I agree. Do I think Ange is going to succeed? probably not, to be honest. But I hope I’m given the opportunity to be proven wrong, as I have no faith whatsoever in Levy’s next appointment being any better.
I think part of why three of them lasted as long as they did is they had almost immediate positive impacts and maintained that positivity for x amount of seasons, in Poch's case especially we improved season upon season for about three years, maintained it for a further two and then finally declined to which he was then sacked. Ange for a multitude of reasons, some in and out of his control, is simply failing. I think as CK has somewhat alluded to, Ange is basically a B-Tech Jose/ Conte but with a different style of football and significantly less glamorous CV. We're basically in need of a Pochettino right now, someone who can coach and develop players as well as be tactically flexible... well unless this board decides to give Ange some proper players but I think we all know the answer to that.
Had a chat with Levy and then signed a new deal at Feyenoord... Probably tells you how well the chat went.
Yeah that's essentially the dreaded vote of confidence. Probably now means he has 5 games to save his Spurs career.
IIRC, the line we were given at the time was that we “would not be pursuing things with Slot further”. - This is why I’d love to know more. From what I’ve seen, Slot has literally been a seamless transition for Liverpool, and credit where it’s due, that ain’t easy for any club, let alone one replacing one of the best managers in the world. So much pressure on Liverpool to get it right, and prevent a regression. We’ve been ****ing around with managers for years, yet we as a club didn’t think he’s suitable, but a better team than us did. Why?
Classic Levy behaviour. Instead of saying it directly, leak a vote of 'confidence' for the manager via a journalist who will hide the full article behind a pay wall. Clever. As DH said, all this means is that Ange has until the 'LEVY OUT' chants and protests start up again, then he's gone.
I seem to recall that Slot himself said something along the lines of we have just won the league and I want to take Feyenord into the champions league...which suggests that he wasn't suitably impressed with anything we had to offer at the time.
Simple answer: he's a Raiola client, which are somehow still a thing in spite the minor inconvenience of Raiola being dead So the likelihood is either we were quoted exorbitant agent fees, were told there was a list of maybe 6-8 clubs in world football who they would listen to an approach and we weren't one of them, or the agency acted like tarts because Levy told Raiola to do one in the past and Raiola was supremely butthurt about that for years
It's all a lot simpler than most seem to think. Our expected position is sixth based on playing strength. There is no way to recruit better players without paying back the stadium loans as the covenant on them restricts our cash expenditure. Finishing 6th or below is pretty dismal but finishing 5th or above improves things significantly. So a risky playing style which increases the chance of finishing both above 6th and below 6th is the right strategy. That should be understood by the Board so it would be ridiculous to sack Ange if the downside scenario happens. Especially since the run of results is so weird, with all the losses being by a single goal and the vast majority of the wins being thrashings. The only tricky decision was what to do about the Europa League. Since our PL results are on the downside I think it is now our best chance of CL qualification so we need to be really solid in the three remaining group matches to ensure a bye to the last 16. I would say we have about a 60% chance of winning each knockout tie but that's only about a 1 in ten chance of winning it.
So why doesn't this Narrative apply to Chelsea? They have a much higher turnover of staff due to frequent sackings, currently run by somebody on such an ego trip they appointed themselves DoF in spite having no qualifications or experience to do so, and yet where are the Skyte Sports pundits suggesting they're a dysfunctional club in spite the evidence being right in front of them?
They generally win a lot of stuff with their approach and often heavily back their managers to where failure is more often on the manager than the club.
Somebody who knows **** all about playing poker will win matches if they go All In every single hand until they beat the rest of the table, but that doesn't mean their approach isn't dysfunctional
But it works though, to an extent at least. Levy doesn’t seem to know much about football and also doesn’t go all in and it’s why we’re often left in situations of managers getting binned after little joy. It’d actually be nice if for one or two windows in succession we could sit back and think “right, over to you Ange/ new gaffer” as the board give them everything possible to make something happen. We had a dismal summer window and our manager is now being given the dreaded vote of confidence.
But it doesn't work, because if it worked they would have more stable management and certainly not have some berk walk in and declare himself DoF like he was Idi Amin in a polo shirt ruling over his personal fiefdom while sacking anyone who fails - which Todd Bollo's done remarkably often in eighteen months or so, which is somehow an improvement on having coaching staff insist on living underground in case they displeased the club owner so badly they found themselves falling out of 18th storey windows
Right, and that's precisely the problem. Almost everything going wrong at the moment is relatively simple to fix, as has been the case with quite a number of high profile, high impact mistakes the club has made in recent years. This is why fans are rightly getting so worked up - many of us could see this coming. Because it is simple. Don't spend £60m on a crippled pigeon if you don't have the budget of a blood money club. Don't hire proven winners as manager and then refuse to back them. Don't lurch one summer buying proven and established players to the next almost only signing unproven youngsters. And for the manager, don't approach every single fixture with exactly the same tactics, especially if you are ravaged by injuries. You're right. This stuff really isn't complicated.
It does and has. Multiple league titles, two CLs, an EL and a bunch of other cups shows their approach, even if chaotic, has proven successful. More often than not, failure has largely fallen upon the manager’s shoulders due to the heavy backing they’ve received at Chelsea. Even now with Boehly, he’s as thick as pig’s **** and a complete helmet but he’s essentially given Maresca a now £1bn squad to work with. Failure is now more on the manager than it is with the board. Failure at Spurs has so often had a taste of the board not doing enough, even if managers rightly have taken some blame too.
How does their success compare to PL clubs who were equally "chaotic" , but were not a Sugga Daddy FC ??
