So Roma bring in a coach who turns then into title contenders after we help them get Baldini off the wage bill and 32 million for Lamela. Those sneaky Italians.
Bit of a no-brainer, as December is important for all clubs given the fixture pile. However, the ES has been quite slippery in not stating that AVB will be sacked if results do not go well.
The Sun's saying that Porto want to take him back. Better get on the blower to see if Hiddink wants to be our coach for six months...
Its ok, Real will be in for him in the summer. Maybe we'll get Ancelloti, if they don't give him to Arsenal
I don't understand the logic of expecting us to be much better than 5th. The 'investment' in the summer was simply a recycling of money raised from sales so should not improve the squad at all in theory and also led to the problem of bedding in 7 new players. And even with the spend the value of the squad is only 60% of that of Chelsea, Man City or Man U and about the same as Arsenal's and Liverpool's both of whom had a net spend in the summer.
Its because we sacked a manager who got us top four twice, so it stands to reason his successor should at least match his progress (not in points total) but league finish, otherwise as a club we're going backwards. However if we're saying we employed Avb for a long term vision to take us ahead of what Redknapp done, and that can only be achieved through time and allowing the squad to not just develop but our signings to be a huge success, then that in itself is a hugely risky plan which currently looks set to be a failure and when Avb is sacked, another manager will arrive with a new project which may also need time and may also fail and in time everyone may realise what a huge mistake it was to sack Redknapp.
1) How does it help to compare what Harry did with a different squad and against different opponents with what AVB is doing now? 2) The points that we get are under the manager's control. The points others get are not. It is ridiculous to compare league finishing place rather than points. 3) You would trust Redknapp with spending £100m in one go without a DoF to help? I agree that AVB is a risky plan but no more risky than letting Harry loose with £Ms
I am firmly in the trust AVB (for a while anyway), but you can't say that about Harry (point 3). Previous owners may have let him spend more than their club can afford (so not a blank cheque) but I don't recall him buying many duff players (well, Chimbonda back I suppose)
The bottom line is this : Arrys' future in 2012 (Spurs or England) was dependent on getting a CL slot. He failed to do that. And it has not escaped the attention of some of us that Arrys' 'recovery' from the terrible P11 W2 D4 L5 started the weekend AFTER Chelsky qualified for the CL final. 10 pts from the final 12 was a good haul, but PowerSpurs shows the fallacy of that with point #2. Regardless of whether ENIC liked his gobbiness etc, Arry would have been near untouchable. So he went. The FA had a fair excuse for why they shouldn't appoint him in the melee of media support. And Spurs lost a means of trying to retain Modric. Again, the thin line failure for Arry turned out to be unable to turn D4 L5 into D5 L4.
Its not about helping but you asked why fans should expect us to finish higher then 5th, and if our previous manager got us top four twice and was sacked for failing to finish 3rd (a position we rarely compete for and I mean rarely) then fans expect the manager coming in, to offer an improvement on league placing. We finished with 3 points more (last year, compared to previous), its hardly 90 plus points so the important fact is where we finished, as your not awarded bonus points for beating the previous years total.
Also I had a look at the league table in 2011/12 compared to 2012/13 in 2011/12 the total number of points from teams 10-20 was 441 points in 2012/13 the total number of points from teams 10-20 was 426 points So you can actually argue the teams in the lower half of the table in 2011/12 where harder to beat then the teams in 2012/13 and thats why both us and Arsenal scored 3 more points last year. Plus last season when we faced City they weren't as strong as they where in 2011/12. Thats why I don't look at points total when you're comparing by such few points as there are other factors, such as the form of opponents at certain times, lucky wins, Bale scoring when we're playing crap. All I focus on is where we finish as in football thats the most important fact.
It's a case of a catchphrase winning out over people's (slight and occasional) ability to reason. We spent 100 million alright, but what matters are two things 1. Net spend = 0 2. This years Spurs have to be one of the newest teams ever, nearly as close to a collection of complete strangers as ever started a year with the same badge. So 1. is neutral, and 2. is a massive disadvantage. Therefore we should be doing much better. You can't argue with logic like that.
There's a stupid rumour in the Italian media that Levy's looking to replace Villas-Boas with this guy: please log in to view this image
To be fair, HAD Harry had been given a £100m spending spree (or big money backing when he asked for it), good chance we could've ended up with the likes of Cazorla, Mata, Balotelli and Suarez. Granted the last two are "bad boys" but the talent we'd have had IF Harry got his way would be unbelievable. As for the points comparisons with AVB and Harry, surely we have to compare the previous regime to what we're doing now? The whole point of sacking Harry was to move forward and therefore we have to see how we're getting on after him and if we are indeed, "moving forward".
Rather have a different Argentinian, Diego Simeone would be a good choice, he always gets players to perform.
