Jol/Comolli - Like we didn't know already...

[Fatcat]

I think he desreves to have his say at alot of confirm what most of us thought but think he should of done this sooner . I think Jol did well for us but was lacking as a top 4 manager.

As already mentioned Jol has many times before said that he had final say on all signings and now this contradicts that. With the talk of dignity I think that if he felt this was happening in the Summer then he should of said something then.
Him staying on and getting the sack has improved his chances of getting a new job thanks to the fiasco with Ramos. I would have had a lot more respect if he would have left in the summer stating his reasons then.
It would not suprise me if this is also another great PR plan to help Jol secure another job with ease.

Thank You BMJ for your hard work and taking us to the next step. Ramos is now the man to take us further.

 

[muffwah]

The guy has no dignity, if it was that bad why was he still at the club?

 

[muffwah]

You need to forget this term "inherent value". I used it as Levy used in a quote back in January. We don't have a transfer policy that we call project "inherent value". So terms like being "inherent value" bias are meaningless. We have a financial model in which every single one of our transfer over the last 4 or so years fits into. It doesn't have a name. I'm not assuming a particular player will holds it's value over a two year period, but any model one creates will have to take into account that some transfer value's will rise and some will decrease. So it makes sesne to create a model based on players retaining their value, rather than increasing or decreasing. This model becomes more efficient with better the transfer market knowledge, hence the club are very keen not to rely purely on the opinion of a manager, but also to bring in transfer market experts. So Bent might have cost £16 million, but that was clearly the market price (we weren't the only one's after him). The experts (Comollli/Jol) obviously think he can get better and that is all the board can realistically do. The can only take advice from "experts" and build a model around it. So individual cases like Zokora, JJ and Bent are not relevant. It's the value of the squad as a whole. Is it worth more than what we paid for it? I don't know. Is it worth less? I don't know. It's probably worth about the same, in fact, to be fair, it probably has actually gone up in value. The key is, there are no examples in the squad that mean we will lose over £2.5 million a year on (unless they've been given a new contract, but that is all about choice) which in the past wouldn't have been the case.

Yeah shame on Comolli and Levy!! just look at all the old players Arsenal and Man U are buying

 

[Bus-Conductor]

You need to forget this term "inherent value". I used it as Levy used in a quote back in January. We don't have a transfer policy that we call project "inherent value". So terms like being "inherent value" bias are meaningless. We have a financial model in which every single one of our transfer over the last 4 or so years fits into. It doesn't have a name. I'm not assuming a particular player will holds it's value over a two year period, but any model one creates will have to take into account that some transfer value's will rise and some will decrease. So it makes sesne to create a model based on players retaining their value, rather than increasing or decreasing. This model becomes more efficient with better the transfer market knowledge, hence the club are very keen not to rely purely on the opinion of a manager, but also to bring in transfer market experts. So Bent might have cost £16 million, but that was clearly the market price (we weren't the only one's after him). The experts (Comollli/Jol) obviously think he can get better and that is all the board can realistically do. The can only take advice from "experts" and build a model around it. So individual cases like Zokora, JJ and Bent are not relevant. It's the value of the squad as a whole. Is it worth more than what we paid for it? I don't know. Is it worth less? I don't know. It's probably worth about the same, in fact, to be fair, it probably has actually gone up in value. The key is, there are no examples in the squad that mean we will lose over £2.5 million a year on (unless they've been given a new contract, but that is all about choice) which in the past wouldn't have been the case.

I think you have kind of just agreed with me haven't you ??

I was also saying that the term inherent value is over stated in my original post didn't I ?

I think we both agree that the club have adopted just about the best combination business/football model that was possible given all the circumstances - but we both, I think, accept that to expect CL breakthrough without a slight modification is unrealistic.

Would that be fair ?

 

[soup]

Are we a selling club all of a sudden? Where exactly are all these youngsters we're making a killing on?

If it's wrong to be going out and buying some of the best young talent out there such as Mills and Dervitte then what is right? It's not like we're suffering big money signings because of it, we still went and bought Berbatov, Bale and Bent didn't we?

For all that Jol is saying I still believe it's his own fault, and can't agree more with Ray when he says that Jol coming out now and saying he wanted Elano is frankly bollocks. I'm sure that if a manager proclaims strongly enough that he definitely wants one sole target then the club willl go all out to get him, even if there is another strategy at play.

It's like people think the club were doing all they could to prevent Jol from doing his job, and that they stuck the knife in at every opportunity, of course they didn't. Comolli is being percieved as an internal assassin who is trying to do his best to ruin the club, and Levy is being criminalised for getting us the most sought after coach in Europe and making him the highest paid in the premier league.

Watching Spurs for the past couple of seasons has been just like watching England, good football in spurts but a mess for the most part, underacheiving players, no real organisation or playing style but able to just about win matches due to quality of players, whereas a real top team like ManU or painfully Arsenal play with a style and verve that dictates a game and puts the pressure on the opponent.

The one thing missing at Spurs is what enables teams like Everton and Portsmouth to win games with lesser players - I'm sure no one would doubt that they do have lesser players? So even though some weeks they might lose away at ManU or Liverpool they still play with a cohesion and style that is just missing at the Lane, not just roll out and hope individual brilliance wins them games, they never roll over and they never look down-in-the-mouth like we do. That is down to one thing - the training pitch, and that is down to one man - the manager.

People seem to think we've overachieved in the past 2 seasons while I think we've completely underachieved with what's available to us and the money that we've spent. And for the board to be putting pressure on our manager to get us in the CL is completely the right thing to be doing, it's called ambition, and whilst some of us lot might see sacking a faltering manager and getting in a proven top European coach in as a backward step I do not. I see a board who don't give a stuff about what the press is writing and what the fans are being spoon-fed and quite frankly rub it in the press's face (such as Levy not turning up to Ramos' press conference), and too right too, they don't have to answer to them.

People bang on about what Jol did for us but given the choice would you rather have Alan Sugar and Jol or Levy and Ramos? Thought so. That's because Levy has done more for this club than Jol ever did, he's the one who has turned this club around and deserves all the praise we can heap on him.

Perhaps he'd do better to just stop spending money, sell all our players but call Gabby Logan darling once in a while. Clearly he'd be more favourable on here.

 

[muffwah]

I think you have kind of just agreed with me haven't you ??

I was also saying that the term inherent value is over stated in my original post didn't I ?

I think we both agree that the club have adopted just about the best combination business/football model that was possible given all the circumstances - but we both, I think, accept that to expect CL breakthrough without a slight modification is unrealistic.

Would that be fair ?

I think it would be a salient point to acknowledge it is very difficult for the club to sign top rate established players. We have been signing very high calibre youngsters in order to have a great team in the future.....and obviously their value will increase in time, probably to a point where we could no longer buy them.

 

[joey55]

I think you have kind of just agreed with me haven't you ??

I was also saying that the term inherent value is over stated in my original post didn't I ?

I think we both agree that the club have adopted just about the best combination business/football model that was possible given all the circumstances - but we both, I think, accept that to expect CL breakthrough without a slight modification is unrealistic.

Would that be fair ?

Yes that would be fair.

But from every post you've made on the subject in the last couple of months has suggested that the term "inherent value" is a name (not literally) for our tansfer policy. "Inherent value" is what the club want from our policy (as confirmed by Levy in Jan, though I now wish I relly didn't quote that particular phrase). So the basic term "inherent value" is over stated, simply because it seems to have become what we refer to our transfer policy as. But the concept of "inherent value" has in no way been over stated. It is absolutely key to how Enic have taken the club forward. When you say we need to make some modifications, in more simple and realistic terms, we need to, at this stage in our development, work outside of the transfer policy that has served us so well. Will Enic do that? Is it in their best interests to do that? I'm not sure it is. Obviously it depends on what is on the table in terms of takeover offers, but if I were Enic i'd be more interested in an exit strategy than a further long term committment.

 

[eddiebailey]

The guy has no dignity, if it was that bad why was he still at the club?

The guy was doing his job within the constraints imposed on him by his employers, as we all do. And as a conscientious employee he was always punctilious in following the corporate line in public. In short he behaved professionally. What he said to the Board in private and what assurances he was given we are unlikely to ever know. But when it all started to go wrong the Board did not accept any collective responsibility and instead heaped all the blame on the manager, whislt absolving themselves of all accountability. Under the circumstances I would not blame him for wanting to put the record straight. He is entitled to his compensation, but he also has the right to defend his reputation.

 

[joey55]

Yeah shame on Comolli and Levy!! just look at all the old players Arsenal and Man U are buying

Just look at the players that were at the club when their coaches arrived. How many trophies had Seaman, Platt, Adams, Dixon, Wright, Bergkamp and Keown won between them? They weren't exactly spring chickens either were they? If you are going to start developing and bringing in the best young talent I think players like this are pretty much perfect to help instill that winning ethos and show how to handle pressure etc.

 

[eddiebailey]

People bang on about what Jol did for us but given the choice would you rather have Alan Sugar and Jol or Levy and Ramos?

Sugar and Jol actually does not sound an unattractive combination.

 

[SpurSince57]

And Sevilla's success was not entirely down to Ramos.

 

[DC_Boy]

Well, whoever was responsible, our summer signing strategy was poor (at best) and if we get relegated, catastrophic.

If we do get relegated, I want to see Commoli sacked. If we win nothing and finish 17th-15th I also want to see Commolli out.

This is the fans' money that is subsidising crazy gambles on 'future values'. If we were being bankrolled Jack Walker style, fair enough, but we're not. It's our money (the TV money only comes because of our fanaticism) that's paying for all this, and I'm not happy with what's gone on over the summer and autumn, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Before the season started I was asked by various friends/colleagues what I expected from us. I said 'Europe'. And that anything below 10th place would be 'disappointing'. That was conservative compared to a lot of fans.

15th and trophyless would simply be not good enough. Naturally, it wouldn't be Ramos' fault, so I, and doubtless other fans, would look for sackings/resignations elsewhere.

 

[tylaw]

He has said nothing outrageous here.

Bent was overpriced, Adel Taarabt is shit, the board are wankas....
Yesterdays old news!

Lazy journalism

 

[Gilzeanking]

Sugar and Jol actually does not sound an unattractive combination.

Oh Eddie , I can't believe you said this . Had you down as a realist .

Ta to Soup for making it unnecessary to repeat myself , agree entirely .

Anyway Ramos has the power now , I think we all agree that we hope he uses it and gets in exactly who he wants .

Oh and yes , I'm surprised Jol didn't have a... shut your fucking mouth about Spurs.. clause in his 5 million pay off.

As Shady says....His cheque must've just cleared

 

[yanno]

I'm a Jol fan, and I think he achieved a lot for us during his tenure at Spurs. I also think the club do have a policy of primarily signing young promise rather than signing established talent in their late 20s. I think this policy is generally sound, but wish we were prepared to open the chequebook to sign the right seasoned pro to balance our team and squad.

But so much of it comes down to judgement about players. If Zokora was good enough to replace Carrick, then that would have been an excellent piece of business by the club: if it had worked, the team would not have been weakened, and we'd have had £10 million to strengthen with other players. Unfortunately, Zokora proved himself incapable of playing the Carrick role, and Jol struggled to find a CM combination that worked post-Carrick. So, it was bad for the team, and bad business.

However, if we are going to continue to buy young talent (eg Kaboul rather than Distin, or both Kaboul and Distin), then we have to have coaches who buy into this strategy and work with the youngsters. One of my disappointments with Jol is that he didn't seem to be able to work with our young players and make them better: Lennon burst onto the scene through sheer raw ability, and then went backwards; Routledge lost all confidence; Jol gave Taarabt five minutes in Cyprus and then slagged him off for losing the ball; KPBoateng was played on the right wing once and then hauled off; there was no evidence that Kaboul was being drilled on his defensive positioning and duties on our training ground. Etc etc.

Whether Ramos has bought into our young talent policy remains to be seen. As Jol said, he may well buy a couple of experienced players in January. But as long as we're buying youth, we have to balance that with coaches who can spend endless hours on the coaching ground improving the discipline and decision-making of the likes of Taarabt and Kaboul - otherwise there's no point in buying them in the first place.

 

[worcestersauce]

As per my other post, I'm totally in favour of our buying top young talent. The issue is the lack of balance in our transfer policy. Real Madrid signed the young Dutch LB/LM Royston Drenthe (much admired by many here) over the summer, but they also signed the highly experienced Gabriel Heinze. That's balance.

Man Utd have been buying established, youngish players - Hargreaves, Carrick, Tevez - plus top young players - Nani and Anderson. That's also a balanced policy, and hopefully the one we'll have if we get CL status and purchasing power.

Once again, for me the issue is not ad hominem attacks on Jol and Comolli. It's trying to see whether Jol's comments are identifying a genuine issue with the club's transfer policy. And if they are, seeing if we can do anything about it.

I answered that point in my post, top established players have alternatives like Real, Barca and Man Utd and don't see us as a worthwhile destination yet. We couldn't have got Heinze because he chose to Real or Hargeaves or Tevez who chose Man Utd , it wasn't policy that led to us not getting them.

We cannot yet compete with those clubs for world class players, that's not policy that's reality so we have to build from youngsters, we can buy established players but quite frankly none of the ones mentioned by anybody on here are good enough.

I think I've said before that we have done the deal of the Summer for the last two seasons in Berbatov and Bale that's not a bad record as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Archibald-CPH]

I think they will listen to Ramos more than they did Jol as they respect him more.

I hope so, otherwise Ramos wont be staying for long thats for sure

 

[thfc_2004]

You're a fan, so it's different. Fans on message bords moaning about players and club officials is one thing, but a sacked coach saying in the press that he was right and the club was wrong is completely different.

Personally I think Jol has a right to say anything he likes about this club after the shambolic way he was treated. Most of the country heard about Jol's sacking before he did.

 

[DogsOfWar]

Just look at the players that were at the club when their coaches arrived. How many trophies had Seaman, Platt, Adams, Dixon, Wright, Bergkamp and Keown won between them? They weren't exactly spring chickens either were they? If you are going to start developing and bringing in the best young talent I think players like this are pretty much perfect to help instill that winning ethos and show how to handle pressure etc.

We had/have defensive issues yet Jol could still field Lee, Rocha and Stalteri who have all won European leagues/cups, plus Gardner who has extensive Premiership experience.

It was his choice to play Ekotto, Kaboul, Dawson or Chimbonda.
I have sympathy for Jol where injury has robbed him of his experienced players but none where he has chosen to leave them out.

 

[yanno]

I answered that point in my post, top established players have alternatives like Real, Barca and Man Utd and don't see us as a worthwhile destination yet. We couldn't have got Heinze because he chose to Real or Hargeaves or Tevez who chose Man Utd , it wasn't policy that led to us not getting them.

We cannot yet compete with those clubs for world class players, that's not policy that's reality so we have to build from youngsters, we can buy established players but quite frankly none of the ones mentioned by anybody on here are good enough.

I'm not arguing that we could have signed Drenthe and Heinze - once Real were in for them, they were always going to Spain. The argument is about whether you need to balance the signing of young players with more experienced players, as Real did by signing both Drenthe & Heinze.

We signed Bale, we already had Lee & BA-E. Should we have signed Petrov as well? My personal view is that given he was coming off a serious knee injury, and that Man City apparently offered him ridiculous money with no get-out clauses if his knee goes again, he was probably too much of a risk.

Similarly, we signed Kaboul, we knew Ledley & TG were, ahem, injuryprone. Was Rocha good enough insurance? Or should we have signed Distin as well? My personal view is probably yes, but I acknowledge that that is partly hindsight based on Kaboul's erratic defending.

As I've argued above, if we're going to sign young talent, we also need more specialist coaches like Ricardo Moniz. I'd be delighted if Naybet came back as a specialist defensive coach, he's precisely what we need.