I kind of get your point but we made 9 changes from the AEL Limassol match on the thursday and the liverpool match on the sunday when we lost 3 nil. Only lloris and kaboul started both. We also did the same from the partizan match on the thursday to wba match on the sunday where there were 10 changes which we lost 1 nil. The player who was unchanged was Lloris So the problem is not really so simple.
As others have said, a lot of the players just aren't good enough. We clearly aren't gonna buy our way to any glory so that leaves us one hope - youth development. As soon as it gets to the point where people are saying "should <insert young up-and-comer> be in the team over <insert aging/older player>?" then they should be in. The young players WANT to play and lots have grown up with their goal being to play for SPURS. Right now, for me, that means putting Dier into central defence. Kane up front. Mason stays in. Bentaleb in too. Townsend is arguable, watching him winds me up, but at least he tries. If Townsend could be told not to shoot so much then bung him in. Lloris (c) Kaboul Dier Vertonghen Rose Mason Bentaleb Lamela Eriksen Chadli Kane Townsend rotated in for Chadli/Lamela. For width when required we could even put Lennon right and Rose/Townsend left with Davies at LB. Sell Adebayor, Soldado, Dembele, Capoue and recoup some of the money we've wasted. Lets go back to buying 19-22 yr olds and trying to develop them. That and the odd master signing (VDV/Modric) is how we got in the CL in the first place.
The only 'quick fix' is to return to football basics get rid of all the 'systems' and come to terms with the fact that we have human beings here this is not a computer game. The only approach is one that Redknapp would take, select a team of players and tell them to go out and express themselves. 'You are professionals you know how the game works, now get out and do it'. From our present available players I would go with. Lloris, Kaboul Dier Vertonghen Rose Lennon Dembele Mason Lamela Soldado Kane
Even that l agree , that team is still very weak and at best mid table , at the moment there are no game changers . What ever team we put out our position in the league of 7/8 if we are lucky is as best as it gets.
I get annoyed when I watch tennis because the commentators I watch all seem to come back to the theme of "If he'd just start trying, he'd win." The problem with that idea is that the guy on the other side of the net should be trying equally hard. The effort levels of both should cancel out, and the winner will be the one who has better strokes, strategy and nerves. This is why Mother Teresa never won Wimbledon. It's not all about character. People are human and therefore abound in flaws. No doubt at times teams lose because they are less focused and dedicated than those they're playing. I don't know whether and to what extent that's true with Spurs. What is clear to me is that on the right side against Newcastle we had Dier, who is not a right back, and Lamela, who has been much more likely to score on the left side. Getting two players on the right who are good at playing on the right side seems the first and most obvious fix. What's also clear is that playing with two strikers has correlated well in the recent past with scoring more, and for that matter winning more, so do that as well.
I think its less true of a case with football than tennis because football is a team game, and unless you have a world class player to carry the team like Bale did for us in his last season, then a lack of effort or backbone from others can become very apparent. If successful tennis requires strokes, strategy and nerves then successful football requires technique, strategy and nerves (both require a healthy dollop of fitness too but you get what I mean), but the difference in football is that the whole team has to meet the standard. Unless you have a player who can win the game single-handedly, you are only as strong as your weakest link. I know I probably talk too much about 'systems' and 'tactics' on here but clearly if you're trying to play a pressing game then if some players don't commit to the press then teams just play around it. I agree with your second paragraph though, although with the caveat that a 4-4-2 will leave us light in midfield against the top teams and even exposed against other teams IMO - I know City play it sometimes but they have players an another level to us across the board - and a midfield diamond will leave us just as reliant on fullbacks for width as we are now, but could be a good option regardless.
I always think that the difference between a 4-4-2 and a 4-5-1/4-4-1-1/4-2-3-1 or whatever in the middle of the park is overemphasised. Teams rarely play two out-and-out strikers that don't track back or drop into the midfield when they don't have the ball, so the numbers in there are always pretty similar. The narrowness or width of a side and how organised they are seem more influential, to me. Liverpool successfully played with two striker last season because Suarez was both very good and very mobile and Sturridge is happy to run the channels. City did it with a variety of forwards, be it Dzeko, Aguero, Negredo or Jovetic. Man Utd have been doing it with Rooney, van Persie, Welbeck and now Falcao. Two strikers is fine, as long as the side has the right balance. Ours doesn't have it at the moment, regardless of how we've lined up. We got our tactics right against Arsenal, as the packed centre worked in our favour. They dominated possession but struggled to create chances and we had lots of players together when we broke. The same lack of width and has caused us problems in various other games, though. When the tables are turned and we're looking to break down a compact side, it's a big disadvantage.
Most of our squad is young and will improve with age/game time. I'd stick to the 4231 system and rotate about 3 players in and out every game to give them all a rest while maintaining continuity. If any three or four of Dier, Rose, Davies, Bentaleb, Mason, Carroll, Lamela, Townsend, Chadli, Eriksen, Pritchard and Kane turn into palyers of the calibre of Bale, King and Modric we are going to be fine. And why shouldn't they?
quick fix?? change contracts to performance / results rated and just perhaps they will stay awake for 90 minutes plus Ie they light the cigars at half time at present
I also think our young players are going to turn out to be very good, though I'd be shocked if any turn out to be as good as Bale. There's what I'd like and what I think Pochettino might try. As to the latter, I think he has to address the problem that with Lamela and Dier on the right, we're going to lose the battle on half the field. So Lennon or Kaboul at right back, and Lennon, Dembele or even Townsend would be an improvement at on the right. I'd have a hard time deciding whether to keep Chadli on the left, or put Lamela there, and would probably try both. The team I'd actually like to see at home or any team that's likely to sit back: Lennon Kaboul Vertonghen Rose Dembele Mason Eriksen Lamela/Chadli Ade Kane Dembele and Mason could switch off on the right and in a deeper role. They could both play deeper if we had the lead. Rose and Lennon would provide width, Dembele/Mason would be there to protect the back four. No one who's ever played right back would be a risk, but I think Lennon and Dembele/Mason between them would provide decent defending on the right side. 4-2-3-1 against stronger teams/away against middling teams, and have it sit back against the top teams.
Poch has stated that we are struggling at home because our pitch "Is a little bit tight." SURE sign of a loser to produce a transparently weak excuse like that or any excuse at all for that matter. AVB complained that Hoops' pitch was too small and shortly after he was gone from Chelsea.If a coach has to find excuses then he's inadequate and already feeling the pressure. Go Poch, it's been less than average knowing you.
Come off it Spurm, he's diverting attention away from the side's poor showing and therefore himself by dreaming up a non existent problem and therefore a weak excuse.
Einstein had a good quote on the definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. We keep sacking managers, nothing changes. So we sack Poch for a comment?
Ferguson, Mourinho and Wenger have made more excuses than anyone. If they're inadequate, then I don't know who isn't now days.
Were Levy to sack Pochettino, we would rightly be the laughing stock of English football. There's enough people laughing at us already, let's not give them even more ammunition.
