Levy's best managerial appointment?

[Hoddle&Waddle]

Dont and never have got why Jol is rated so highly buy Spurs fans, he was pants.

 

[Armstrong_11]

we took 4th twice with Harry....

guess he wins.

 

[Armstrong_11]

Dont and never have got why Jol is rated so highly buy Spurs fans, he was pants.

at that time Jol was a breath of fresh air we all needed from Santini very technical defensive side. Jol gave the players the freedom to express themselves, and played the attacking kind of football we like to see.

 

[marvel]

Voted for Harry but believe and hope Pochettino will be the one in 2 seasons time

 

[Hoddle&Waddle]

at that time Jol was a breath of fresh air we all needed from Santini very technical defensive side. Jol gave the players the freedom to express themselves, and played the attacking kind of football we like to see.

We played some nice stuff at times, but he never got the balance between defence and attack, we were a soft touch. He spent shitloads of cash (or aloud it under his watch) on mostly players we didnt need or were fucking shit. Give any half decent Manager the funds he had and they'd get 5th.

@Shaydan, 'Doh' my post and run away like you always do, but maybe you can explain why Jol has done fuckall since if he's so great....yeah thought so....

 

[dontcallme]

Clearly Redknapp. Anyone who says otherwise is letting their dislike of Harry the man cloud their opinion of Harry the manager. He wasn't perfect, but he's by far and away the best we've had in the last 20 years.

I liked Redknapp, for the most part, and was very positive about his appointment.

But Jol does it for me. The group of players he took to 5th twice really wasn't that good. I also absolutely loved his time in charge.

I felt his sacking was possibly correct and felt we should have hired a coach who championed the 433 and wanted similar players to Jol so we could continue building rather than tearing the squad apart and starting again.

Does that make me a Redknapp hater or just someone with a different point of view to you?

 

[Armstrong_11]

We played some nice stuff at times, but he never got the balance between defence and attack, we were a soft touch. He spent shitloads of cash (or aloud it under his watch) on mostly players we didnt need or were fucking shit. Give any half decent Manager the funds he had and they'd get 5th.

@Shaydan, 'Doh' my post and run away like you always do, but maybe you can explain why Jol has done fuckall since if he's so great....yeah thought so....

I felt the team enjoyed playing under him. maybe its just me but i did enjoy his time at the lane.

 

[Hoddle&Waddle]

I felt the team enjoyed playing under him. maybe its just me but i did enjoy his time at the lane.

Only because he followed such poor Managers before him I bet.

 

[crokey]

You might not like them, but that group of players were winners, and they knew a fraud when they saw it.

What did they win?

 

[Hoddle&Waddle]

What did they win?

Eh? The likes of Terry Lampard Essien had won plenty.

 

[parklane1]

Big Martin for me.

 

[stemark44]

I don't rate any of them......not one of them went on to do anything noteworthy after leaving us either.

 

[mill]

I don't rate any of them......not one of them went on to do anything noteworthy after leaving us either.

It's more about what they did for us, redknapp and Jol were the only 2 that pushed us on imo, whilst Ramos won a trophy if useless otherwise

 

[Spurger King]

There's a massive difference between hiring a manager that turns out to be good, and having the right reasons for appointing a manager. I still think AVB was a great decision by Levy to make at the time. Harry was too, but because of his reputation for handling relegation dogfights - not because he unexpectedly got the team playing well and successfully (which most of the managers on that list might have done with the same players).

Ramos was a poor decision. The guy couldn't speak English. Surely that would have set off a couple of alarm bells? Hoddle and Pleat were your standard 'go with familiarity to keep the fans onside' choices. Santini was a decent show of ambition at the time (though Levy probably should have done some better research into his suitability), Jol was a happy accident that fell into his lap, and Sherwood was really nothing more than a stop-gap.

Too early to comment on Pochettino, but from the rest on that list, AVB is the one that stands out as the most thoughtful and appropriate appointment at the time. No use playing Captain Hindsight and saying he turned out to be rubbish. He was Levy's best managerial appointment based on who we needed and who was available.

 

[mill]

There's a massive difference between hiring a manager that turns out to be good, and having the right reasons for appointing a manager. I still think AVB was a great decision by Levy to make at the time. Harry was too, but because of his reputation for handling relegation dogfights - not because he unexpectedly got the team playing well and successfully (which most of the managers on that list might have done with the same players).

Ramos was a poor decision. The guy couldn't speak English. Surely that would have set off a couple of alarm bells? Hoddle and Pleat were your standard 'go with familiarity to keep the fans onside' choices. Santini was a decent show of ambition at the time (though Levy probably should have done some better research into his suitability), Jol was a happy accident that fell into his lap, and Sherwood was really nothing more than a stop-gap.

Too early to comment on Pochettino, but from the rest on that list, AVB is the one that stands out as the most thoughtful and appropriate appointment at the time. No use playing Captain Hindsight and saying he turned out to be rubbish. He was Levy's best managerial appointment based on who we needed and who was available.

I disagree on AVB due to his failure with Chelsea and that's through watching their games whilst he was there as well, too much of a risk imo

 

[Spurger King]

I disagree on AVB due to his failure with Chelsea and that's through watching their games whilst he was there as well, too much of a risk imo

Most of the potential appointments at the time were risks (unless we're being unrealistic and talking about the likes of Mourinho). Keeping Harry would have been a risk after he made his willingness to jump ship for England clear. Moyes was a risk (that United gambled and lost on). Martinez was a risk. Perhaps Benitez, but he's not exactly a manager that most fans would be willing to give the benefit of time.

I remember watching Chelsea play under AVB too, but it was difficult to read too much into it when he was still very much in the 'learning the trade' stage and having to deal with some of the most detestable people on Earth. AVB's record at Chelsea constituted the gamble that Levy took, and although it didn't pay off, I think there were enough reasons for him to take it.

We had one of the most exciting teams in Europe at that time, but without the financial clout to back it up. Appointing a highly regarded young manager with one blemish on his short record seemed like a sign of ambition from Levy to me. I think the degree to which it failed as an appointment has retrospectively distorted the bravery and logic behind it. And I'm no Levy apologist.

 

[mill]

Most of the potential appointments at the time were risks (unless we're being unrealistic and talking about the likes of Mourinho). Keeping Harry would have been a risk after he made his willingness to jump ship for England clear. Moyes was a risk (that United gambled and lost on). Martinez was a risk. Perhaps Benitez, but he's not exactly a manager that most fans would be willing to give the benefit of time.

I remember watching Chelsea play under AVB too, but it was difficult to read too much into it when he was still very much in the 'learning the trade' stage and having to deal with some of the most detestable people on Earth. AVB's record at Chelsea constituted the gamble that Levy took, and although it didn't pay off, I think there were enough reasons for him to take it.

We had one of the most exciting teams in Europe at that time, but without the financial clout to back it up. Appointing a highly regarded young manager with one blemish on his short record seemed like a sign of ambition from Levy to me. I think the degree to which it failed as an appointment has retrospectively distorted the bravery and logic behind it. And I'm no Levy apologist.

I can see your point but it's just my opinion, I wanted Rodgers at the time (IIRC he claims to have turned us down). I just didn't like what I saw at Chelsea tbh and thought it was too big a risk.

Fwiw I'd have preferred Laudrup at the time so what do I know? Lol

 

[tototoner]

Clearly Redknapp, then Jol

But I hope in 2 years I will change my mind to Pochettino