous midfield, Ledley in defence and decent full backs. The issue was that Harry’s skill was to build teams with magnificent balance, but he was not so great on the tactical side. That’s what cost him the trophies imho. Still his teams were fabulous to watch.

In the end tactics cost both Poch and Redknapp trophies, but just in different ways.
I honestly think Redknapp's teams in the semi-finals and final he played would have gotten over the line with a Kane in the team. Similarly, we might have nopt got higher then 4th in any season with Poch if we didn't have Kane (though we would have been more 'organic' in our approach in that situation than Redknapp).

Both were good sides to watch, but the failure was at a much higher level with Poch imho because we had that most special of commodities: a 20-plus a season striker who turns up for most games, including the big ones

 

[Robspur12]

In the end tactics cost both Poch and Redknapp trophies, but just in different ways.
I honestly think Redknapp's teams in the semi-finals and final he played would have gotten over the line with a Kane in the team. Similarly, we might have nopt got higher then 4th in any season with Poch if we didn't have Kane (though we would have been more 'organic' in our approach in that situation than Redknapp).

Both were good sides to watch, but the failure was at a much higher level with Poch imho because we had that most special of commodities: a 20-plus a season striker who turns up for most games, including the big ones

Poch had Harry Kane, Redknapp had Modric and Bale 2 of the best players in the world, add to that rafael van dear vaart, adebayor, and Defoe; it’s fair to say he had an embarrassment of forward riches, the likes of which were not available to Poch.

 

[MKSpur]

Poch had Harry Kane, Redknapp had Modric and Bale 2 of the best players in the world, add to that rafael van dear vaart, adebayor, and Defoe; it’s fair to say he had an embarrassment of forward riches, the likes of which were not available to Poch.

Son Eriksen and Dele would be compared to VDV and Defoe? Dembele to Modric too maybe?

The best teams if these managers were the best In recent memory for me and Im very positive about both tenures, both exceeded my expectations at the time they arrived and to date compare favourably with their successor and predecessor! But I think to really compare which manager had the best players you’d need to see who they inherited, who they bought and who they had the most use of and their players relative improvement under their tenure. Without researching it too much my feeling was Redknapp couldn’t get his best 11 on the pitch as often as Poch and there may have been some overlap with the better players coming and going, while Poch did have a period where the players were all available.

 

[glorygloryeze]

You really do have to start wondering why Poch still hasn't a new job...again, with how this window has unfolded you maybe do think some of our transfer windows and how they ended up he was more responsible for and that his public utterings have put many a chairman off...

Still, he can look back over some great times with us regardless..

 

[Bishop]

I think the “Redknapp didn’t have a good enough striker, “ line doesn’t really cut it for me. At different times he had Keane, Defoe, Pav, Adebayor, Bent, Crouch and Saha (albeit old and slow). That list, whilst not world class should have been good enough to win a trophy in front of the fabulous midfield, Ledley in defence and decent full backs. The issue was that Harry’s skill was to build teams with magnificent balance, but he was not so great on the tactical side. That’s what cost him the trophies imho. Still his teams were fabulous to watch.

None of them and I mean NONE of them were good enough.

Saha was a shell by the time he came he shouldn't even be mentioned.

Crouch was fudging brick, couldn't hit a barn door with a fudging barn.

Bent was meh, a good finisher of a particular type of chance but only good in that one context.

Keane was finished and a shell of the player when he came back from his Liverpool holiday.

Pav was actually decent but Harry never really put his trust in him and even then he was just decent.

Defoe is a fans favourite but only once scoring more than 13 league goals is rubbish and marks him as a mid table striker.

Ade was very good for his first year, but he was much more of a support striker with his play style and instincts. He really should have gotten at 25 league goals his first season but he just wasn't a goal hungry striker. He was happier laying off to someone else.

None of those guys could be relied upon to finish the chances that were laid on a plate consistently for them. Did any of them even score 20 leagues goals at some point in their careers? Average players who were by far the weak point of Harry's teams. Put Kane or even Son in that side and we are talking a totally different proposition.

 

[Raziel]

You really do have to start wondering why Poch still hasn't a new job...again, with how this window has unfolded you maybe do think some of our transfer windows and how they ended up he was more responsible for and that his public utterings have put many a chairman off...

Still, he can look back over some great times with us regardless..

United talking about taking a punt again ...

 

[richie_spur]

United talking about taking a punt again ...

Almost like he was told to take some time off and wait and see...

 

[Robspur12]

None of them and I mean NONE of them were good enough.

Saha was a shell by the time he came he shouldn't even be mentioned.

Crouch was fudging brick, couldn't hit a barn door with a fudging barn.

Bent was meh, a good finisher of a particular type of chance but only good in that one context.

Keane was finished and a shell of the player when he came back from his Liverpool holiday.

Pav was actually decent but Harry never really put his trust in him and even then he was just decent.

Defoe is a fans favourite but only once scoring more than 13 league goals is rubbish and marks him as a mid table striker.

Ade was very good for his first year, but he was much more of a support striker with his play style and instincts. He really should have gotten at 25 league goals his first season but he just wasn't a goal hungry striker. He was happier laying off to someone else.

None of those guys could be relied upon to finish the chances that were laid on a plate consistently for them. Did any of them even score 20 leagues goals at some point in their careers? Average players who were by far the weak point of Harry's teams. Put Kane or even Son in that side and we are talking a totally different proposition.

Yeah but you can always turn it the other way. Harry was arguably Poch’s only world class player. But imagine what he could have achieved with Modric and Bale? Adebayor and Defoe should have been good enough in front of that midfield to overcome their individual deficiencies.