Ex-Manager watch: Antonio Conte

[Nebby]

And yet - we have been through Poch, Mourinho, Nuno, Conte, Mason - twice.

Poch left - won a trophy
Mourinho left - won a trophy
Nuno left - about to win a trophy

Mason - if he left would probably get a team promoted if he went to the Championship.

We have had very good managers - who have won in the past, and won after they left Spurs.

It's not the manager. Its the players, and the culture of the club - that comes from above the manager.

If the manager were as important as people think - teams would stop the Merry-go-round of managers continuously being recycled. Show me a good manager, and I'll show you a team with good players.

Changing managers is a short-term solution to a long-term problem.

It's horses for courses. You need to match the right manager with the right group of players. Whether by luck of judgement we seem to have that balance right.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Sorry mate but I couldn't disagree with this more and I think Ange coming in and having the incredible positive impact that he has, shows that this is absolutely not true and that everything starts with the Manager.

Of course it helps to have good players but the Manager helps to set the culture, he sets the tactics, he decides the style of play, he sets the rules and discipline etc etc.

Also some Managers fit clubs better than others and comparing Poch winning a trophy at PSG or Nuno in the Saudi money league is hardly comparable to how those managers performed at Tottenham in the most competitive league in the world with less resources than at least 5 teams in the same league.

Some of the culture of a club comes from above a Manager but i'd argue that most of the culture of a club is set from the Manager. Take Jose & Conte, when they had injuries or the team had bad form, what happened? They were defensive and critical and blamed the players mentality or quality which created a toxic blame culture, they also bitched and moaned about how they didn't have the players they wanted or how they were essentially bigger than Tottenham and doing the club a favour and that its in Tottenham's DNA to lose etc etc. Also the playing styles of Jose & Conte and Nuno were boring and defensive and rigid, that also starts to embed a culture change at our club which we don't like and aren't used to. Take the Champions League Rd of 16 game last season under Conte, we were losing and he brings on a defender!!! That is the absolute opposite of 'to dare is to do', so things weren't aligned at all in terms of culture and vision.

Then take Ange and how he's remained resolute and resilient and strong and positive and solution focused in the face of adversity and many very challenging circumstances, so that attitude plus an attractive attacking style of football that he is not compromising on sets a new culture and mindset at our club, to the players, to the fans etc. Also Ange is huge on the mentality and personality of the player he signs, this also effects the culture, whereas Jose & Conte cared more about how experienced the players were.

Its an interesting discussion but I hope seeing what Ange has done that many fans eyes are now open to just how vital the Manager is at a football club.

I said it in another thread, take Liverpool for example, 7-8 years without a trophy and 30 years without a PL title, they had lost their culture and belief, in walks Klopp who was the perfect perfect fit for them. He brought high energy and passion and has openly said he changed the clubs culture and the fans mindset from dreamers to believers, he also came from another club who had a 'kop end' and he brought a style of play that resonates with the people of Liverpool, the rest is history as to what he has achieved there.

You can go even further back in time, take Fergie coming into Man.U and how he said hello to every member of staff and made Man.U feel like a family and that every single person was part of a collective objective, he changed things so the players wore suits and were more disciplined etc etc etc, Wenger at Arsenal cut out the drinking culture, changed the diet, changed the style of play, recruited French and other foreign players to also re-enforce this new culture, take Bryan Cluff at Forest, yes they signed some good players but he set the culture of the style of play and the belief that they could beat anyone.

Of course its not as simple as just one person influences everything but as Carlo Ancelotti has quoted in his book, "as a Manager it is my job to 'manage', so whatever the situation I make it work and part of this is to help set a culture and discipline within the team and club'.

My point is Jose, Nuno and Conte were never a good fit for us and whilst sure we needed to make more signings to continue the 'painful rebuild', ultimately Jose, Nuno and mostly Conte created a negative toxic environment and culture where the players felt under pressure, the fans felt bored and offended and the club felt toxic.

Ange thankfully has been just the tonic we've needed in so many ways and the longer he is here, the more his good influence brings to setting a new culture at the club for this period which is much more in-line with our true DNA as a club.

Holy wall of text Batman!

It's all well and good that Ange has come in and changed the culture of the club - and infused more positivity. I think that has been a big factor in the turn around.


But, you can't just ignore the upgrade in players either - both Ange and the new players have contributed to the change.

Last year - Against Newcastle - we have upgraded:

Lloris
Dier
Perisic (at LB)
Hojbjerg
Skipp

5 starters - is a huge change


If you go back to the last win before the Newcastle debacle, it was Brighton, and we have upgraded:

Lloris
Dier
Lenglet
Skipp
Hojbjerg
Perisic (LWB)


So, you can't point to Ange alone as the reason for the change. When you upgrade half the team, that also has a big impact on performance.


All that said - you know I love Ange, and would not trade him for anyone. Just don't ignore the upgrades to the team that have been made since last season.

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

Holy wall of text Batman!

It's all well and good that Ange has come in and changed the culture of the club - and infused more positivity. I think that has been a big factor in the turn around.


But, you can't just ignore the upgrade in players either - both Ange and the new players have contributed to the change.

Last year - Against Newcastle - we have upgraded:

Lloris
Dier
Perisic (at LB)
Hojbjerg
Skipp

5 starters - is a huge change


If you go back to the last win before the Newcastle debacle, it was Brighton, and we have upgraded:

Lloris
Dier
Lenglet
Skipp
Hojbjerg
Perisic (LWB)


So, you can't point to Ange alone as the reason for the change. When you upgrade half the team, that also has a big impact on performance.


All that said - you know I love Ange, and would not trade him for anyone. Just don't ignore the upgrades to the team that have been made since last season.

I didn’t bro I said it’s a combination of both but it all starts with the Manager. Whereas you said “It’s not the manager it’s the players and the culture of the club” that was the part I wrote my wall of text about.

But I know you love Ange really bro

 

[Cochise]

When I saw the thread bump I'd assumed he'd gotten a new job somewhere.

I'm very happy with Ange, but there is still an element of "what if?" with Conte. I doubt that he'd be happy with our current squad, but I'd still have liked to have seen what he could've done with a team containing Vicario, Micky, Udogie, Porro and Maddison.

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

When I saw the thread bump I'd assumed he'd gotten a new job somewhere.

I'm very happy with Ange, but there is still an element of "what if?" with Conte. I doubt that he'd be happy with our current squad, but I'd still have liked to have seen what he could've done with a team containing Vicario, Micky, Udogie, Porro and Maddison.

He’d never have signed Vicario, VDV or Maddison, he turned down Maddison & Eriksen and he favours experienced players.

And even if he had agreed to sign them, he’d have us camped on our own box for most the match so they’d all look shells of the players they look under Ange.

There is no ‘what if’ for me, it was what it was, it didn’t work, never was going to because Conte isn’t a good fit for us, he thought he was above us and so it’s good riddance and onwards and upwards with Anhe

 

[Styopa]

Conte and Ange are complete opposites in so many ways, I’m not sure what predictions we can confidently make about how well Conte would have done with Ange’s “upgraded” squad.

Firstly, what tends to get forgotten now is Conte had Kane, probably the world’s best striker. Secondly, by all accounts Conte rejected Maddison. Thirdly, he didn’t seem to rate Bissouma all that much either.

But even setting those issues aside, and giving Conte the benefit of the doubt by saying he had an inferior squad to work with, nothing felt right at Spurs last season. Conte wasn’t committed, performances were largely terrible even when we were winning, it felt like we were going backwards after a great start the previous season. The whole atmosphere was miserable and toxic.

If it was just the case that Conte needed a couple more windows to make us competitive, he could have stuck around and the fans would have understood I think. But it just felt like we were in terminal decline last season and to his credit I think Conte himself realised that which is why he self destructed because he wanted out. He didn’t see any future for himself at the club.

The mood, the atmosphere, the momentum is completely different with Ange. Even with all our injuries, the whole mood around the club is totally different.

 

[ComfortablyNumb]

Holy wall of text Batman!

It's all well and good that Ange has come in and changed the culture of the club - and infused more positivity. I think that has been a big factor in the turn around.

I'm going to go off on one a bit here, because "culture" is something I take seriously in my job and, unfortunately, to a first order approximation, one cannot direct a change in culture, whoever you are, in any organisation. That's because culture is both path dependent and emergent. You can change behaviour, and to some extent that might influence culture, but not necesarily in the way you want it to change. For instance, a manager could impose fines for late arrival to training, and some players might imprve their timekeeping. That's a behavioural change, and I'd expect that the players that change their behaviour already had a degree of discipline in their own culture. However, not all players will respond, and you could end up with a culture of us versus them, with the bad boys playing up anyway they can, and the good boys resenting them.

I don't know whether the culture has changed since Ange arrived, certainly we're playing with a smile, and seem more resilient when things go wrong, but I suspect that this is more to do with the fact that Ange's methods actually suit our existing culture better than Conte's did.

Anyone who has any kind of training in organisational behaviour will tell you that if you really want to change culture A to culture B, you need to identify all your staff with culture A and sack them, replacing them with new people with culture B. That's bloody expensive , and still isn't guaranteed to work. Or you have to be very patient, and constantly make small changes. No manager has that luxury, in football or anywhere else.

Whatever Ange is doing is working for the team, but if he has manged to improve our culture, even he won't know how he has done it.

All IMO, of course...

 

[Styopa]

I'm going to go off on one a bit here, because "culture" is something I take seriously in my job and, unfortunately, to a first order approximation, one cannot direct a change in culture, whoever you are, in any organisation. That's because culture is both path dependent and emergent. You can change behaviour, and to some extent that might influence culture, but not necesarily in the way you want it to change. For instance, a manager could impose fines for late arrival to training, and some players might imprve their timekeeping. That's a behavioural change, and I'd expect that the players that change their behaviour already had a degree of discipline in their own culture. However, not all players will respond, and you could end up with a culture of us versus them, with the bad boys playing up anyway they can, and the good boys resenting them.

I don't know whether the culture has changed since Ange arrived, certainly we're playing with a smile, and seem more resilient when things go wrong, but I suspect that this is more to do with the fact that Ange's methods actually suit our existing culture better than Conte's did.

Anyone who has any kind of training in organisational behaviour will tell you that if you really want to change culture A to culture B, you need to identify all your staff with culture A and sack them, replacing them with new people with culture B. That's bloody expensive , and still isn't guaranteed to work. Or you have to be very patient, and constantly make small changes. No manager has that luxury, in football or anywhere else.

Whatever Ange is doing is working for the team, but if he has manged to improve our culture, even he won't know how he has done it.

All IMO, of course...

Culture is a loaded term, but mood or atmosphere probably captures it better. It’s like when Jol took over from Santini or Redknapp from Ramos, there was a palpable shift in a very short space of time.

I think most of us have worked under or with someone who brings the whole mood of a place down and when they’ve gone there is a real feeling of positivity and relief and everyone is happier.

 

[ComfortablyNumb]

Culture is a loaded term, but mood or atmosphere probably captures it better. It’s like when Jol took over from Santini or Redknapp from Ramos, there was a palpable shift in a very short space of time.

I think most of us have worked under or with someone who brings the whole mood of a place down and when they’ve gone there is a real feeling of positivity and relief and everyone is happier.

I wouldn't argue with any of that. I know my mood improved the day Conte fucked off...

 

[thelak]

I'm going to go off on one a bit here, because "culture" is something I take seriously in my job and, unfortunately, to a first order approximation, one cannot direct a change in culture, whoever you are, in any organisation. That's because culture is both path dependent and emergent. You can change behaviour, and to some extent that might influence culture, but not necesarily in the way you want it to change. For instance, a manager could impose fines for late arrival to training, and some players might imprve their timekeeping. That's a behavioural change, and I'd expect that the players that change their behaviour already had a degree of discipline in their own culture. However, not all players will respond, and you could end up with a culture of us versus them, with the bad boys playing up anyway they can, and the good boys resenting them.

I don't know whether the culture has changed since Ange arrived, certainly we're playing with a smile, and seem more resilient when things go wrong, but I suspect that this is more to do with the fact that Ange's methods actually suit our existing culture better than Conte's did.

Anyone who has any kind of training in organisational behaviour will tell you that if you really want to change culture A to culture B, you need to identify all your staff with culture A and sack them, replacing them with new people with culture B. That's bloody expensive , and still isn't guaranteed to work. Or you have to be very patient, and constantly make small changes. No manager has that luxury, in football or anywhere else.

Whatever Ange is doing is working for the team, but if he has manged to improve our culture, even he won't know how he has done it.

All IMO, of course...

Thanks

 

[southlondonyiddo]

I'm going to go off on one a bit here, because "culture" is something I take seriously in my job and, unfortunately, to a first order approximation, one cannot direct a change in culture, whoever you are, in any organisation. That's because culture is both path dependent and emergent. You can change behaviour, and to some extent that might influence culture, but not necesarily in the way you want it to change. For instance, a manager could impose fines for late arrival to training, and some players might imprve their timekeeping. That's a behavioural change, and I'd expect that the players that change their behaviour already had a degree of discipline in their own culture. However, not all players will respond, and you could end up with a culture of us versus them, with the bad boys playing up anyway they can, and the good boys resenting them.

I don't know whether the culture has changed since Ange arrived, certainly we're playing with a smile, and seem more resilient when things go wrong, but I suspect that this is more to do with the fact that Ange's methods actually suit our existing culture better than Conte's did.

Anyone who has any kind of training in organisational behaviour will tell you that if you really want to change culture A to culture B, you need to identify all your staff with culture A and sack them, replacing them with new people with culture B. That's bloody expensive , and still isn't guaranteed to work. Or you have to be very patient, and constantly make small changes. No manager has that luxury, in football or anywhere else.

Whatever Ange is doing is working for the team, but if he has manged to improve our culture, even he won't know how he has done it.

All IMO, of course...

How do we sack our Chairman & owners with Culture A and get Culture B installed?

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

I'm going to go off on one a bit here, because "culture" is something I take seriously in my job and, unfortunately, to a first order approximation, one cannot direct a change in culture, whoever you are, in any organisation. That's because culture is both path dependent and emergent. You can change behaviour, and to some extent that might influence culture, but not necesarily in the way you want it to change. For instance, a manager could impose fines for late arrival to training, and some players might imprve their timekeeping. That's a behavioural change, and I'd expect that the players that change their behaviour already had a degree of discipline in their own culture. However, not all players will respond, and you could end up with a culture of us versus them, with the bad boys playing up anyway they can, and the good boys resenting them.

I don't know whether the culture has changed since Ange arrived, certainly we're playing with a smile, and seem more resilient when things go wrong, but I suspect that this is more to do with the fact that Ange's methods actually suit our existing culture better than Conte's did.

Anyone who has any kind of training in organisational behaviour will tell you that if you really want to change culture A to culture B, you need to identify all your staff with culture A and sack them, replacing them with new people with culture B. That's bloody expensive , and still isn't guaranteed to work. Or you have to be very patient, and constantly make small changes. No manager has that luxury, in football or anywhere else.

Whatever Ange is doing is working for the team, but if he has manged to improve our culture, even he won't know how he has done it.

All IMO, of course...

Really really great post.

Only point I disagree with is about needing to sack all your staff and replace them all to change culture from A to B, I don't think its as black and white or as dramatic as that (like most things there are many influencing factors).

However to simplify this I believe that the Manager of a Football Team/Club has by far the most influence along with the Chairman/woman in instilling or changing a culture.

I also love the idea that Ange has essentially unlocked what our true club culture is and his methods suit and fit that better whereas Conte's didn't just like in the way that Conte was very successful at Inter and Juve where he probably did very much suit those clubs culture. As Levy said in the fan forum "Conte & Jose are good managers but not for us" aka not suited to or don't fir well with our club.

Also just using the world 'culture' is also oversimplifying it, as you rightly say behaviour and habits and discipline are all part of it, whether that overall summates to 'culture' or 'identity' or something else its hard to say but whatever the best wording is Ange has got it spot on and "we have our Tottenham back"

 

[Styopa]

Really really great post.

Only point I disagree with is about needing to sack all your staff and replace them all to change culture from A to B, I don't think its as black and white as that (like most things there are many influencing factors).

However to simplify this I believe that the Manager of a Football Team/Club has by far the most influence along with the Chairman/woman in instilling or changing a culture.

I also love the idea that Ange has essentially unlocked what our true club culture is and his methods suit and fit that better whereas Conte's didn't just like in the way that Conte was very successful and Inter and Juve where he probably did very much suit those clubs culture.

Also just using the world 'culture' is also oversimplifying it, as you rightly say behaviour and habits and discipline are all part of it, whether that overall summates to 'culture' or 'identity' or something else its hard to say but whatever the best wording is Ange has got it spot on and "we have our Tottenham back"

Yeah it’s definitely a case of “fit”. Conte felt like a bad fit whereas Ange feels like a really good fit. That doesn’t mean Conte is a bad coach just it wasn’t right for him or for the club.

It’s never as simple as employing a successful manager and expecting them to replicate that success. England tried that with a couple of really successful managers and it ended up being awful. We tried it too with the same outcome.

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

Yeah it’s definitely a case of “fit”. Conte felt like a bad fit whereas Ange feels like a really good fit. That doesn’t mean Conte is a bad coach just it wasn’t right for him or for the club.

It’s never as simple as employing a successful manager and expecting them to replicate that success. England tried that with a couple of really successful managers and it ended up being awful. We tried it too with the same outcome.

Spot on mate

 

[thfcsteff]

I'm going to go off on one a bit here, because "culture" is something I take seriously in my job and, unfortunately, to a first order approximation, one cannot direct a change in culture, whoever you are, in any organisation. That's because culture is both path dependent and emergent. You can change behaviour, and to some extent that might influence culture, but not necesarily in the way you want it to change. For instance, a manager could impose fines for late arrival to training, and some players might imprve their timekeeping. That's a behavioural change, and I'd expect that the players that change their behaviour already had a degree of discipline in their own culture. However, not all players will respond, and you could end up with a culture of us versus them, with the bad boys playing up anyway they can, and the good boys resenting them.

I don't know whether the culture has changed since Ange arrived, certainly we're playing with a smile, and seem more resilient when things go wrong, but I suspect that this is more to do with the fact that Ange's methods actually suit our existing culture better than Conte's did.

Anyone who has any kind of training in organisational behaviour will tell you that if you really want to change culture A to culture B, you need to identify all your staff with culture A and sack them, replacing them with new people with culture B. That's bloody expensive , and still isn't guaranteed to work. Or you have to be very patient, and constantly make small changes. No manager has that luxury, in football or anywhere else.

Whatever Ange is doing is working for the team, but if he has manged to improve our culture, even he won't know how he has done it.

All IMO, of course...

Postecoglu has changed the culture. From one of fear and uncertainty to one of clarity. Under ****e, no-one knew what was happening from one minute to the next due to the narcissistic control freakism which we quickly saw oozing from his every ore. You could literally see the players were both cautious and fearful. The attitudes which wafted out of the dressing room and training ground. I'd wager that Ventrone was the buffer, the 'warmer' figure, the one who could both calm Conte down and lend an ear to any player needing one. Once he sadly passed, and with a World Cup springing up, our control freak really started to go doo-lally. My view anyway...last season, the BEST half of football we played was at Anfield second-half, because we genuinely played with freedom. Forget the Lucas gaffe, the three goal comeback was great, lovely to finally see them playing for fun...

...and then came Ange. He made it clear what he wanted, clear how he operates, put a structure in place and has stuck to it. No histrionics, no control-freakism (he obviously likes control - he's a manager!-but he controls only what he CAN control), no fretting every five fucking seconds because someone was a foot out of their pre-planned quadrant...I know, a bit excessive, so I'll get back to my basic point which is before Ange arrived, we had a culture of fear, whereas now we have a culture of adventure and possibility. It is wonderful.

 

[Styopa]

I agree that there was a culture of fear while Conte was here. You could see it in the contained way the team played, terrified of making a mistake.

Actually I think that’s what made him popular among some of the fans on here. They were angry with the team and got a kind of sadistic pleasure from the way Conte laid into them.

 

[NEVILLEB]

No doubt Ange’s personality has made a huge difference. Without VDV, Vicario and Udogie however he might have found himself more cautious than he has been this season.

 

[spurs mental]

I agree that there was a culture of fear while Conte was here. You could see it in the contained way the team played, terrified of making a mistake.

Actually I think that’s what made him popular among some of the fans on here. They were angry with the team and got a kind of sadistic pleasure from the way Conte laid into them.

I wouldn't say people took pleasure from the way he laid into them. More so that he was correct in his summation of the players. Quite a few of them anyway.

It was clear, and it still is clear, that some of the players simply aren't good enough, whether they've improved under Ange is another thing completely, but some of them who were here under Poch/Jose/Conte remain here now and have proven not good enough even under Ange.

That was consistently the point many made when Conte was here.

 

[Styopa]

I wouldn't say people took pleasure from the way he laid into them. More so that he was correct in his summation of the players. Quite a few of them anyway.

It was clear, and it still is clear, that some of the players simply aren't good enough, whether they've improved under Ange is another thing completely, but some of them who were here under Poch/Jose/Conte remain here now and have proven not good enough even under Ange.

That was consistently the point many made when Conte was here.

I disagree. For example, when Conte went off on a rant after the Southampton match, a lot of people here were totally into it. They weren’t just agreeing, they enjoyed it.

We know the players in question aren’t good enough but a number of them are still here and Ange has managed to contain his emotions about them. Conte’s outbursts helped fuel the kind of abuse we see players like Lloris, Dier, Emerson etc subjected to on here. Yeah they’re not good enough but they’re professional and some of them have dedicated most of their careers to the club.

We are replacing them anyway and that started under Conte. We were never going to do it all in two windows.

 

[Gassin's finest]

Conte was absolutely unhinged, never wanted to be here and only came for the bunce because no one else was interested. I quite frankly never want to hear about him again.