Buy "ordinary" Experience or Coach what we have debate

[Jamturk]

I have decided

We should coach what we have.

Maybe sprinkle a Carrick here and there.

 

[danielneeds]

But defensively he oozed quality. Quality isn't just about the creative thing.

I guess that's what I was getting at. Sometimes Spurs fans in particular can disparage more agricultural players.

I think what it comes down to is that Ivanovic story Mourinho goes on about whereby he was playing with a fucked toe and had so much blood in his boot by the end of the game it was soaking wet. Mourinho said the boot should be put on display in the Chelsea youth academy, to show them the spirit required to be a champion.

Without having 7 or 8 players with that character in your side your never going to be successful

 

[Ionman34]

But defensively he oozed quality. Quality isn't just about the creative thing.

This.

Adams as a creative Footballer? Not in a million.

Adams a top quality defender? All day long.

Quality comes in different forms for different roles. Makalele created very few chances and scored less, wasn't his only goal against us? But anyone who denies he was quality has rocks for brains.

 

[Bobishism]

So McCarthy isn't worth the resources required to get him? We have no idea what kind of fees will be involved. What if it came down to Lennon + 5 milliion? Would the squad depth be worth it then?

 

[Nerine]

WhyiareiyouisuggestingstheyzareTmutuallyxexclusive?f?
Why Samantha? Why??

 

[IGSpur]

So McCarthy isn't worth the resources required to get him? We have no idea what kind of fees will be involved. What if it came down to Lennon + 5 milliion? Would the squad depth be worth it then?

I wouldn't mind then. As we could focus the money saved on an area we really need to improve i.e. striker/winger and the small fee wouldn't bring pressure to play him. If he didn't come off we also wouldn't struggle to get rid of him as I'd imagine he'd be on easy to shift wages

 

[IGSpur]

@danielneeds I don't know why that's stupid, you can read various threads. I've never been completely against getting McCarthy. I have been against the apparent outlay it would require when there are more pressing needs in the squad as imo position isn't urgent as we have plenty of cover.

 

[sloth]

I had read it - and responded appropriately. I note responses from others to your posts as well

Sorry, but what a load of b*****cks.

In the last few years we've seen Caulker, Livermore, Rose, Townsend, Kane, Mason & Bentaleb play in the first team and Pritchard has been told by Poch that he will be in the first team squad next season

So that's an average of about 2 Spurs youth per season promoted to the first team by a variety of managers.

And the Spurs youth watchers universally report that there is a conveyor belt of good prospects coming through - mostly mentioning the same names, and they are realistic so its identifying a couple a season who could make it, and recognising a few who are good but not perhaps quite good enough..

So if we've had an average of 2 youngsters a season come through to the first team and no shortage of talent coming through - isn't the logical thing to expect is an average of 2 a season in the future ?

And in order to get the 2 a season into the first team squad, that often means having a group of maybe half a dozen involved with the first team, of whom Poch will choose 1, 2 or 3 to promote full time.

So having nobody come through into the first team in a season should raise more than eyebrows.

My post said try to trust Poch and his team. I gave some examples of the information which justifies doubts. I pointed out that our own information is flimsy compared to the coaches.

According to you that's "what a load of bollocks!"

Somewhat embarrassingly you then go on to post a load of spurious bollocks yourself. Spurious because you're arguing against a fiction. In fact your stats make my point. All of which is why I assumed you hadn't actually read what I said.

 

[GetSpurredOn]

Posted this about something in another thread, but seems quite poignant to this conversation

Tom Huddlestone on Edgar Davids...
"He was probably a bit intimidating. Not through any fault of his own but just because of his legendary reputation. But as a guy, he was very nice and very easy to get on with. Throughout the few years he was there, he always spoke to the younger players and was giving us advice about things we needed to tweak in our game if we needed. It was general advice about all of football. Having been there and done it for a number of years, and especially as he broke into the team at Ajax at such a young age, he could relate and understand what we were going through."

Maybe worth considering a move for Cambiasso, free, PL experience, played in two of Europes biggest leagues, for some very prestigious teams, and won a lot of trophies. Cheeky little player coach role??

Bentaleb, Mason, Carroll, Ali & Winks could learn a thing or two.

 

[sloth]

That is not what you were saying originally though, you were suggesting in a round about way that none of us are qualified to have an opinion. Which I think we are often eminently qualified, we just aren't paid to do so.

But to answer your question, if I was hiring someone to pick my pl team, I would interview the prospective applicants and make a decision based on all the criteria, facts, instincts on offer to me about those candidates. But if every chairman only employed the coach with the greatest footballing (playing/coaching) experience miles on the clock the game would have lost some great coaches.

Personally I would value intelligence, vision, character and communicative skills above a great playing career or years spent coaching.

Obvious examples like Mourinho and Sachi come to mind, but recently people like Warburton are proving this point.

We have two choices. We can believe we know better than Poch and his team because we've seen a few youth matches, or we can think we might not.

As I said that is not carte blanche for experts over interested bystanders, in any field you find idiot experts and insightful onlookers. Idiot experts are judged by their tracks records though, but as far as I can tell Poch's track record is anything but idiot. Last season he had 10s of millions of pounds of talent at his disposal, but he picked his side on merit not transfer fee. So the track record is positive and we should therefore try to trust, try to remember that we don't possess a full picture and if we disagree initially, nevertheless give it a bit of time to see how it actually pans out.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

We have two choices. We can believe we know better than Poch and his team because we've seen a few youth matches, or we can think we might not.

As I said that is not carte blanche for experts over interested bystanders, in any field you find idiot experts and insightful onlookers. Idiot experts are judged by their tracks records though, but as far as I can tell Poch's track record is anything but idiot. Last season he had 10s of millions of pounds of talent at his disposal, but he picked his side on merit not transfer fee. So the track record is positive and we should therefore try to trust, try to remember that we don't possess a full picture and if we disagree initially, nevertheless give it a bit of time to see how it actually pans out.

So we don't analyse, discuss, critique anyone or anything we deem to have greater experience of a situation than ourselves ? We trust politicians, law enforcement, the legal system, actors, singers etc etc as long as they appear to be mostly getting things right ?

Is their a an exact scientific measurement we use in this "trust" process to establish the precise moment when criticism or alternative opinion is valid ?

A very famous Sports Quant* inventor man once said "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has it's own reason for existing".

I think you've spent too long in the fucking ashram. Time to hang up the kaftan and get back to reality Sloth old son.

We don't just have two choices.




*Sports Quant or theory of relativity, one or the other I get these confused.

 

[sloth]

So we don't analyse, discuss, critique anyone or anything we deem to have greater experience of a situation than ourselves ? We trust politicians, law enforcement, the legal system, actors, singers etc etc as long as they appear to be mostly getting things right ?

Surely this addresses that point (I've bolded the bits of particular relevance)

We have two choices. We can believe we know better than Poch and his team because we've seen a few youth matches, or we can think we might not.

As I said that is not carte blanche for experts over interested bystanders, in any field you find idiot experts and insightful onlookers. Idiot experts are judged by their tracks records though, but as far as I can tell Poch's track record is anything but idiot. Last season he had 10s of millions of pounds of talent at his disposal, but he picked his side on merit not transfer fee. So the track record is positive and we should therefore try to trust, try to remember that we don't possess a full picture and if we disagree initially, nevertheless give it a bit of time to see how it actually pans out.

Is their a an exact scientific measurement we use in this "trust" process to establish the precise moment when criticism or alternative opinion is valid ?

A very famous Sports Quant* inventor man once said "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has it's own reason for existing".

I think you've spent too long in the fucking ashram. Time to hang up the kaftan and get back to reality Sloth old son.

We don't just have two choices.




*Sports Quant or theory of relativity, one or the other I get these confused.

There's not an exact point, but we look at the track record surely? Last season we bought Ben Davis for £10m, but Poch gave our academy product Rose* the opportunity to prove himself and played him when he did. We signed a guy from Sporting Lisbon's academy and he ended up playing more that Sevilla's Europa League winning Captain. In CM he could choose from several expensive buys, but he saw that our home-grown guys were doing it in the EL and on the training pitch, and hey presto it's Mason and Bentaleb who make that position their own. Up fonr he had three strikers, one a kid and the other two with massive reputations, but who did he go for? The player on form, not with the rep. In other poositions though he did go with the established name over the young gun, because he deserved it, so it wasn't just play youth and fuck the players with reputation. All the way through the season Poch showed he was going to pick players based on his criteria and not their reputations. So if we want to look at track records I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt.

Now if we buy McCarthy and whoever else and they play ahead of other players and they're average and yet Poch persists with them, and then some of our youth players move on and they turn out to be Paul Pogbas or whatever, then we can criticise, because we're starting to get a negative picture. We're beginning to see that Poch is conservative and not willing to give our talent a chance and a route through to the first team. So there is a time when we can criticise, I just think it should be when he's done bad, and not before.

* For the purposes of this post I'm choosing to call an academy product a player he spent some time in our academy before progressing to the first team.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Surely this addresses that point (I've bolded the bits of particular relevance)





There's not an exact point, but we look at the track record surely? Last season we bought Ben Davis for £10m, but Poch gave our academy product Rose* the opportunity to prove himself and played him when he did. We signed a guy from Sporting Lisbon's academy and he ended up playing more that Sevilla's Europa League winning Captain. In CM he could choose from several expensive buys, but he saw that our home-grown guys were doing it in the EL and on the training pitch, and hey presto it's Mason and Bentaleb who make that position their own. Up fonr he had three strikers, one a kid and the other two with massive reputations, but who did he go for? The player on form, not with the rep. In other poositions though he did go with the established name over the young gun, because he deserved it, so it wasn't just play youth and fuck the players with reputation. All the way through the season Poch showed he was going to pick players based on his criteria and not their reputations. So if we want to look at track records I think we should give him the benefit of the doubt.

Now if we buy McCarthy and whoever else and they play ahead of other players and they're average and yet Poch persists with them, and then some of our youth players move on and they turn out to be Paul Pogbas or whatever, then we can criticise, because we're starting to get a negative picture. We're beginning to see that Poch is conservative and not willing to give our talent a chance and a route through to the first team. So there is a time when we can criticise, I just think it should be when he's done bad, and not before.

* For the purposes of this post I'm choosing to call an academy product a player he spent some time in our academy before progressing to the first team.

This issue isn't just about criticising Pochettino and his willingness to take chances on academy players. It is about having a philosophy driven by the chairman that everyone in coaching, development, managerial, recruitment and playing roles buys into.

And judging by our interest in players last year and this summer I still don't think this philosophy as strong enough.

And whilst I agree that Pochettino hasn't let fee be a factor I still don't think Pochettino made enough use of some exceptional academy talents. In 55 games only 23yo Mason was given his first start from our academy.

You rightly accused my OP of being over simplistic, but so is your argument that just because Pochettino didn't always let purchase fee be his master that means everything he did was indicative of someone who does everything in keeping with a great integration philosophy.

 

[THFCSPURS19]

@Bus-Conductor - would you be happy with Cambiasso?

 

[danielneeds]

@danielneeds I don't know why that's stupid, you can read various threads. I've never been completely against getting McCarthy. I have been against the apparent outlay it would require when there are more pressing needs in the squad as imo position isn't urgent as we have plenty of cover.

iPhone fat fingers...

 

[sloth]

This issue isn't just about criticising Pochettino and his willingness to take chances on academy players. It is about having a philosophy driven by the chairman that everyone in coaching, development, managerial, recruitment and playing roles buys into.

And judging by our interest in players last year and this summer I still don't think this philosophy as strong enough.

And whilst I agree that Pochettino hasn't let fee be a factor I still don't think Pochettino made enough use of some exceptional academy talents. In 55 games only 23yo Mason was given his first start from our academy.

You rightly accused my OP of being over simplistic, but so is your argument that just because Pochettino didn't always let purchase fee be his master that means everything he did was indicative of someone who does everything in keeping with a great integration philosophy.

I think most agree that the academy players he has given a go to have been a success.

We can also agree that apart from the very odd cameo we haven't seen the academy kids who have not been called up to the first team up against grown men of Premier League quality.

We do know that Poch sees them in this respect every day in training.

We also know that Poch doesn't stand on reputation, and takes a lot of account of performance on the training ground.

Poch has only been with us a season and in that time several fringe younger players have become first team mainstays.

Last season the teams Poch picked had the youngest average age of any team in the PL.

this is the first window in which Mitchell has his feet under the table.

We know Levy forked out circa £50m for the training facility to bring through kids from the academy.

We know Levy doesn't want to fork out multi-millions when we've got the talent already coming through.

We suspect, but don't know, that both Redknapp and AVB were let go, at least in part, because they didn't engage with the academy.

We suspect, but don't know, that the very green Sherwood was given the job, at least in part, because he believed in the academy, and the talent we had in the club.

Folk won't agree with all of the above, but most will agree with the majority of it.

All of that adds up to us giving the new team a go, it adds up to us believing the club believes in the academy and that we're trying to follow a philosophy of bringing kids through to the first team, and that more than most other clubs in the division we're enacting it.

It may be that we're not being brave enough, it may also be that you're not realising the limits of your knowledge and getting caught up in an ideology you believe in very strongly. An ideology I also believe in btw.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

@Bus-Conductor - would you be happy with Cambiasso?

I loved Cambiasso in his prime, he was the heir to Marcus Senna's crown as King of footballing busy ****s.

But do I want the 35yo Cambiasso ? I'm really not sure. On one level I'd love to see him in a Spurs shirt and I'm sure he's got a lot to give on and off the pitch, but for a couple of reasons I'm not sure if I do want him now. I'd much rather, if possible, we built for the future and a 35yo Cambiasso will only need replacing in a year anyway. Then again, maybe it buys us a year while we look for a better long term option which might not be available now? I'd also hate to watch him if he was on the slide. I didn't see enough of him at Leicester to know how close to his best he was last year.

Mixed feelings.

 

[Spurrific]

If there's any body on this site that thinks Cambiasso in a midfield two next to Mason or Bentaleb would not get absolutely creamed by every single team we play, you're mad.

If he was to play in a 3, maybe - but he's 85 years old. We need a bit of experience, but he's too old imo, I'd imagine this guy's birth certificate looks like the Shroud of Turin

 

[spurs9]

I loved Cambiasso in his prime, he was the heir to Marcus Senna's crown as King of footballing busy ****s.

But do I want the 35yo Cambiasso ? I'm really not sure. On one level I'd love to see him in a Spurs shirt and I'm sure he's got a lot to give on and off the pitch, but for a couple of reasons I'm not sure if I do want him now. I'd much rather, if possible, we built for the future and a 35yo Cambiasso will only need replacing in a year anyway. Then again, maybe it buys us a year while we look for a better long term option which might not be available now? I'd also hate to watch him if he was on the slide. I didn't see enough of him at Leicester to know how close to his best he was last year.

Mixed feelings.

My issue with Cambiasso is does he still have the legs to play in a high tempo system, in a CM2 with Bentaleb? He had great stamina in his prime.

From a building for the perspective, he could be great (if he can handle the above), as he has the knowledge and experience to help out the young players and we can use that year to try and get Winks or Veljkovic ready to take over.

 

[Mr Pink]

My issue with Cambiasso is does he still have the legs to play in a high tempo system, in a CM2 with Bentaleb? He had great stamina in his prime.

From a building for the perspective, he could be great (if he can handle the above), as he has the knowledge and experience to help out the young players and we can use that year to try and get Winks or Veljkovic ready to take over.

I don't think he would have the legs to play in a two now. Didn't he play in a three man midfield at Leicester?

Quite a difference that.