They were lucky against us and robbed Liverpool.
Ange Postecoglou | New Spurs boss on 4 year contract
- Thread starter MayosNoun
- Start date
They were lucky against us and robbed Liverpool.
https://x.com/YidVids/status/1786133848213823950
Their form since the 4-1 loss to Chelsea is Mid table.
Their form since the 4-1 loss to Chelsea is Mid table.
Basically they had a new manager bounce then reverted to type.
They reported a loss of £85M or so on their 22/23 accounts, according to transfermarkt they spent €140 net, I remember them getting some capital investment of £150m to help them spend. This was a season they had Champions League football.
For this season, despite the Kane sale, Transfermarkt has them spending €150m net. They also have no Champions League football, in fact no European football whatsoever.
Levy is apparently again out with the begging bowl looking for more capital investment to 'maximise their potential'.
I'm not sure if they can afford to spend on 4/5 quality signings.
They were always going to struggle without Kane. Top 6 would be a decent season.
He basically decided not to give his team the highest chance of salvaging a point from the game after going down to 9 men. They probably would've lost even if they sat back but with keeping his high line he was basically willing to let Chelsea score 6-7 goals, or even more
He's a good manager but today he made an objectively stupid decision
Oh, and they'll be 20+ pts off the title in May, so hopefully that conversation dies down soon
Told ya
Yeah you’re completely right. I don’t know why I presumed they didn’t spend so much last summer but they spent a fair bit. Probably because they didn’t really replace Kane with a big signing but rather bought numerous 30-40m players.
He has done well in his first season and with the players he's had. There's more talk to sack him over ETH end Porch? That doesn't make sense.
Ange is a fantastic manager and person. He always delivers in his second season
Ange is a fantastic manager and person. He always delivers in his second season
I think he's done alright this season. They don't have great depth and seem to have just run out of steam. Think they will improve next year.
That stat about us dropping 9 points after the 80th minute over the last few months is mental. Really shot ourselves in the foot and should have been right up after Villa.
That stat about us dropping 9 points after the 80th minute over the last few months is mental. Really shot ourselves in the foot and should have been right up after Villa.
No there isn't.
There is almost no talk of him being sacked. What are you on about?
Typical caf. Gone from 'He's a great manager, how can he walk into Spurs and get them playing a new style whilst Ten Hag is struggling after a year - he's' to 'He's terrible' all in one season.
Worth noting that Spurs have only played 37 games in all comps this season. By comparison, United have played 47, Villa have played 51 and Liverpool have played 55. That is a big advantage that they (probably) won't have again next season.
They're going to have at least 48 games next season.
38 league, 8 in Europe, and 2 domestic cup games.
Obviously, progressing in any of the cup competitions just adds to that.
People saying they've ran out of steam this time out and they're only going to play 41 in total.
Exciting football is so easy to create nowadays, just don't bother defending.
Et viola, all your games are exciting
Et viola, all your games are exciting
Hopefully the likes of Ian Wright can stop sucking him off now.
Are they the same posters though? If I had said that he was a great manager then I probably would be avoiding this thread right now.
Get 5th and it's a good season for them if you view it from the summer and losing Kane. Top 4 and doing better in cup competitions needs to happen next season though or he will be under pressure.
I don’t think missing out on what has clearly been their target for months now can count as a good season.
Depends how you look at it. Summer objectives would have been to challenge for top 4 I imagine but with a realistic expectation to finish 5th/6th. That likely changed to an objective of top 4 mid-season but I think you can still fail a changed objective but still have a good season when you consider everything (First season, huge shift of philosophy from previous manager, losing talisman and best player in the league etc...)
Ange performed ok with his lot considering their mess of a season last year and that there are seemingly a fair bit of competition for that 4th spot. That would have made it a good season of course.
People got all excited calling them title challengers in the beginning of the season but their players were just on purple patches at the beginning of the season. Son might move on now too I suspect. He has a year or two left at a high level. Richarlison, Maddison, Johnson....all decent players but not exactly players that will bring them to the next level. Still have defensive issues as well.
People got all excited calling them title challengers in the beginning of the season but their players were just on purple patches at the beginning of the season. Son might move on now too I suspect. He has a year or two left at a high level. Richarlison, Maddison, Johnson....all decent players but not exactly players that will bring them to the next level. Still have defensive issues as well.
I think it also depends on your interpretation of "good".
I'd say a finish outside of the top four, with the points total they're likely to end up with, was about the bare minimum they'd have expected from Ange's first season. The fact that United, Newcastle and Chelsea all failed to show up for the party in terms of CL places means they probably should have found themselves in pole-position for that last CL spot, especially considering they were actually top of the league 10 games in.
That run from Chelsea at home to West Ham away was brutal, and they've never really recovered their form, which makes that opening run look more and more like a honeymoon period. As I said in another comment, their last seven games has brought about five defeats and just two wins (both of which were against relegation fodder).
If they miss out on fourth this season (which looks likely) and get off to a slow start next season (and they're going to have at least eight Europa games to contend with), he'll be gone before the end of the campaign.
I think that also ignores how good Villa are and have been under Emery. They've been one of the best performers since he joined (They're 4th in that time too) and are in that 4th spot on merit.
You'd expect Spurs to get at least 66 points so they'll have improved on points and position by the end of the season. I think that, in the context of what I gave is a good season. The pressure will rise next year though due to the negatives amongst the good. Top 4 and better cup competitiveness will be the goal and aim and agree if at Christmas they're not within that bubble he will be under a lot of pressure.
I'm not ignoring Villa as they're well worth their spot, but Spurs were first after 10 games, and already four points clear of Villa in fifth. Spurs then went on the run mentioned, and plummeted down the table. No one expected them to be title challengers, so it's not a surprise that they've not maintained that level, but it absolutely should have had them in pole position for fourth, considering they were also nine points clear of Newcastle, 11 points clear of United, and 14 points clear of Chelsea. They should have even been back in pole after 28 games, considering they were fifth, three points behind Villa in fourth, with a game in hand, having just beaten them 4-0 at Villa Park. Villa have dropped nine points since losing to Spurs, but Spurs have managed to drop 14, and are now seven points behind with a trip to Anfield and a visit from City coming up.
They are likely to improve on last season's points total, but Conte was on course for 66/67 points when he was sacked, which would seen them finish 5th/6th, and was seen as not good enough. It's also on course to be their lowest points total, for a season in which they didn't sack a manager, since Poch's first season in 2014/15 (64 points).
Ultimately, Kane or no Kane, I'm struggling to see how a season with no European distractions, two very early cup exits, and almost zero competition from United, Newcastle and Chelsea for a spot in the CL, can be seen as "good" if it ends up with them 5th, behind a Villa side that's been playing Thursday/Sunday for most of the season and will finish the season having played 15/16 more games than them, especially with the above considerations. As I said, it's about the bare minimum they'd have expected, with the league position simply elevated by United and Newcastle dropping off massively and Chelsea failing to turn up for a second consecutive campaign.
I disagree. Teams can go on good runs at the starts of seasons and manager tenures, which we have seen with De Zerbi at Brighton, Ancelotti at Everton etc. which can overexaggerate just how good a side is or their true level. Going back through the thread to the start of the season the large majority of people thought 5th/6th would be a a great season for him.
Conte was getting knocked out of the cups to Sheffield United and Forest. Ange got knocked out of the FA cup to City and Fulham on penalties in the EFL Cup. Not great either but bit better than Conte. Overall I think Ange has been a bit better than Conte and he's doing it while shifting the mentality of the squad massively and without Kane. I really don't think it can be overstated enough how much value Kane added to the Spurs side. He would drag them through games at times when nobody else could and this Spurs squad has nobody like that anymore and Ange is trying to shift the momentum of the team so they don't have to rely on someone like that but it will take time.
It's good to me because City/Arsenal/Liverpool are a level above the rest of the league and Villa have been too since Emery came in.
In addition, their whole game revolves around having more energy than opponents and pressing them to death. They really don’t have a plan B for how to win matches when they’re on equal footing or more leggy than the other side.
A lot of things need to go right this summer - recruitment, tactical evolution - or they will be set up to fail next year.
You made some good points no doubt but I also think Ange having them play nice football is most important argument on his side after 5 years of mostly uninspiring football they got to watch under different managers. They surely have some reservations due to average form since November but he's done enough for 2nd season. I agree with SilentWitness on this.
That's a bit disingenuous as Conte also had them topping their CL group and only being eliminated 1-0 on aggregate to the Italian champions in the round of 16. Additionally, at the start of the season people saying "5th/6th would be a a great season for him" would have been imagining such a finish to be in competition with more than just Villa (who they're on course to finish behind). United haven't been higher than 6th all season, same for Newcastle (ignoring the opening round of fixtures) and they were actually 10th not too long ago, and Chelsea haven't been higher than 8th and have spent most of the season dipping into the bottom half.
As I said, "5th/6th" is almost an irrelevance at this point because it's only happened because basically every team they'd have been expecting to compete with for such a spot has been a non-entity. Unless they can somehow overtake Villa, he'll have done the bare minimum expected, because finishing any lower, with the seasons United, Newcastle and Chelsea have had, would likely mean doing even worse than they did last season.
I'm not saying they should sack him, I'm saying he's on course to meet minimum expectations rather than matching any notion of having had a "good" season. It's simply been "okay", which is fine for the first season, but my point is basically that he's going to have to show a lot more as a manager if he's going to survive the increased expectations next season.
I also don't understand the "nice football" argument considering it's becoming increasingly obvious that his style is unsustainable and he's shown little to no inclination to change things up, which are basically the biggest criticisms aimed at Ten Hag. You'd think they'd been battering teams all season the way people go on, but they've won by three or more goals just one more time than we have, and have scored three or more goals just one more time than we have. They've actually conceded more goals than we have, and have only kept two clean sheets since October.
That's shifting the goalposts though mid season in regards to United, Chelsea and Newcastle, even considering Brighton too when you're saying bare minimum expected.
At the start of the season to say that is bare minimum expected is just not true.
Good enough season is right expression imo.
Ten Hag is in his 2nd season with United while Postecoglou is in his first so that's important difference as well. We've got +1 goal difference compared to their +13 which can at least be regarded as not bad or okayish.
Maybe it's not the right analogy but Ange's 1st season reminds to van Gaal's first season with us in some ways. Decent but have to improve more in 2nd season otherwise manager will be in trouble.
It's not shifting the goalposts at all, as that's not what I said about the expectations at the start of the season:
Specific league position shouldn't really factor into it too much, precisely because it can be affected by other teams under or overperforming. I've said a few times regarding United's season that, in different circumstances (namely, Newcastle and Chelsea showing up), we could have had a much better season on the pitch but still found ourselves in 6th/7th come the end of the campaign, simply because of the competition for places. Similarly, Spurs could have had this exact "good" season and found themselves 8th again.
5th/6th might have been seen as "great" in pre-season, but that sort of position-specific metric is only made with the assumption that United, Newcastle and Chelsea are also in the hunt for top four. They haven't been, so of course expectations will have shifted mid-season, especially given their start. United haven't been within six points of 4th since they beat Villa in February, and that only lasted two weeks. In the second half of the season, the only other team not Villa or Spurs to be that close to fourth was West Ham, in GW 20, and they're now 9th, 18 points off it.
The fact is, Spurs sacked Conte when he was on course to finish outside of the top four on 66/67 points as he was deemed to be underperforming. Kane or no Kane, Ange has been brought in to do a better job than Conte, and he's on course to finish outside of the top four on 66/67 points. It's sufficient for his first season, but that's about it. All things considered, unless they can overtake Villa, Spurs certainly won't have had a "great" season, and it's absolutely pushing it to even described it as "good". As @BorisManUtd said, "good enough" is about right.
We will have to agree to disagree as we disagree on the parameters which Conte was dealing with vs Ange.
One's dead and the other is 98 this year. He's got issues if he's shagged either.
Don't know how I feel about this in all honesty. Someone else pointed out it won't be the same people branding him a great success and then a faliure by and large. It will be differnet folk.
Mind you, I do think fans can be too reactionary at times. For managers, for players too. Can't be blamed to an extent though, clubs are as well. They'll bin off a manager for par performance, or for failing to continue to overperform if they've previously set the bar high. As fans we get used to that, any dip in form to be in jeopardy and expecting clubs to treat it that way, so we jump on manager's backs according to the way clubs generally behave too. We're just following suit, industry standard.
Postecoglou has gone from great to shit, to great to shit again all within this season.
Yo're only as good as your recent form/results when it comes down to it I suppose. It's the way it is. His results have been poor. Overall as a season though, not bad.
Last edited:
Personally, I called him a massive gamble before the season started, and predicted he'd be sacked in season two or three around October/November time.
I've been similarly dismissive of De Zerbi. There's been a lot of "grass is greener" with United fans being (justifiably) disappointed in our season and hyping up other managers/clubs as a result.
As I said above, Conte was sacked while on course for 66/67 points, which would have seen him finish outside of the top four. This was seen as a woeful under-performance (hence the sacking). Ange was brought in to do better than Conte, but is currently on course for 66/67 points which would see Spurs finish outside of the top four. If any of United, Newcastle or Chelsea had turned up this season, they'd be 6th/7th/8th. Ange has had an acceptable first campaign, but, in my opinion, needs to show a lot more next season (while balancing at least eight European games) to keep his job.
As you say, it's not been a bad first season, but to me, the only way it can be seen as "good" is if they can actually secure 4th, which seems highly unlikely at this point.
I'm happy to go along with that. It seems like we're arguing the semantics of what a "good" campaign constitutes at this point. I think he's done enough to warrant a second campaign.
In retrospect, got to laugh at the media jerking off all over them and calling them strong contenders to win the league at the 1st quarter of the season. I mean I have been a United fan for 10 over years and since when in this reality has Spurs actually genuinely challenged for the title?
The thing with Conte is that he was brought in as a 'winner'. He wasn't brought into to build something - he was there to win trophies and get them regularly in the top four. They probably accepted the football would be quite dour at times and were happy to concede this for the possibility of trophies and CL football.
Ange was very much the opposite sort of appointment, yes he's got history in winning trophies but he bases his job on the style of football and trying to build teams.
IMO it's too early to judge Ange and we haven't really got enough to go off. There has been some very good moments within the first season but also some very bad moments and the circumstances he walked into in terms of not facing gruelling season where definitely favourable but then you also have to caveat it with the fact that they lost one of their best ever players. I don't think Spurs have under or overachieved really this season.
The talk of him being a fraud is just as stupid as the talk of him being a world class manager at the start of the season.
Ange was very much the opposite sort of appointment, yes he's got history in winning trophies but he bases his job on the style of football and trying to build teams.
IMO it's too early to judge Ange and we haven't really got enough to go off. There has been some very good moments within the first season but also some very bad moments and the circumstances he walked into in terms of not facing gruelling season where definitely favourable but then you also have to caveat it with the fact that they lost one of their best ever players. I don't think Spurs have under or overachieved really this season.
The talk of him being a fraud is just as stupid as the talk of him being a world class manager at the start of the season.
Do Spurs fans believe that their team, this squad and the money invested in it, are good enough for top-4? With any manager.
For example, ETH spent 400 million in 2 summers. How much did Spurs spend in the past 2 summers?
For example, ETH spent 400 million in 2 summers. How much did Spurs spend in the past 2 summers?