Glenn Hoddle has suggested today that he was close to being appointed as interim manager at Spurs after Villas-Boas was sacked. He claims that he would've been happy to take the job on that basis purely because of his love for the club. Do people think that Levy was right to give it a miss and go with Sherwood or would you have rather seen the return of Hoddle to the helm? I thought I'd do a rare (for this board) poll. Votes are public.
Gone with Hoddle. Underrated as a Manager and clearly temporary. Would have meant the board can carefully plan for next season rather than watching Sherwood to see if he is up to it.
Difficult one. The problem is that Hoddle hasn't managed on a day to day basis for a long time now. He would have needed to get to know the players, understand their abilities, weaknesses, etc. Sherwood had one advantage in that he knew them all. Can't really decide, I'd like to say neither of them. But then who else was going to take over at short notice like that, at that time in a season. I'll think about it!..
Hoddle, and I said the same at the time too. He'd be a gamble but no moreso than Sherwood and at least with Hoddle we'd have some experience, understanding of what it's like to be a PL manager.
Hoddle has been out of management far too long, he cold have mellowed a tad as before he was an arrogant man who wouldn't tolerate players who weren't as good as him, thats why he works better with kids or at international level as with kids they look up to him and at International level he had a break from the players and could work on changing the style of play. He should be an international manager as he was doing a fine job. At the time I preferred Hoddle but would it really have made much difference? at least with Sherwood hes causing people at the club to think about decisions they make, rather then if we had Hoddle Levy would just be sat there with a "fan" in charge of the club, as Hoddle is still a Tottenham man and I've still memories of Hoddles management before where he was clueless with tactics so whats changed? He would have been slated as well.
I went with Sherwood purely due to the fact that he knows the current players a lot better than what Hoddle does. Hoddle would've needed time to assess and get to know the lads and see who he feels are better than others, Sherwood works with them on a daily basis and as we've seen with Bentaleb's emergence, also knows the ones coming through. Hoddle also mentioned when he was initially linked with us that he'd have a played a 5-3-1 formation... No... Just no. EDIT: 5-3-2 formation... Yes, I'm a lemon, I can't count.
Hoddles problem has always been that his expectation of his players is generally higher than their abilities allow. Hence he has always seemed to do better when working with better players. Equally, as Boss says, he clearly works well with youngsters as his expectations of them are more considered. I guess it comes down to whether we want a manager who would prefer to settle for getting the best out of a more mediocre/younger group or one that would expect to strive for perfection with a stronger squad. So if Levy and ENIC were to support Hoddle by bankrolling his selection of players then I would like to see him given another chance.
**** sake, 5-3-2! In my defence I have said before numbers and maths really aren't my strong point lol.
Club legend. By far, the best player who ever committed himself t o play us. Would I have him over Sherwoodie? No question. At least he has never, ever, claimed to support the Gunners. He was great for Chelsea, before they had a mad Russian's billions. Is he our long term solution? Who cares! He's a legend and he loves Spurs.
