- Dec 22, 2003
- 8,081
- 7,581
This is a bit revisionist, he got less out of the players he inherited than Sherwood had managed to - the real turn around didn't happen until he'd shunted out much of the foundation of the previous squad. Players who went to Levy to complain about him, only for Levy to back the manager this time. Pochettino was under pressure, the football wasn't great, and he said himself the narrow win at Villa was a crucial turning point in his time with us continuing.Its significantly better than Bentaleb and Mason in midfield with Soldado as our starting number 9 at the start of the season that poch inherited and produced drastically better football with.
This is also a bit revisionist, much like any other manager, he improved some players, pushed others out, some were already top prospects and would likely have improved on their own. He was also pretty terrible at bringing through young players after the initial purge, and was strangely reluctant to let them go on loan for development opportunities. That's one of the big reasons why if he does come back, we really need a good DoF in place first.by my logic Poch instantly caused improvement in the players playing under him not a short spike of 3 months followed by a long painful season of players becoming worse.
What Pochettino did with us was fantastic, the connection with the fans and the team the best I can remember it - yet there is a lot of misty-eyed nostalgia flying around that ignores much of the reality of his time. We were quite capable of putting in turgid displays - it wasn't wall-to-wall exciting football as some seem to misremember it, we often needed a bit of Eriksen magic to get us a point(s) and it didn't always come. The crowd would grow frustrated with sideways and backwards passing, same as it ever was, and we were often naive in big games. Did he do a brilliant job for us despite that? Absolutely. Was it all as perfect as some seem to want to paint it? No, of course not.