I don't get why Eriksen is continually overlooked, for me he is Spurs' most irreplaceable player.
The Spurs thread | 2016-2017 season | Serious thread - wummers/derailers will be threadbanned
- Thread starter baanke laal
- Start date
- Status
I don't get why Eriksen is continually overlooked, for me he is Spurs' most irreplaceable player.
This thread goes in bloody weird directions sometimes.
To answer a couple of the points:
Our two biggest earners are Lloris and Kane on 100k each. Alderweirald is (reportedly and imo rightly so) negotiating his contract so that he matches these two.
As for the trophies thing, big club yada yada, I come in somewhere in between. Some Spurs fans are a bit upset that we aren't being taken as seriously as they think we should be. Fair in a way. But unless we change something substantial (ie qualify for the CL a few seasons in a row, win a trophy or go on a run, or two, deep into either European competition, some people will still not take us seriously. And I think there is some justification to that.
The trophies thing.... I think it is a bit unfair to compare directly to Man Utd or Chelsea and say but we've won more than you! Well of course, the money spent is not even slightly comparable. You'd expect those clubs to have a lot more trophies. Still, I'd be surprised if many Spurs fans could honestly say that if we hadn't won a trophy in the next five years, that they wouldn't be disappointed.
I'd say our models should be Atletico, Seville and Dortmund. They have less more financially powerful rivals than us but regardless, have still managed a few big trophies. That's what I want to see.
@roonster09 , I'm interested in your thoughts on why we have done poorly in Europe this season. I may be wrong but you seem to be saying its down to a lack of quality. Which may be fair enough but then why have three teams below us in the table progressed further in both European competitions?
To answer a couple of the points:
Our two biggest earners are Lloris and Kane on 100k each. Alderweirald is (reportedly and imo rightly so) negotiating his contract so that he matches these two.
As for the trophies thing, big club yada yada, I come in somewhere in between. Some Spurs fans are a bit upset that we aren't being taken as seriously as they think we should be. Fair in a way. But unless we change something substantial (ie qualify for the CL a few seasons in a row, win a trophy or go on a run, or two, deep into either European competition, some people will still not take us seriously. And I think there is some justification to that.
The trophies thing.... I think it is a bit unfair to compare directly to Man Utd or Chelsea and say but we've won more than you! Well of course, the money spent is not even slightly comparable. You'd expect those clubs to have a lot more trophies. Still, I'd be surprised if many Spurs fans could honestly say that if we hadn't won a trophy in the next five years, that they wouldn't be disappointed.
I'd say our models should be Atletico, Seville and Dortmund. They have less more financially powerful rivals than us but regardless, have still managed a few big trophies. That's what I want to see.
@roonster09 , I'm interested in your thoughts on why we have done poorly in Europe this season. I may be wrong but you seem to be saying its down to a lack of quality. Which may be fair enough but then why have three teams below us in the table progressed further in both European competitions?
Agree. I think a lot of people consistently put him below the top level of playmakers in the league, when I think he is not worse than them in the slightest (except Hazard).
Also...yes I know it is one of those sad tables that doesn't really show anything of any note. It is heartening to see though that we have been the most consistent side over the past two seasons. A far cry from when most of our thoughts at this time would be about whether we'd be finishing nearer the top of the bottom half of the table or the bottom.
Just a shame we're unlikely to see a league title from this period.
I mentioned this in the Kane thread but all the tabloids of Kane missing the season were written before the scan.
Heck even after the game Poch said it was the same ankle and was therefore hoping for a quicker recovery because he may have already had scar-tissue or whatever built up. So most Spurs fans were ready for a speedier recovery. It's just the sensationalist clickbair British media doing their thing.
Rose was the one who unfortunately hit a set back, but he should be back soon as well.
I totally agree and I put it down mostly to his lack of dribbling ability and lack of pace.
There's something to players who dribble that cause everyone to massively overrate them.
Take Coutinho for example. Eriksen is better than Coutinho at basically EVERYTHING except dribbling and probably sheer number of shots. Yet many rate Coutinho higher including, sadly, Tottenham supporters.
He's the creative lynchpin to our team and we're massively worse off without him.
That again sounds like excuse when you compare your record in Europe (Europa) under Poch. Conditions were same for both teams and Leverkusen are not all that. You should have easily qualified from the group.
I didn't say you lack quality. I was replying to the post which said you have among the best defense in Europe or implied post, so I asked if that's the reason why didn't you qualify from group stage and then KOed by Gent in Europa.
Spurs have excellent defense but in PL. IMO PL don't exploit the gaps between the lines as good as the teams in Europe. Might be the reason why Spurs are more used to defending well in PL than in Europe. For example, City and ManUtd did well in league but Chelsea used to do better in Europe. Even last season Arsenal finished higher than City but City reached Semi finals in CL.
Defending in PL and CL is not the same. The quality and style of attack is different, so maybe Spurs defense is comfortable playing against PL teams than continental teams.
Fair enough. In which case, would you say that Arsenal, Man City, Man Utd and Leicester have defences that are more suited to Europe than we do?
Or for example, do Genk have a better defence than Gent?
I think you're putting too much stall in one off cup competitions tbh. Yes Man City went further than Arsenal last season in the CL. Yet this season, they just reached the same stage? So did their experience change so drastically in one season or Man City's defence became less suited to Europe etc?
Its worth remembering I think the difficulty pretty much all the English clubs have had in their first attempts at the CL.
I mean, Ferguson's record early on in his Man Utd career reads like this: Knocked out in the 1st round of the UEFA cup by Torpedo Moscow. Knocked out in the Champions league second round (ie before the Group stage) by Galatasary. Finished 3rd in the group stage behind Goteburg and Barcelona in the CL. Knocked out in the UEFA cup 1st round by Rotor Volgograd. Then finally, 5 years into his forays into proper European football as a Man Utd manager, reached the CL semi final.
These things take time, experience, mentality and also definitely the right players too. We are still on that journey and I don't think this season's performances and results can be explained by any one factor or are that unusual for English clubs in Europe.
I don't know whether they are more suited but they did better than Spurs in Europe this season.
It's not one off competition, it's taking into consideration what happened in Europe in 3 seasons. Spurs have won 1 KO tie in 3 years and that's an awful record.
It doesn't make sense to use examples from 20 years back, back them PL was completely different. Foreign rule restriction, English clubs were way behind European teams. Spurs are not new to Europe also, they always qualified for Europa league. Also the teams they played weren't experienced or some Tier 1 teams. Wonder why teams like Malaga, Monaco, PSG all did better in CL without any excuses?
I said this even when the excuse was used for City that they lack experience in Europe when the team was full of players who played in CL, managed by manager who had experience in CL.
His ability on the ball is nothing special so he isn't a force in the biggest of games.
Yeah, uhm, those compelling arguments aren't going to be listened here as what's important is the here and now. Right now spurs is the 12th biggest club on the Deloitte money league. The reason we're the biggest is cause of how we monopolized the league for so many years that we still have credit. If we continue this current trajectory we'll be heading backwards in a jiffy.
I believe that Spurs didn't do themselves justice in Europe - partly because of the Wembley factor. Your claim in effect is that Spurs did do themselves justice - the justice being that we are allegedly not good enough and that we allegedly need to improve the first XI to do better.
I've already explained why your claim lacks credibility. You mention Leverkusen, but they would not be capable of finishing 3rd in the Prem like Spurs did last season, nor capable of sitting in 2nd place in the Prem now (you yourself say that they are "not all that"). This further goes to illustrate that Spurs are a lot better than they managed to show in Europe.
Key point.
PL teams can't even beat the second tier of teams with any regularity these days.
Even if Real,Barca,A. Madrid,Bayern were kicked of next season CL I doubt a PL team would win it.
You said earlier "your team needs better players" and "While those players might look like all that in the premiership scale, in the bigger scheme of things they aren't hence why you'll struggle in Europe"
Spurs messed up a golden opportunity last season in the CL. It was a pretty decent draw given they were in pot 3. But these things happen.
But the Europa league early exit is very costly. Spurs are now going to be in pot 3 again and it makes it very difficult for them to progress.
Let's not forget that our league form during the CL games weren't amazing either, and we lacked cohesion and key players. Yes we under performed, but I think we will do much better next year, unless the Wembley curse actually is real... 
I said you need better players? Must be someone else.
Fair enough.
I'm talking about the CL. This is only the second time we've qualified for the CL. All the English clubs have struggled at least once in their first few times of qualifying for the CL.
Well, how about examples from 6 years back? When we reached the CL QF? Then next season, ended up getting knocked out of the EL group stage by....PAOK and Rubin Kazan?
My posts are based on facts and what happened. Yours is based on assumptions.
I'm talking about Spurs European record.
6 years back your team was almost completely different. So not sure what that has to do with Poch and his Spurs team.
Let's not forget that our league form during the CL games weren't amazing either, and we lacked cohesion and key players. Yes we under performed, but I think we will do much better next year, unless the Wembley curse actually is real...
White Hart Lane Pitch Size - 110 yds x 73 yds
Wembley Pitch Size - 115 yds by 75 yds
I know that doesn't sound like much, but listen: Twitter Post (wasn't embedding)
Upton Park - 110 yds x 70 yds
Olympic Stadium - 115 yds by 74 yds yards
So it's not a curse, I just think your lads struggle playing at Wembley for the reasons Antonio describes.
Let's not forget that our league form during the CL games weren't amazing either, and we lacked cohesion and key players. Yes we under performed, but I think we will do much better next year, unless the Wembley curse actually is real...
Yep. I think there were a lot of reasons like I said.
Poor form in general at the beginning of the season, some poor tactics from Poch. It is difficult to play like we did at Wembley for multiple reasons. I also think we under estimated some of the teams, Monaco especially. We smashed them 4-0 last season and were surprised by a resurgent Monaco in our first CL game. That kind of set the tone a bit.
Motivation was also an issue in the EL I think.
All sounds like excuses true and I 100% agree that we should have done better, in both. But I really do think people are often too eager to jump on easy and simple reasons.
No. My posts have been based facts:
1) Spurs record at WHL is phenomenal this season - the best home record in the Prem I believe.
2) Spurs record for Wembley 'home' games this season was terrible.
My only assumption was that, if playing in the Prem, Leverkusen would not be doing as well as Spurs last season and this. But then you yourself said Leverkusen were "not all that".
Yes. Spurs don't exist in a vacuum. We've not done anything differently in the CL than Arsenal, Man Utd, Liverpool or Man City, who all struggled at least once in their first couple of goes.
And I'm not comparing directly to this team, or saying its the same team. But a team that in one season was able to get through to the CL quarter finals found themselves next season crashing out of the group stage of the Europa league. Surely the reasons for success in a European campaign in whichever competition may come down to a bit more than just whether your defence is suited for Europe or not?
Also, I didn't really explore this earlier. So in your opinion, Man City, Man Utd, Arsenal and Leicester have defences that are more suited to Europe than Spurs? In what way is that the case and why?
That's why I'm saying may be Spurs can't handle European style attack. This isn't the first time when some team not doing so well in Pl doing better in CL.
Even taking your example why didn't Spurs struggle first time? Where was all the excuses of settling in, inexperience and all that?
I have already said that, those team have done better in CL and Europa. Maybe the teams knew how to play in Europe rather than being naive.
It's not really hard to think some teams might struggle to handle European style. Liverpool, Chelsea did well in Europe even when other teams did better in league.
Because as I've said, it wasn't always the first time that those other teams struggled.
I actually do think there was an element of naivety in how we played, especially when it came to in game management.
No, its not difficult to imagine that. I just find it difficult to believe that those four English clubs are so much more suited to Europe than Spurs but each to their own.
You can check the PL table and also CL performance of English teams in CL, maybe you'll see it's not that uncommon.
Yep its quite easy to check. The two best clubs in the premier league in the last ten years have been Man Utd and Chelsea, who've won all but three titles between them in that time. In the same time, they've been the only two English clubs to win the CL and the only two to reach the final.
Between them, all of the other English clubs have managed a grand total of 3 Semi-final appearances between them in the past ten years (until City did it again last season, the last time was 2008/2009).
So yeah, there are a few exceptions season to season. Chelsea winning the CL and finishing 6th for example. But success in the competition over a prolonged period of time seems to follow relatively closely to performance in the league.
As others have said I would classify Eriksen easily as a top level player who we would miss the most if he wasn't available or sold. You don't need top level players in every position to win things it's all about a good blend and balance. We are certainly a better team than we showed in Europe.
Pochettino is quality Id love for him and Spurs to nick it this year.
So you think this is exception? How do you explain Spurs failure in Europa?
Arsenal were better team than Liverpool for years but Liverpool performed well in CL. Like I said there are many examples.
A lack of managing the game schedule, an inexperience of the squad of competing at the top of the league and handling Europe and playing at Wembley. Also let's remember football is football it's unpredictable. We have seen many top English clubs dumped out of the CL and the Europa League to smaller clubs.
Over the past two seasons, the points tally of the top seven teams combined is:
Spurs 135
Arsenal 125
Man City 124
Chelsea 122
Man Utd 120
Liverpool 120
Leicester 117
Great consistency by Tottenham.
Spurs 135
Arsenal 125
Man City 124
Chelsea 122
Man Utd 120
Liverpool 120
Leicester 117
Great consistency by Tottenham.
Or inconsistency by the rest.
The second place is in the bag by now.
They can even capitalise on an unlikely Chelsea collapse. Great season by Spurs, again.
I actually do want them to steal it, it'll be kind of amazing.
I actually do want them to steal it, it'll be kind of amazing.
I would also classify Alderweireld as a top level player - his record speaks for itself and he's a brilliant defender to watch.
They are unstoppable at home. Too bad for them that next season they'll have to play at Wembley.
That's a great news. Let's hope their form descrease.
- Status