*** Tottenham Hotspur Vs Forest *** OMT

[Junior19]

He's had 16 league games!

The problem with your 'the manager is the problem' hypothesis is that he's punched above his weight as a manger. BUT he was given time, and didn't excel at first.

The other problem with your approach is the myriad managers we've sacked who've been very successful elsewhere. So were they the issue too? Or was a lack of long term building, stability, strategy the issue? Having run multiple organisations myself, I know which camp I am in.

Again, I'm not calling for his head.

I don't think he is the _only_ problem. He does however need to start convincing us that he knows what the solutions to the problems are. The way to do that may be to convince the players that he knows what the solutions are. But nothing in the body language, facial expressions, or match management from the players at the moment gives off that vibe.

I'm all for stability, not making rash changes. I'm more than happy to give him time, but I need to know where we are going! As long as we have a direction, and the actions and words from the manager, coaches and the team adds up to that direction, I'd back any manager from here to the end of time. (or the end of his contract, anyway).

 

[Junior19]

Not saying any your proposed changes wouldn't have worked, just suggesting different.
Spence for Porro. Yes Porro does have a good delivery, but it's not been there for a couple of weeks, hitting the first man with an Eriksen like consistency. Porro is possibly being over played.
Tel or Odobert for Richie, move rkm into the middle.
Davies on at lb.
Bergvall for Bentancur.

All very possible changes, and all of those would have given me more sense of at least a desire to chase the game then what was done.

My suggestion would still have a major problem, since our press resistance is so poor at the moment, and I don't really suggest anything that would solve that. My prerogative as an armchair general..

 

[braineclipse]

He's had 16 league games!

The problem with your 'the manager is the problem' hypothesis is that he's punched above his weight as a manger. BUT he was given time, and didn't excel at first.

The other problem with your approach is the myriad managers we've sacked who've been very successful elsewhere. So were they the issue too? Or was a lack of long term building, stability, strategy the issue? Having run multiple organisations myself, I know which camp I am in.

No doubt he's a good and talented manager. Is he the right manager for us though?

Long term building and strategy should imo not be primarily down to the manager. It's important that the manager is well aligned with that strategy and what the manager himself needs is important. But he's there to fit into the overall strategy, not create it.

I definitely agree that managers will need time, but it's also their job to show that they're deserving of that time in the process.

I'm very much open to the idea that it's too soon for him to show us what he can do here. Him needing time. But at some point he has to show some clear positive signs of improvement.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Again, I'm not calling for his head.

I don't think he is the _only_ problem. He does however need to start convincing us that he knows what the solutions to the problems are.

Isn't that obvious? It is to sign ready-made players. Or show patience to develop the players we have. What are shortcuts are there? The idea that a formation can mask inexperience and issues with ability is flawed.

The way to do that may be to convince the players that he knows what the solutions are. But nothing in the body language, facial expressions, or match management from the players at the moment gives off that vibe.

Winning breeds confidence. We don't have many senior established players. Which is another reason to show some patience.

I'm all for stability, not making rash changes. I'm more than happy to give him time, but I need to know where we are going! As long as we have a direction, and the actions and words from the manager, coaches and the team adds up to that direction,

Can you give an example?

I'd back any manager from here to the end of time. (or the end of his contract, anyway).

Let's be candid, if we are winning fans are onside. Lose and the tide turns instantly.

 

[SpurMeUp]

No doubt he's a good and talented manager. Is he the right manager for us though?

Long term building and strategy should imo not be primarily down to the manager. It's important that the manager is well aligned with that strategy and what the manager himself needs is important. But he's there to fit into the overall strategy, not create it.

I definitely agree that managers will need time, but it's also their job to show that they're deserving of that time in the process.

I'm very much open to the idea that it's too soon for him to show us what he can do here. Him needing time. But at some point he has to show some clear positive signs of improvement.

Are all club situations and players the same? If no, then why would the solution be the same? Why would you discern that the manager has to show that they deserve time, and what does that look like? You win lose or draw.

 

[Junior19]

Isn't that obvious? It is to sign ready-made players. Or show patience to develop the players we have. What are shortcuts are there? The idea that a formation can mask inexperience and issues with ability is flawed.

A single formation is not the fix-all. Never has been, never will be. But you -can- avoid exposing your own weaknesses, inexperience and lack of abilty by not playing right at them all the time.

Can you give an example?

Any indication that he can change a game where something has gone tits up would be a good start!

What I'm seeing so far is quite a bit of "the plan doesn't work the way I thought it would. I'd better change some players, and keep on with the plan. Nothing is wrong with the plan!"

And even that -could- be ok, if we occationally got a glimpse of that plan working on a regular basis. Unlike some on here who seems to think that our performances against Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Brentford and Slavia Prague were good, I didn't. They were (in order) poor (and lucky), ok and ok. The last two should however have been "stepping stones" and confidence growers.
That went down the drain on City Ground.

 

[braineclipse]

No anger mate I'm just responding to what i see as the key point of your post - you say that you want to be patient, so be patient

I think that there is a lot of 'I'll give patience, but only if certain criteria is met straightaway' being banded about - that to me is a contradictory position to hold.

I guess that's part of my position. Depending on the straight away thing.

We're 16 league games in. 3 games away from half a season, no? If half a season is straight away I guess I will hold that contradictory position. Yes, my patience is conditional.

I think half a season should be enough to at least show some signs of how the manager wants us to play longer term. Is that unreasonable?

To me we have been rather dull and boring, uninspiring at the very least. To me we've been repeatedly second best in too many games also against teams that aren't top teams.

We're 11th, but to me we've gotten better results than our performances warrant. That's also what xG numbers point towards. Fotmob has us on 18 expected points after 16 games. A bit better than relegation form. CL to me is similar in terms of performances and results.

To me it's not good enough. I'm happy to give him time, but he has to show improvements at some point this season at the very least. What's your timeline? Keep performing like this for the full season and then give him another season almost regardless? Or will some conditions to patience show up at some point this season if we keep performing like this?

 

[SpurMeUp]

A single formation is not the fix-all. Never has been, never will be. But you -can- avoid exposing your own weaknesses, inexperience and lack of abilty by not playing right at them all the time.

So what are you suggesting? Which formation would sort us out?

Any indication that he can change a game where something has gone tits up would be a good start!

What I'm seeing so far is quite a bit of "the plan doesn't work the way I thought it would. I'd better change some players, and keep on with the plan. Nothing is wrong with the plan!"

And even that -could- be ok, if we occationally got a glimpse of that plan working on a regular basis. Unlike some on here who seems to think that our performances against Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Brentford and Slavia Prague were good, I didn't. They were (in order) poor (and lucky), ok and ok. The last two should however have been "stepping stones" and confidence growers.
That went down the drain on City Ground.

You ahve to build on something consistent. Constantly changing isn't going to solve a problem which is most likely a lack of stability. We need to build off a defensive foundation and be patient.

 

[Mikey10]

No doubt he's a good and talented manager. Is he the right manager for us though?

Long term building and strategy should imo not be primarily down to the manager. It's important that the manager is well aligned with that strategy and what the manager himself needs is important. But he's there to fit into the overall strategy, not create it.

I’m not sure we’ve had a strategy on the football side of the club under ENIC.

We struck lucky with Poch. Other than that, it’s been a series of short-term decisions, none of which have really worked out. The mismanagement of the footballing side of the club has been a scandal. We’ve been allowed to go from the Pochettino team to what we have now. Instead of building on success we continued to try our own bizarre way of trying to move further forward.

Sacking Frank now, as some (not necessarily you) seem to want means giving him a significant payoff; it probably means getting rid of/paying off a big chunk of his coaching team; as well as potentially scrapping some of the January targets he will have been involved with identifying; and ripping up yet another blueprint, this time before it’s had any chance to really bed in. It also lets this largely mentally weak squad, of largely average ability, off the hook.

Given how we operate, none of that would surprise me in the least.

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

I’m not sure we’ve had a strategy on the football side of the club under ENIC.

We struck lucky with Poch. Other than that, it’s been a series of short-term decisions, none of which have really worked out. The mismanagement of the footballing side of the club has been a scandal. We’ve been allowed to go from the Pochettino team to what we have now. Instead of building on success we continued to try our own bizarre way of trying to move further forward.

Sacking Frank now, as some (not necessarily you) seem to want means giving him a significant payoff; it probably means getting rid of/paying off a big chunk of his coaching team; as well as potentially scrapping some of the January targets he will have been involved with identifying; and ripping up yet another blueprint, this time before it’s had any chance to really bed in. It also lets this largely mentally weak squad, of largely average ability, off the hook.

Given how we operate, none of that would surprise me in the least.

Also we have just restructured the whole upper management of the club from top to bottom..............AGAIN. Taken another U-Turn on style and therefore profile of player I imagine.

Everything in that plays its part. Until we as a club and fanbase are comfortable in our own skin as a club and our own identity I can't see us changing anytime soon

I said for years, we should stop trying to be Chelsea (for example) and concentrating on being Tottenham and I maintain that