Its a serious question. Which current PL chairman is doing better than Levy with similar resources? Having a stable manager is mostly a matter of luck. No-one here would have a chance at naming four clubs who will have the same manager in November 2017 because there probably won't be four on previous history. Levy is no worse at hiring managers than anyone else.
Okay looking at it more objectively then and just for arguments sake: 1) Name other Premier League chairmen who has hired and fired at least 10 managers/caretakers in 13 years? 2) Name other Premier League chairmen who have sacked more managers for achieving said targets i.e final league positions 3) Name other Premier League chairmen who have increased the season ticket price by over 75% in 13 years? 4) Name other Premier League chairmen who have increased the cheapest matchday ticket price by over 60% in 13 years? Then we can pick the bones out of it I guess.
1) Limited to seven clubs, as no other sides have been ever-present during this period? Leeds have had 19. Chelsea have had 11. 2) Chelsea. 3) Most of them. 4) Most of them. Arsenal is an obvious example.
Spurs have had 3 managers in 11 months...6 in in 7 yrs... Levy chose; hoddle 2001 to 2003 .... 2 yrs 5 months Pleat 2003 to 2004 ....care taker 8 months Santini july 2004 to Oct 2004 ... 3 months Jol 2004 to 2007... 3 yrs Ramos 2007 to 2008.... 12 months Redknapp 2008 to 2012.... 3 years 8 months Avb 2012 to 2013.... 1 year 4 months Sherwood 2013 to 2014.... 5 months Only redknapp had 3 whole season...only 3 have last mors than 2 years... All this suggests levy is **** at chosing managers
I should have added that I think all club chairman sack managers too frequently and don't give them time to make their ideas work. I think part of Levy's issue here is that he is too ambitious so he is looking for someone to move the club forward which is why Jol went. But our motto is Audere est Facere after all. It seems to me that the last three didn't get sacked for performance but more because they were not delivering on the way they said they would manage when they were appointed. For example if I were Levy I would have been delighted with Redknapp on the pitch but totally hacked off with the way he flirted with the England job after he had been backed through the tax evasion case. Almost all organisations of any sort would suspend a senior manager who was charged with that sort of offense. Similarly AVB's results were OK but he didn't deal with the squad and similarly Sherwood for different reasons.
...and when he does get the right man, he ends up sacking him! Levy has two things going against him: (1) he gets decisions wrong far more often than he gets them right, and (2) he lacks any kind of patience.
Aston Villa had 7 over that period, Sunderland 13, West Ham 7, Newcastle 11 or 13, depending on how you count the two who served twice - this all suggests that everyone is s**t at choosing managers. They were the sort of clubs that were around or above us when Levy took over - would you rather we had their chairmen?
What's the betting that we'll have Moyes in charge, come the New Year? Also, what's the betting that the crowd will use the next match to chant anti-Levy slogans in reprisal for his drowning out their boos at the end of the last game? I really do think that the fans need to start showing Levy who most of us blame for the club's current crisis.
I've voted for the squad, not because I feel the talent is poor but the mentality and attitude of most is shocking. The quality of players we possess is not bottom half worthy and 3 managers can't be blamed for the poor performances. With that said, I am coming around to the idea that Levy needs to pull his finger out, while I solely trust him as a businessman to keep this club safe and secure, his failure to back a manager with their desired targets really hasn't helped. A tweet was retweeted onto my timeline that summarised Levy, "Give Levy your Harrods shopping list & he returns with a Lidl bag, then kicks you out cos you couldn't make a lobster dinner with tinned spam", funny but somewhat true, although the calibre of player for the most part that he's brought in hasn't been bad it's not been the manager's choice more often than not and so it certainly makes a manager's job far harder without his desired players at his disposal.
Can't they? Of the 3 Sherwood showed a different approach and is the only one of the 3 I would think it worth sticking with. He obviously needed more experience but he was already onto the lack of passion in the squad and gave Bentaleb and Townsend a chance to show theirs. Pochettino and AVB both were open to change but both are too much involved in their 'systems' IMO. Work with what you have and not what you would like to have. First and foremost a manager/coach needs to be able to get the best out of his current resources before looking for new players, if he can't do that then as PS has said what is he doing in the job.
I just don't buy this we're where we should be idea. Yes, other clubs have had many managers, but how many of those have had the funds at their disposal that ours have? Not many. Somehow, £85+mil has been wasted on overpriced, overhyped "talent" nobody wants to put their hands up and accept responsibility for that, and we're now in worse position than we have been for ages. Once again, the buck has to stop somewhere. As SOTM said, in any other major business, heads at the top would have rolled by now. Bame the managers, blame Baldini, but somebody hired these people and nobody wants to carry the can for that.
Liverpool spent more than us - if the likes of Lovren, Can, Lallana and Ballotelli are better than the seven we signed then its not showing much in the league table. So did Arsenal - ditto. So did Man Utd - ditto. We won't know who signed the better players for at least three years. Anyway Baldini was only just in post when we signed most of them so presumably the senior staff in the Club before then played a part in identifying the targets. Now who was that - AVB and Sherwood - lets's sack them....oh!
ENIC/Levy have changed their direction in recent years concerning their ambition for Spurs. 5 years ago it was about the champs league money . If we could get in with sensible no risk spending great. Man City new owners destroyed Lewis's chance of sitting at the top table with little outlay . With Chelsea, City always there , then Arse, United, Liverpool fighting on far bigger budgets the door was closed without major investment . In the meantime with the domestic new TV mega deals in the pipeline , it has meant that trying for top 4 by spending is not worth the risk as just being in the league pays generously . Why bother , it would cost more in players/wages than its worth . They have their cream already , of course if could happen on peanuts they would have a double Christmas . The stadium cost to build it , fill it with a team of ambition for a full house , is not worth the expense when you can take a frugal no risk fiscal policy with the future paved in gold. Let some other mug do it or finance it. Sadly it has been obvious for many a year but gradual decline is getting to hard to smokescreen .
Liverpool spent about the same as us. Admittedly they have fared little better, but I believe both Can & Lallana will come good. Balotelli was Rodgers' crazy idea, he will probably pay for it if things don't improve. Yes, we have fired AVB & Sherwoid. I repeat, who was responsible for hiring them, along with all the other failed "saviours", in the first place? If you really believe AVB and Sherwood would have been allowed to spend that kind of money without the nod from much higher up, you're sadly misguided.
The investment must be going towards the stadium, but there is one problem. If we arrive in a shiny new stadium with a **** team playing **** football with no passion then those extra seats aren't gonna be worth a whole lot
They spent about £15m more and had a net spend of over £50m more, assuming you're comparing our post-Bale summer to their post-Suarez one.
