A View from the Outside

[spurs9]

Very much so. The list of clubs is from a post I wrote on another thread on the subject of sacking managers. Martinez, given job security and a good run of years at the club, worked miracles, not only keeping them up for years on a budget of approximately tuppence, but playing attractive football as well. Had they sacked him after his first flirtation with relegation in their second season, you can bet his successor would have gone down ignominiously the following season.

Maybe but Wigan were 11th the season before he took over and Martinez highest finish was 15th, so it hardly shows progress. Plus from when their first season in the EPL to the season they were relegated, they have only had one more manager than us.

Since 2005/06 (Wigan's first year in EPL)

Wigan - 3 Managers (Jewell, Bruce & Martinez)
10th, 17th,14th, 11th,16th,16th,15th,18th

Spurs - 4 Managers (Jol, Ramos, Redknapp & AVB)
5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th, 5th, 4th, 5th

 

[Lilywhite Kane]

Great Article, a very interesting viewpoint but i refuse to believe that we can't push forward and break that group of elite clubs. Yes Finance is undoubtedly a factor but aren't their other factors that we have in our favor. This season has been a disappointment but you know what i can't remember ever looking at a spurs squad as strong as this one. We have quality all over the field and even on the bench, we just need a figurehead to lead us. I honestly believe we CAN and WILL break into the elite. We just need the support of the guys upstairs. Don't let the bad performances this season blind you, we have a good have a good infrastructure and a very well run club.
THE FUTURE IS BRIGHT, THE FUTURE IS LILYWHITE

 

[jolsnogross]

Maybe but Wigan were 11th the season before he took over and Martinez highest finish was 15th, so it hardly shows progress. Plus from when their first season in the EPL to the season they were relegated, they have only had one more manager than us.

Since 2005/06 (Wigan's first year in EPL)

Wigan - 3 Managers (Jewell, Bruce & Martinez)
10th, 17th,14th, 11th,16th,16th,15th,18th

Spurs - 4 Managers (Jol, Ramos, Redknapp & AVB)
5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th, 5th, 4th, 5th

They had one fewer manager in that time period, and that's a good point, but I think DM's argument still holds. They were overachieving in a moneyball sense and winning the only trophy they've ever won is surely a sign of progress. They lost Bruce rather than sacked him. And they had Jewell from 01 to 07 (two promotions and a league cup runners up) and Martinez from 09 to 13 (FA cup holders). Those two periods of relative (or actual) managerial longevity seem to correlate well with success.

West Brom are another example of a side who had a manager in Clarke who was over-achieving their financials, had a period that brought them back to that level, and they pulled the trigger. If they get their comeuppance now with relegation, they'll have to look in the mirror.

Wigan also sacked Coyle and appointed Rosler recently, further supporting your point a bit. But Coyle was failing and I think the lesson for us (regarding their sticking with Martinez) is to leave well enough alone when you have someone who is actually achieving results with good footy, rather than think in short order that the grass could be greener with a new appointment.

I still haven't heard a decent reason for Redknapp's sacking, other than off-field bullshit, like wanting to manage his country, being in his 60s, telling his strikers to put more effort in, and talking out of car windows with a cockney accent.

 

[jolsnogross]

This is worth repeating from the OP, and would be worth putting as a banner on this site:

The idea that Redknapp had taken them as far as he could seems flawed to me as it suggests another manager could have taken them even further, which when you look at how things are in football these days, that is hugely unlikely. When you look at the size of their wage bill it would incredibly hard to attract better players. They've tried on several occasions to higher "tactical coaches" to bridge the gap, but anyone who still believes in them is deluded if you ask me. The truth is under Redknapp they over achieved and he was rightly lauded in the media, though this didn't sit well with lots of football fans as he isn't popular.

Also, I was number 98 on the OP's 'winner' rating list....in case there are two more reading this.

 

[spurs9]

They had one fewer manager in that time period, and that's a good point, but I think DM's argument still holds. They were overachieving in a moneyball sense and winning the only trophy they've ever won is surely a sign of progress. They lost Bruce rather than sacked him. And they had Jewell from 01 to 07 (two promotions and a league cup runners up) and Martinez from 09 to 13 (FA cup holders). Those two periods of relative (or actual) managerial longevity seem to correlate well with success.

They've also sacked Coyle and appointed Rosler recently, further supporting your point a bit. But Coyle was failing and I think the lesson for us (regarding their sticking with Martinez) is to leave well enough alone when you have someone who is actually achieving results with good footy, rather than think in short order that the grass could be greener with a new appointment. West Brom are an example of a side who had a manager in Clarke who was over-achieving their financials, and if they get their comeuppance now with relegation, they'll have to look in the mirror.

I still haven't heard a decent reason for Redknapp's sacking, other than off-field bullshit, like wanting to manage his country, being in his 60s, telling his strikers to put more effort in, and talking out of car windows with a cockney accent.

But you could argue that the only reason Wigan kept the managers they had as they were reaching their target of escaping relegation. When the target changed to promotion back to the EPL, they sacked Coyle in December as he was 14th.

We were 18th after 10 games when Jol got the boot, 20th when Ramos got the boot. Redknapp & AVB were both 5th and I don't believe it was results based that these two went. I think Redknapp went because Levy stood by him through the court case, which once won, HR then publicly said he wanted the England job, which Levy would have found disrespectful after he had just stood by him. Then once the England job went to someone else, he tried to get an improved contract after loosing a 13 point lead on Arsenal, which many people believe was because HR (and the players) were distracted because of the England Job.

 

[jolsnogross]

But you could argue that the only reason Wigan kept the managers they had as they were reaching their target of escaping relegation. When the target changed to promotion back to the EPL, they sacked Coyle in December as he was 14th.

We were 18th after 10 games when Jol got the boot, 20th when Ramos got the boot. Redknapp & AVB were both 5th and I don't believe it was results based that these two went. I think Redknapp went because Levy stood by him through the court case, which once won, HR then publicly said he wanted the England job, which Levy would have found disrespectful after he had just stood by him. Then once the England job went to someone else, he tried to get an improved contract after loosing a 13 point lead on Arsenal, which many people believe was because HR (and the players) were distracted because of the England Job.

That's fair enough about Wigan, but I'd still be persuaded that they backed Martinez quite well through skirts with relegation because they had some reality checks about where their moneyball position is (probably the Championship somewhere) and they were being entertained by a style of play that belied their resources and league position.

And in fact, they allowed him to talk to Villa after they approached him and he turned them down. And did the same with Liverpool, though it might be that Liverpool chose not to offer him the job. Wigan's reaction in both cases was not to throw a hissy fit that he spoke to potentially better offers - they allowed him to do so - but to retain his services and they won the cup as a result.

If they had a Spurs kind of mentality, they'd have dispensed with Martinez long before he won them the Cup. It's still hard to believe we sacked a guy who finished 4th-5th-4th and got us to the quarters of the CL. Possibly based entirely on the national job being available and our manager being an obvious candidate for it.

(BTW: Redknapp left us in 4th, AVB left us in 7th. I'd forgotten about Jol's poor start that season that had us in 18th place having finished 5th the year before)

 

[dudu]

They had one fewer manager in that time period, and that's a good point, but I think DM's argument still holds. They were overachieving in a moneyball sense and winning the only trophy they've ever won is surely a sign of progress. They lost Bruce rather than sacked him. And they had Jewell from 01 to 07 (two promotions and a league cup runners up) and Martinez from 09 to 13 (FA cup holders). Those two periods of relative (or actual) managerial longevity seem to correlate well with success.

West Brom are another example of a side who had a manager in Clarke who was over-achieving their financials, had a period that brought them back to that level, and they pulled the trigger. If they get their comeuppance now with relegation, they'll have to look in the mirror.

Wigan also sacked Coyle and appointed Rosler recently, further supporting your point a bit. But Coyle was failing and I think the lesson for us (regarding their sticking with Martinez) is to leave well enough alone when you have someone who is actually achieving results with good footy, rather than think in short order that the grass could be greener with a new appointment.

I still haven't heard a decent reason for Redknapp's sacking, other than off-field bullshit, like wanting to manage his country, being in his 60s, telling his strikers to put more effort in, and talking out of car windows with a cockney accent.

hmmmm

possibly because in his last 13 games in charge his stats read - h(e didn't even have the Europa to contend with as we couldn't even find a way out of the group stages).

P13 W4 D4 L5

Including getting thumped 5-2 when 2-0 up at Arsenal, Losing to Norwich and QPR, drawing at home to Stoke.

Also getting thumped 5-1 in an FA cup semi final to Chelsea.

All of that while having all of our recent heroes at his disposal.

Even Sherwoods form is marginally better.

 

[14/04/91]

For the life of me I cannot understand that when you defend Arry you talk about strategy in the same post The one thing he did not have was a strategy i would say he could not spell yoof either

He is what he is but long term and planning do not go in same sentence when talking about him

I wasn't defending him. I was making the point that sacking him for a new structure is all when & good until you don't like the new structure after 4 months and bin one of the individuals.
And IF the rumours are true about the 62 year old Van Gaal, do you think he'll have a strategy or will he be tasked with instant success?? And we're back to the same position we were in 2 years ago, with a different name in the same role.

And as an aside, Redknapp loaned out Walker, Towsend, Caulker, Rose, Kane and Carroll with a view to them becoming premier league footballers. Seems to have worked.

 

[CheeseGromit]

I wasn't defending him. I was making the point that sacking him for a new structure is all when & good until you don't like the new structure after 4 months and bin one of the individuals.
And IF the rumours are true about the 62 year old Van Gaal, do you think he'll have a strategy or will he be tasked with instant success?? And we're back to the same position we were in 2 years ago, with a different name in the same role.

And as an aside, Redknapp loaned out Walker, Towsend, Caulker, Rose, Kane and Carroll with a view to them becoming premier league footballers. Seems to have worked.

Not sure who got binned 4 months after Arry left but that aside. LVG and I am not saying he is the answer is a very different football manager to Arry and age has little impact on that. I agree that he will only have a short time to make things happen but that is the ad truth of todays game wherever you are yes spurs probably has more pressure than some because lots keep tipping them for the top4 and we dont live p to expectations.

I think the names you mention had very little to do with Arry's influence, we did not have a viable reserves option and these guys needed experience. I do know that Bale was under his tutelage and nearly sold long before £80m of RM money.

 

[14/04/91]

Not sure who got binned 4 months after Arry left but that aside.

I didn't say after Harry left. I said the new AVB/DOF (Baldini) structure only lasted 4 months before AVB got binned. Another example of Levy's short-term view of life.

 

[Lilbaz]

I'd say harry was in part got rid of as his philosophy didn't match levy's.
Levy thinks the only way we can compete long term with the big clubs is to buy young up and coming players, who we can develope. Then if need be we can sell at a profit and reinvest the money in the squad.
Harry (and also avb if you look at his targets) didn't want to do it that way. They want ready made players as they have short term goals. You can't blame them. But levy has the long term future of this club to consider.
Think this may have lead to arguments.

 

[SteveH]

Jol was sacked because we were in the bottom half of the league.

Ramos was sacked because we were in relegation position.

Redknapp wasn't sacked because of our league position.

AVB was sacked because it looked like he was taking the club backwards and we were playing terrible football that wasn't attractive to fans, tv or sponsors. We even got stuffed at home by liverpool when we had the potential naming right sponsors at the stadium.

Can't argue with that. Jol I though was doing OK but I'm buggered if I can remember.
Embarrassing.
Russia is a fitting reward.

 

[SteveH]

I'd say harry was in part got rid of as his philosophy didn't match levy's.
Levy thinks the only way we can compete long term with the big clubs is to buy young up and coming players, who we can develope. Then if need be we can sell at a profit and reinvest the money in the squad.
Harry (and also avb if you look at his targets) didn't want to do it that way. They want ready made players as they have short term goals. You can't blame them. But levy has the long term future of this club to consider.
Think this may have lead to arguments.

Your on fine form today!

 

[jolsnogross]

hmmmm

possibly because in his last 13 games in charge his stats read - h(e didn't even have the Europa to contend with as we couldn't even find a way out of the group stages).

P13 W4 D4 L5

Including getting thumped 5-2 when 2-0 up at Arsenal, Losing to Norwich and QPR, drawing at home to Stoke.

Also getting thumped 5-1 in an FA cup semi final to Chelsea.

All of that while having all of our recent heroes at his disposal.

Even Sherwoods form is marginally better.

You get points for at least attempting to make an on-field argument for Redknapp's sacking. And I was very disappointed at the collapse against Chelsea in the semi-final.

But, if you think a run of 13 games with 5 losses is justification enough to sack a manager who still finished 4th even with that run, had a run in the same season of WWWWDWWWWWWLWDWDWW, finished 4th and 5th in his prior 2 seasons, made it to the quarters of the Champions League, and all while playing a brand of football admired by almost all observers, then you're very much part of the problem that afflicts Tottenham's chairman, board and many fans.

 

[dudu]

You get points for at least attempting to make an on-field argument for Redknapp's sacking. And I was very disappointed at the collapse against Chelsea in the semi-final.

But, if you think a run of 13 games with 5 losses is justification enough to sack a manager who still finished 4th even with that run, had a run in the same season of WWWWDWWWWWWLWDWDWW, finished 4th and 5th in his prior 2 seasons, made it to the quarters of the Champions League, and all while playing a brand of football admired by almost all observers, then you're very much part of the problem that afflicts Tottenham's chairman, board and many fans.

Im really not - i actually wouldn't have been that unhappy for him to stay based on what he had achieved so far at the club but i was also not really convinced he could take us any further - at the time i felt we had a base and decent enough players in place for someone with managerial talent to come in and drive us forward.

I answered your question - i did not say thats why he was sacked.

It was clearly a culmination of reasons - the absolutes implosion of our team during the last 3 months of that season is only one part of the story.

And make no mistake about it, it was an absolute implosion. The football was crap, our tactics were crap, his subs were an abomination. If you have said a single bad word about Tim Sherwood i don't see how you can defend our form at the end of the season.

Were you comfortable with him courting himself for the England Job a few weeks out of court after we had publicly come out and backed him?

He didn't want to be your manager - so i don't see why you are still so keen on him having been yours/.

 

[The Scarecrow]

This is worth repeating from the OP, and would be worth putting as a banner on this site:



Also, I was number 98 on the OP's 'winner' rating list....in case there are two more reading this.

But we did have the best team we've had in ages.

 

[dudu]

Im really not - i actually wouldn't have been that unhappy for him to stay based on what he had achieved so far at the club but i was also not really convinced he could take us any further - at the time i felt we had a base and decent enough players in place for someone with managerial talent to come in and drive us forward.

I answered your question - i did not say thats why he was sacked.

It was clearly a culmination of reasons - the absolutes implosion of our team during the last 3 months of that season is only one part of the story.

And make no mistake about it, it was an absolute implosion. The football was crap, our tactics were crap, his subs were an abomination. If you have said a single bad word about Tim Sherwood i don't see how you can defend our form at the end of the season.

Were you comfortable with him courting himself for the England Job a few weeks out of court after we had publicly come out and backed him?

He didn't want to be your manager - so i don't see why you are still so keen on him having been yours/.

edit - you've dress the form up nicely but it wasn't '5 losses' it was also '4 very winnable draws' against the likes of stoke, villa and sunderland.

16 points from a possible 39

 

[jolsnogross]

Im really not - i actually wouldn't have been that unhappy for him to stay based on what he had achieved so far at the club but i was also not really convinced he could take us any further - at the time i felt we had a base and decent enough players in place for someone with managerial talent to come in and drive us forward.

I answered your question - i did not say thats why he was sacked.

It was clearly a culmination of reasons - the absolutes implosion of our team during the last 3 months of that season is only one part of the story.

And make no mistake about it, it was an absolute implosion. The football was crap, our tactics were crap, his subs were an abomination. If you have said a single bad word about Tim Sherwood i don't see how you can defend our form at the end of the season.

Were you comfortable with him courting himself for the England Job a few weeks out of court after we had publicly come out and backed him?

He didn't want to be your manager - so i don't see why you are still so keen on him having been yours/.

You didn't really answer the question. You made an attempt at a footballing reason for his sacking but I find it unpersuasive. It's not really a good idea to slice 13 games out of a whole season and make that the basis of an argument for the sack, when we finished our joint top placing in Premier League history again anyway (a record HR had already owned). It's disappointing, to be sure, but sackable? Not at all.

The original post argues well against your point about a managerial talent taking us further. Someone like AVB, perhaps? You're basically saying Harry didn't have the required talent, even though his achievement for us and the style of play that brought it about puts that argument to bed, in my opinion.

It was something of an implosion, and I'd be a little more persuaded by an argument that said HR had trouble closing out a season (becasue it wasn't a once off). But it was only an implosion based on the fantastic achievement of the majority of the season that went before it. Again, you can't just separate your 13 games and discount the other 25 and be considered reasonable.

I haven't been too harsh on Sherwood and would give him next season to prove himself because it's hard to judge a guy on 15 or so games so far after taking on another man's team and impoverished style of play. Sherwood hasn't been any worse than AVB in terms of results or style, and in fact I'd say his style is better because it has led to more goals and more exciting footy.

I was entirely comfortable with HR's link to the England job. It seemed an obvious link to me and he was one of the few men around who you felt would have been greatly honoured by the role and deserving of a crack at it ebcasue he managed a high profile club very well for 3+ seasons. I'd have regretted him leaving for that, but would have understood it. I don't understand our chairman not using his rejection as an opportunity for Spurs.

And the bold text above really sums up why I think this attitude is to the detriment of Spurs. My thoughts on any manager's personality are irrelevant to my enjoyment of Spurs and the club's achievement. He wasn't my manager, he was the manager of the club I follow. That's true for HR, AVB, Sherwood or anyone. You seem to feel a personal slight at the fact that HR would've liked the England job. I find that really odd, and think it's part of the problem if a lot of people, directors more than fans (but still), choose to ignore the great footy and top 4 finishes because they feel as though their man made eyes at someone else!

He wasn't your girlfriend. He was just a good manager for us.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

Since 2005/06 (Wigan's first year in EPL)

Wigan - 3 Managers (Jewell, Bruce & Martinez)
10th, 17th,14th, 11th,16th,16th,15th,18th

Spurs - 4 Managers (Jol, Ramos, Redknapp & AVB)
5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th, 5th, 4th, 5th

They have about 20,000 fans and their ticket prices are much lower than ours. They can't buy the kind of players we buy, nor do they have a youth system that attracts exciting young players from all over the world. Comparing Spurs and Wigan is, well, like comparing Real Madrid and Spurs.

And there is the minor matter of the FA Cup...

And I think you meant one fewer manager than us, yes, not one more?

And Bruce wasn't sacked, he left to manage Sunderland. A bigger club. And Jewell wasn't sacked either, he resigned. So that comparison doesn't really work either.

 

[Styopa]

Im really not - i actually wouldn't have been that unhappy for him to stay based on what he had achieved so far at the club but i was also not really convinced he could take us any further - at the time i felt we had a base and decent enough players in place for someone with managerial talent to come in and drive us forward..

I think Levy saw it that way too. I have no doubt that the courting of the England job and our deteriorating form were aggravating circumstances but I don't think they were enough to sack Redknapp.