What is the minimum achievement neccessary for the replacement of Harry to be considered a success?

[striebs]

Whoever comes in is likely to be compared by the fans , and maybe even by the board , with Harry .

Harry has the best league record of any manager since Bill Nick and will be a hard act to follow .
This is not like coming into a team which has 2 points from 8 games . Expectations are high , perhaps too high .

The squad has reached the end of this chapter in it's history :-
- Ledley King our talismanic captain whose presence almost doubles our win rate has come to the end of his career .
- Gallas who was still excellent last season may be past it next season .
- Friedel , the best goalkeeper we've had for a decade is starting the final year of his career at the top level .

- Aaron Lennon has been run into the ground and is not the same player he was before injury .
- Our best players , Luca Modric and Gareth Bale have outgrown us and need to move on sooner rather than later .

- After 8 windows we still haven't come close to replacing Berbatov and are struggling to keep our on loan Man City and Arsenal reject .

Of our competitors Chelsea need to rebuild .

What should the minimum criteria be for considering the replacement of Harry a success ?

 

[MightyModric]

No excuses, top 4 next season and improvement the season after. He has to do as well as Harry has to be considered a decent replacement in my eyes. With the squad we've got we should be up there most of the season but considering other teams transfers we need to spend to compete.

So, as long as we get some top players in, we should be aiming top 4 minimum.

 

[Sp3akerboxxx]

Champions League.

 

[Arnoldtoo]

I'll let you know when the transfer window closes.

 

[striebs]

I'll let you know when the transfer window closes.

I'll try to remember to post the pole again then .

So far 87.5% of Spurs fans seem to think the criteria for success is top 4 in 2013-2014 .

 

[hutchiniho]

One better!

 

[StartingPrice]

Depends on who is doing the judging.

The new stadium is underway, and Mr Levy has devoted a large amount of time, effort and money into engineering a system and a youth policy that works, through that system, to produce younglings for the first team.
As far as I am concerned, if we get a manager to buy into that, work with it, and add value to it, then we will be in good shape when the stadium is finished to compete at the highest level for many years (for which I would expect CL and even the odd title challenge). That would be improvement for me. In the meantime, the new manager should at least have us competing for a CL spot, still - and, what to me would be improvement, would be to not throw away a clear advantage in 3rd if we get that position again. I suspect Mr Levy sees it pretty much the same.

Don't think this will wash with a lot of the support, though.

 

[jimbo]

I think for us success is finishing in the top 6 and playing European football every season.

 

[punky]

Champions League has to be the minimum.

On paper Harry has a good record but the squad flattered him immensely. Great when things were going good but when they weren't he lookedlost. That coupled with Modric on his way out, Bale possibly following and Harry's transfer strategy we were only going to head in one direction.

We need to consolidate what we have while we still have the players to make it happen. Losing Modric ands Bale coule set us back 5-10 years.

 

[Mullers]

My minimum requirement is almost the same it was for Harry this season, league 4th to 6th, good cup run. BUT, I would expect the new manager to not throw away third like Harry did last season and take ALL the cup competitions we enter seriously. I don't think that is asking too much.

 

[Graysonti]

Consolidation imo

 

[DiscoD1882]

World domination!! Nothing less is acceptable

 

[Azazello]

3rd or 4th with second as a possible/insane stretch goal. But it depends on who's coming in - Levy must be sure of what he's doing with any replacement he's got lined up; no guarantee of success of course. Maybe a cup run or two to make the punters feel that something other than CL revenue matters in the bloated plutocracy that is European football.

 

[Abdoujaparov]

The question is a little ambiguous, but I think 4th then 4th would be considered a success, on balance. This ultimately presumes Redknapp wouldn't have got 4th and 4th or better.

To be honest, I think it's unlikely that Harry's replacement will do that well. I hope I'm wrong, but Levy's track record of managerial appointments (Santini, Jol, Ramos and Hoddle, besides Redknapp) suggests I won't be.

Also the trend towards spending a smaller portion of our income in the transfer market suggests long-term success will be difficult for the new manager to achieve. And none of the names currently being touted really suggest a big upturn from Redknapp.

 

[sloth]

Whoever comes in is likely to be compared by the fans , and maybe even by the board , with Harry .

Harry has the best league record of any manager since Bill Nick and will be a hard act to follow .
This is not like coming into a team which has 2 points from 8 games . Expectations are high , perhaps too high .

The squad has reached the end of this chapter in it's history :-
- Ledley King our talismanic captain whose presence almost doubles our win rate has come to the end of his career .
- Gallas who was still excellent last season may be past it next season .
- Friedel , the best goalkeeper we've had for a decade is starting the final year of his career at the top level .

- Aaron Lennon has been run into the ground and is not the same player he was before injury .
- Our best players , Luca Modric and Gareth Bale have outgrown us and need to move on sooner rather than later .

- After 8 windows we still haven't come close to replacing Berbatov and are struggling to keep our on loan Man City and Arsenal reject .

Of our competitors Chelsea need to rebuild .

What should the minimum criteria be for considering the replacement of Harry a success ?

The question is totally impossible to answer.

First of all you have to place it into the context of your rivals. So Chelsea's significantly strengthened. Utd and City are simply stronger. Arsenal will lose Van Persie, but some of their signings seem good, and a few of their younger players grew in stature as their season progressed. Liverpool have just signed a promising young manager, he may flop, but if he gets Liverpool to be greater than the sum of its parts in the way he did with Swansea then look out.

Then you have to consider some of the key areas we're struggling to fill, such as manager (obviously), striker (don't think we'll get Ade), a new CB pairing, possibly a new keeper, and someone to replace Modric. On the other hand we've got some very good young players, and the core of a very good team. If we recruit wisely we'll be strong.

Once you've worked that bit out - and tbh you'll be very biased depending on which conclusion you've already made about the wisdom or otherwise of sacking Redknapp - then it all hinges on how you rated Redknapp.

If you thought Harry was the bees-knees, then you'd have been expecting us to get better year on year, and so you have to at least match that imagined progress. Anything less than top four will be seen as failure.

If you thought Redknapp was a bit average, and you imagined us slumping, and falling back into the pack in the following seasons, in that case anything around 3rd to 6th feels like progress.

For me, I'm looking less at the next season, but the next decade. I feel very optimistic about that, but I also know in every upward trend there will be troughs as well as peaks.

 

[AngerManagement]

I think there's a good chance we will have to expect to take a step back in the hope of going two forward.

This move will destroy cohesion and unsettle us, we will now buy and sell and disrupt our playing style and system.

Everyone may take some time to get used to the new set up and I would not be surprised to see us fall off the pace and not live up to the last three years of Harry's tenure.

For that reason I voted 5-7th

A lot however will depend on the strength of our squad come start of play, if we haven't sorted our strikers out once again and if we have either lost any of our best players without replacing them well or forced them to stay whilst they are unsettled its not going to be reasonable to expect us to maintain our current level much less expect progression.

So really I think judgement needs to be reserved on our expectations until we know our strike force and who we have bought and sold in other departments

 

[Abdoujaparov]

The question is totally impossible to answer.

First of all you have to place it into the context of your rivals. So Chelsea's significantly strengthened. Utd and City are simply stronger. Arsenal will lose Van Persie, but some of their signings seem good, and a few of their younger players grew in stature as their season progressed. Liverpool have just signed a promising young manager, he may flop, but if he gets Liverpool to be greater than the sum of its parts in the way he did with Swansea then look out.

This is misleading. You also have to consider the extent to which rivals were strengthening when the previous manager took over. Have they strengthened more now than they did as the previous manager was taking over?

 

[eddiebailey]

There will be some transition next season - King, Modric and Adebayor, all key figures last season, are likely to be gone and others could be either gone or resentful at staying; new players, particularly those from outside the Premiership, which is where we seem to be casting our net, will need time to settle; furthermore the new manager will bring in new coaches and new ideas about playing style; and If Levy goes down the DOF role and gets it wrong there is scope for tensions from the outset, as there were between Arnesen and Santini.

Under the circumstances fifth or sixth would be acceptable, and if Levy or anyone else, expects, rather than hopes, for more they are being delusional.

 

[Blake Griffin]

3 points 8 games.

 

[tototoner]

The question is totally impossible to answer.

First of all you have to place it into the context of your rivals. So Chelsea's significantly strengthened. Utd and City are simply stronger. Arsenal will lose Van Persie, but some of their signings seem good, and a few of their younger players grew in stature as their season progressed. Liverpool have just signed a promising young manager, he may flop, but if he gets Liverpool to be greater than the sum of its parts in the way he did with Swansea then look out.

Then you have to consider some of the key areas we're struggling to fill, such as manager (obviously), striker (don't think we'll get Ade), a new CB pairing, possibly a new keeper, and someone to replace Modric. On the other hand we've got some very good young players, and the core of a very good team. If we recruit wisely we'll be strong.

Once you've worked that bit out - and tbh you'll be very biased depending on which conclusion you've already made about the wisdom or otherwise of sacking Redknapp - then it all hinges on how you rated Redknapp.

If you thought Harry was the bees-knees, then you'd have been expecting us to get better year on year, and so you have to at least match that imagined progress. Anything less than top four will be seen as failure.

If you thought Redknapp was a bit average, and you imagined us slumping, and falling back into the pack in the following seasons, in that case anything around 3rd to 6th feels like progress.

For me, I'm looking less at the next season, but the next decade. I feel very optimistic about that, but I also know in every upward trend there will be troughs as well as peaks.

very much this

Anyone expecting an improvement over what we achieved this season will be sorely disappointed.

I would like another trophy though and a day out for us fans, we will do very well next season to finish 4th again , I feel we will be battling for that place with Arsenal and Liverpool so I went for

5th-7th next season and top 4 season after​

​