Players vs Manager

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Spurm

Spurm

Well-Known Member
Apr 1, 2011
9,417
684
113
London
Based on another thread where it was discussed that Fergie was basically the difference in the league this year and had he been managing 2 or 3 of the other teams they would have won the league.
We all though Fergie is a good/great (****ing annoying, lol) manager and one piece of evidence of this is that Utd are better in real-life than they are "on paper" (IMO).
So, which other clubs are better/worse in real life than on paper taking into consideration players at club and players bought by current manager. Here is my view:

Man Utd (better)
Man City (worse)
Arsenal (better)
Chelsea (worse)
Tottenham (worse, i think we edge Arsenal on paper)
Everton (better)
Liverpool (about right)
West Brom (better)
Swansea (better)
West Ham (about right)
Fulham (about right)
Southampton (better)
Norwich (better)
Sunderland (worse)
Stoke (worse)
Newcastle (worse)
Aston Villa (worse)
Wigan (borderline worse)
QPR (worse)
Reading (about right)

Southampton is a funny one. Its Adkins team with a new manager who has gone on a streak. Similar with Harry at QPR, they were doomed before he even took over.

I rate Martinez, so i was surprised i had him being the weak link compared to the players. But then with Wigan's end of season form they could be top half by the time the season actually finishes.

As usual, i don't know what point i'm making :)
 
Let me just get this right, regarding ourselves, you're saying we're better on paper than the way we end up playing on the pitch....that can only be down to manager??...are you dissing AVB mate! <laugh>
 
notsosmartspur said:
Let me just get this right, regarding ourselves, you're saying we're better on paper than the way we play on the pitch....that can only be down to manager??...are you dissing AVB mate! <laugh>
Click to expand...

Well, i believe despite our chronic lack of forwards, that we have the 4th best squad on paper. Its AVB's first season in charge so i think he has done a good job, but next season i would expect to be top 4 all things being equal over the summer window (which we know they won't be).
He has done well to pick up points without playing the type of free-flowing football we did last year, hopefully that will come when he gets a summer to address the squad and can stop playing central mids in virtually every position.
 
Lack of forwards or not, I still have a Q mark over AVB, example, he's rightly being heralded for the game changing substitutions on Sunday...if he'd started with a better formatted 11 he wouldn't have needed too! not sure why it took an hour to work out we were too narrow with no width. The biggest most glaring error there, was that City weren't wide either! so there was masses of space for long periods, don't know about anyone else, but that situation was making me epileptic with anger!
 
Utd's team/squad tends to evolve through a tried and tested method of retaining experienced players, bringing through young players (either through the academy or through transfers- SAF has a policy of buying players who are yet to reach their peak) and the occasional marquee signing. So "on paper", Utd will always have a number of emerging talents in the squad (Jones, de Gea, Smalling, Cleverley, Rafael, Welbeck, Kagawa, Hernandez, Buttner, Powell at present) who are not always going to benefit from comparison with established stars at other clubs, although those comparisons will always assume players are at their best.

On the other hand, City and Chelsea often pay big money for established stars. The hope is that the team will gel quickly, but there is no long term policy for development of players. City have done reasonably well, of course, but Chelsea lurch from disaster to disaster, spending more and more in an attempt to find an instant fix. Top class players will shine from time to time, but they haven't performed as a team often enough. Whoever is manager at one of these clubs had better know how to conjure up success instantly.

Arsenal's problems are well documented. They have lost their way. Selling your best players and buying inferior replacements doesn't work. Wenger's policy of recruiting top young players from abroad isn't working either. Due to their plight, he hasn't had the chance to give them enough first team opportunities, having to rely instead on rotating his B listers. Is it Wenger or is it the board?

Finances mean that Spurs are at a huge disadvantage in competing with the four above mentioned clubs. I think AVB is doing as well as can be expected, but he is obviously far from the finished article. He has benefited from the progression of a number of younger players in the team (Bale notably, of course). Spurs need a period of consolidation, not change, giving AVB and the players a chance to improve together. Keeping your better players is obviously paramount.
 
notsosmartspur said:
Lack of forwards or not, I still have a Q mark over AVB, example, he's rightly being heralded for the game changing substitutions on Sunday...if he'd started with a better formatted 11 he wouldn't have needed too! not sure why it took an hour to work out we were too narrow with no width. The biggest most glaring error there, was that City weren't wide either! so there was masses of space for long periods, don't know about anyone else, but that situation was making me epileptic with anger!
Click to expand...

Surely he deliberately set us up with no width to go like for like with City and make sure we were not over-run in midfield. When we needed a goal he changed it and it worked. It is quite possible that if we had started 433 we would have done a lot worse. It always amazes me ho many people on here think they know what would have happened in what would essentially have been a different match.
 
Spurm said:
Based on another thread where it was discussed that Fergie was basically the difference in the league this year and had he been managing 2 or 3 of the other teams they would have won the league.
We all though Fergie is a good/great (****ing annoying, lol) manager and one piece of evidence of this is that Utd are better in real-life than they are "on paper" (IMO).
So, which other clubs are better/worse in real life than on paper taking into consideration players at club and players bought by current manager. Here is my view:

Man Utd (better)
Man City (worse)
Arsenal (better)
Chelsea (worse)
Tottenham (worse, i think we edge Arsenal on paper)
Everton (better)
Liverpool (about right)
West Brom (better)
Swansea (better)
West Ham (about right)
Fulham (about right)
Southampton (better)
Norwich (better)
Sunderland (worse)
Stoke (worse)
Newcastle (worse)
Aston Villa (worse)
Wigan (borderline worse)
QPR (worse)
Reading (about right)

Southampton is a funny one. Its Adkins team with a new manager who has gone on a streak. Similar with Harry at QPR, they were doomed before he even took over.

I rate Martinez, so i was surprised i had him being the weak link compared to the players. But then with Wigan's end of season form they could be top half by the time the season actually finishes.

As usual, i don't know what point i'm making :)
Click to expand...

Don't agree with your assement of us, or the goons
 
PowerSpurs said:
Surely he deliberately set us up with no width to go like for like with City and make sure we were not over-run in midfield. When we needed a goal he changed it and it worked. It is quite possible that if we had started 433 we would have done a lot worse. It always amazes me ho many people on here think they know what would have happened in what would essentially have been a different match.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. Another classic example of creating an excuse for our manager rather than accepting he got it wrong. It doesn't make you less of a fan to concede the guy gets it wrong from time to time.

We went a goal down after 5 minutes and whilst I don't demand he makes a change then, it was evident to all in the stadium that there was width to be exploited. Why did it take an hour to change what was so blatantly obvious ?? We were damn fortunate to go in only one down, yet still he set us out for the 2nd half with the same set up.

Sorry, but it is quite reasonable to retain doubts about AVB and Sunday was another example of why.
 
I think that Villas-Boas got it wrong too, but I also think that he tried to sort it out with the players that were already out there before making any substitutions.
He was audibly trying to get Sigurdsson to play much wider than he was and he tried to get Bale to stay out on the right, but they didn't pay much attention.
 
I have us as slightly better, though I agree we have the fourth best squad. I take into account players not being here, transitioning to a new system, and two spates of injuries which wiped out our "2" players, first, then out three highest scorers. For AVB to have had the team in third when Bale and Lennon went down was overacheiving. Definitely more huff and puff than beautiful football, on balance, but a few stretches of spectacular play. (Man U first half, Man City second half)

However, I remain hugely critical of the lineup versus Liverpool. Juggling a team around that's been on a good streak when you only had to replace one player seemed like a fatal mistake at the time. I would also agree that his subbing has been strange and below par overall, but would argue he makes up for it by doing a good job with man management and overall setup and tactics. He's got a talented squad, but one that isn't really coherent (missing a creative attacker most of the year), and has done reasonably well in getting them points.
 
PowerSpurs said:
It always amazes me ho many people on here think they know what would have happened in what would essentially have been a different match.
Click to expand...

Not sure why you're on a forum with a view like that...what an odd reply. Where does it say i guarantee thats what would happen??, its my point of view thats all, I didn't ask you or anyone else to agree with it either, if you don't thats all you have to say...and thats all I have to say too.
 
I think Spurs are worse.

I've always rated our squad as a very talented one and one that should be doing better, even taking into account injuries. When you think of the likes of Ade, Walker, Ekotto (at times), Parker, Dempsey (at times) & Sig (at times) have all been pretty disappointing, we'd have done far better had they stepped up a gear or two. I don't lay the entire blame on AVB for not getting the best from them, he's still impressed me in many areas and has worked wonders for others but I do think he needs to do more to work on how these players should/ could have done better or failing that, should have dropped them for someone eager to impress.
 
There seems to be a mix of "we are better" and "we are worse", so maybe in reality we are "about right".

Next season we should judge AVB. Hopefully he'll get some players he wants and we'll hang on to our better ones.
 
Spurm said:
There seems to be a mix of "we are better" and "we are worse", so maybe in reality we are "about right".

Next season we should judge AVB. Hopefully he'll get some players he wants and we'll hang on to our better ones.
Click to expand...

As long as we get top 4 I'll be a happy man at the end of the season, simple as that really.

If we don't then I'd consider the season a failure with the squad we have.

In regards to AVB not getting players he wants, I think we've just assumed that. Vertonghen and Sigurdsson both mentioned in interviews they spoke with the manager prior to signing. I know Levy likes to find players and conclude a lot of the business but, although I can't back this up with facts, I'm sure he'd consult AVB as to whether he'd like them or not, so even if they are predominantly a Levy signing, the manager would surely say if he'd accommodate them into the team.

Similar to when we signed Rafa, Harry said Levy called him up to say he was available and Harry jumped at the chance...
 
yeah, but there is a significant difference between:
DL: "I can get this player, can you make use of him?"
and
AVB: "Please sir, can i have X/Y/Z?"
 
Spurs or Sex? said:
As long as we get top 4 I'll be a happy man at the end of the season, simple as that really.

If we don't then I'd consider the season a failure with the squad we have.

In regards to AVB not getting players he wants, I think we've just assumed that. Vertonghen and Sigurdsson both mentioned in interviews they spoke with the manager prior to signing. I know Levy likes to find players and conclude a lot of the business but, although I can't back this up with facts, I'm sure he'd consult AVB as to whether he'd like them or not, so even if they are predominantly a Levy signing, the manager would surely say if he'd accommodate them into the team.

Similar to when we signed Rafa, Harry said Levy called him up to say he was available and Harry jumped at the chance...
Click to expand...

Not if your the Chelsea manager,it's, i've bought this player,you will play him!
 
Spurm said:
yeah, but there is a significant difference between:
DL: "I can get this player, can you make use of him?"
and
AVB: "Please sir, can i have X/Y/Z?"
Click to expand...

But the one player AVB wanted was valued at £20m+... You can't really blame Levy for not dishing that sort of money out.

totsfan said:
Not if your the Chelsea manager,it's, i've bought this player,you will play him!
Click to expand...

Haha you're not wrong there. Though in fairness I wouldn't mind my chairman buying Hazard, Oscar etc and then saying "play them!" <laugh>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back