2 successful appointments in 7, poor! but chelsea's has to be worse, but they seem less affected by managerial change, so it can be done. Numerically and legally, as astute as they come, but his football player suitability knowledge imo is still in the realms of 'a little knowledge is worse than none' causing problems as Abramovich has at Chelsea.
"2 successful appointments in 7, poor! but chelsea's has to be worse, but they seem less affected by managerial change, so it can be done." When di Matteo got sacked, Pat Nevin did the PR job and called it their "business model" . And that whatever you think of it (the financial outlays etc) , it seems to work for Roman (silverware won etc) . Footnote : You could argue that all that distinguishes Roman from Levy is the money personally injected into their respective clubs.
So let's compare AVB's 54 PL matches with the last 54 of Redknapp's PL matches when he was settled in and had the best team we've ever had. Redknapp won 26 of these, AVB won 29. You can put in as many if's and but's as you like but on the raw data AVB did better than Redknapp. I'm pretty sure that the difference is high enough for long enough to make it a significant finding but I've not had time to check this. So even after Redknapp's progression he was doing worse than AVB
You really don't get it, do you power? you're breaking down stats into periods, that is how people misuse stats to paint a different picture to reality. Dealing with Facts/Reality, whats actually important: Redknapp was manager for four years. Avb was manager for a season and a half. Redknapp left us a point off third. Avb left us in 7th and sacked because he was out of his depth. On raw data, Redknapp finished 4th and the best competition he qualified for, was the champions league. On raw data, Avb finished 5th and the best competition he qualified for, was the Europa League. Understand? or does it not sink in?
Yes I do understand but you are also being selective. I do not believe that AVB failed as he had a worse and more highly changed squad than Harry against more powerful competitors. Harry himself has said that AVB should have had more time. Qualitatively I agree that the football was worse and Sunday was the last straw. Quantitatively he should have been given longer
I'm not being selective, I'm just dealing with what happened. If you break down Harry's games played /win ratio to compare it with Avb, which you done as they managed for different lengths then it doesn't give a true comparison. Redknapp was in the job longer as he was better at his job, he was allowed time as he put himself in a position where his management wasn't questioned until he was sacked, but even then he left us in a stronger position. Ultimately both where sacked, for different reasons and if we look at both managers and what they achieved, Redknapp is more successful based on where he took the club.
Boss - the thing you are not getting is that AVB's win ratio is really very good. Whether it's better or worse than Redknapp's is not really the issue. Even this season when you say things have deteriorated it is 50%. We would normally applaud stats like that.
I know! I really believed this guy knew what he was doing and in the long run it would work out. But some of his bad calls turned into disasters and I think he was feeling the pressure. I'd feel pretty disgruntled if I'd had 26 matches in all competitions and won 17 of them and people were calling for my head!
And from AVB's 29 wins, I reckon a hefty percentage was because of Bale. Like Boss mentioned, under Harry, we lost and won as a team. There were times we looked unbelievable and times where we were painful on the eye but it was a collective effort, we never had a stand out performer, Bale, Modric, Rafa, Ade, Parker, Lennon and others all shone at various times for the team. Under AVB, we won mainly because of Bale and more often than not, those wins papered over some very below average and shocking performances, just like we've seen this season but the problem for AVB this time around was that Bale couldn't save us. Unfortunately I think AVB has lived off his Porto rep to make people believe he's some manager messiah of the future, to an extent, you could even question his Porto achievements if you wanted to be picky, any team that has Hulk and Falcao in their side is a force to be reckoned with.
"Yep weight of spend is going to beat managerial skill day in day out" And here is the interesting thing. Considering how Chelsky have done in the PL relative to Spurs for the past two seasons, even with that "weight of spend" , then given how Spurs are currently financially operating, the following comes to mind : - A bit of strategic (but not frivolous) cash injection by ENIC for key players could have made a serious difference - The Chelsky "weight of spend" ultimately counts for little in the PL, when you have substantial managerial churn to negate it
I seem to remember that Harry had Bale too? Only he thought he was a left back/left winger. AVB turned him into a player worth £90m And the names you mention simply show that Harry had a much stronger 'first choice'.
I've praised Avb for his ability to pick up points and even as someone that doesn't particular like the guy, I'm aware his stats are good. My issue is when you or others claim he is our most successful manager as succes is based on what they actually done for the club. For that, Redknapp wins. Not even a contest. However if you personally want to view Avb as overall the better manager based on his stats win ratio then that's your call and I respect that as we all have different managers we Personally rate. But let's drop the most successful Spurs manager, as Avb doesn't deserve to be mentioned.
Redknapp didn't win any trophies. We've had some managers that did. If you're talking about a straight comparison between Redknapp and Villas-Boas though, then I'd put the former first. Overall in our history? Neither comes close.
Well I don't think anyone is talking overall history as again that's not even a contest, but my mistake I should have said premier league history as that's usually what the debate is over.
AVB had £110 million to spend this summer; last season he had another £45 million...dempsey, siggy, Lloris, Dembele, Holtby and Ade ... the club spent £155 million all of which was raised by player sales...he was fully supported by the club and this season Soldado; Paulinio; Chadli; Chirches and Capoue were bought early enough to be fitted into the team...I think they were all were around for our pre season matches so the performances this season have been appalling...ignore the results...look at the league performances. Palace...never looked like scoring - got a penalty that could have gone either way Swansea...pretty much the same - denied a stone wall pen but got a lucky pen Arsenal...never looked like scoring Cardiff...dominated Norwich ...totally dominated Chelsea...great first half we were dominated 2nd half West Ham...beaten out of sight by a team playing no strikers and who hadn't scored more than 1 away goal in a whole year Aston Villa...totally dominated Hull...very dodgy pen was the only way we were ever going to score Newcastle...poor first half good second half Everton...good first half poor second half Man City...lucky to get nil Man Utd...played very well on the whole Fulham...played ok but win flattered us Sunderland...got lucky as they weren't given a stonewall penalty but we deserved to win Liverpool...no shots on target and 5 nil flattered us we have played 3 good halves (Everton Toon Chelsea) the other halves of these matches were the opposite we have dominate Cardiff (recently promoted) Villa and Norwich (both struggling) we have been lucky against Hull; Sunderland; Palace and Fulham (they deserved a draw) we were ineffective v Arsenal we were ****ing awful v City; west Ham and Liverpool we played well v United The positives equate to 3 very good halves; 1 whole very good match; 3 matches effectively dominated v struggling clubs. The negative equate to 3 very poor halves ; 1 ineffective match; 3 ****ing awful matches everything else falls in between and on top of this we are so boring to watch. personally I think that I expect better with £155m spent in 18 months...I expect excitement and goals
Exactly, Harry did but he used Bale to be a more team player instead of building the team around him, which is what AVB done, we didn't have to rely on Bale to produce the goods week in week out. Everyone at the time saw Bale as a left back/ left winger, Harry tried him on the right at times but it didn't work out back then. AVB aided Bale into becoming the player he is now by giving him more freedom and building the team around him but he didn't turn Bale into the £90m player. Bale's natural progression as a player is the reason he is where he is now. You can't teach a player how to shoot from 35 yards with precision into the top corner or to run through defences and finish deftly, AVB inherited Bale at the ideal time (just like he did with Hulk and Falcao at Porto). Bale came back in pre-season and looked a completely different guy, his physique was more filled out and "manly" instead of the young lad who looked as though he wouldn't say boo to a goose. I'm not taking away AVB's input into his progression but he didn't "turn" Bale into the £90m player, he aided him. AVB got rid of a lot of those first choices. Rafa and Parker have been sold and Ade is rotting away in obscurity (not that I like the guy anyway), plus Benny is also out on loan who prior to AVB was a key member of our back 4, and since he's been on loan we've needed him more than ever.
We only needed benny because Rose was injured ,overwise Benny would not get a look in,he is not as good as Rose,who will become Englands L/B IMO
