Tottenham after Postecoglou

Status
Not open for further replies.
Awaydays72 said:
I can’t understand why spurs would go down the fat mess route, instead of going for Roberto de Zerbi, unless they’ve been told to fcuk off by Brighton, and De Zebri.
A manager that’s already proved he has a very good understanding of that league.
Click to expand...
Brighton have a great set up at the moment.

If I was De Zerbi I would say no to spurs.
 
Viatrophy said:
Sorry mate that last sentence is embarrassing. We lost every game, they also had a shite campaign but to say that it was worse when we both placed last is embarrassing.
Click to expand...

One team got 6.5pts in the co-efficient, the other 6pts.

They had an easier group and still failed to get third, even when it included one of those poor teams we beat on the run to Seville…

With a Summer to plan, their budget + draw, I’d suggest they had a poorer Euro campaign.
 
BrooklynBlue said:
One team got 6.5pts in the co-efficient, the other 6pts.

They had an easier group and still failed to get third, even when it included one of those poor teams we beat on the run to Seville…

With a Summer to plan, their budget + draw, I’d suggest they had a poorer Euro campaign.
Click to expand...
simply_the_best said:
We gained more co-efficient points than they did this season.
Click to expand...

Serious question is that from the qualifying rounds? Because that obviously explains it. I can’t imagine we got too many points from getting beat in every game.
 
Viatrophy said:
Serious question is that from the qualifying rounds? Because that obviously explains it. I can’t imagine we got too many points from getting beat in every game.
Click to expand...

It’s the overall campaign, of course. Getting through the qualifiers against two very decent sides was an excellent performance - or are we now just to dismiss this?

Achieving CL qualification was a success. The group stage was a disaster but that’s not what I am debating.
 
FDB1978 said:
He's certainly had more than his fair share of luck I'd say with Rangers having three different managers during his tenure and all the upheaval that brings. Getting key fixtures moved at a vital stage of the season last year and most importantly he's been financially backed more than any other manager ever has in Scottish football history.

He's not a terrible manager by any means but if you're approaching 60 and you haven't managed anywhere in Europe other than the Greek 4th division and SPFL it's probably for a reason.
Click to expand...
You could look at the other way if he gets the job that means the people that make the decisions at these clubs believe hes a premiership level manager now. I also find it difficult to accept anyone that just spends a long time in any top leagues in europe must be a wonderful coach, some will just keeping getting jobs because they have the most experience.

Maybe doing well in Japan or Australia or even Scotland is a bit more difficult than we think. We will certainly be far more positive about someone winning for Rangers and not too worried about the "levels" if Beale can do similar in the next couple of years.

Its a bit of an odd debate, we have moved on from hes got no chance to trying to predict how many months, weeks maybe, he will last as theres absolutely no chance the guy will be successful and do a good job at that club, a club that would be happy with any cup win and delighted with a top 4 finish which Newcastle have done.

I am just waiting for the first post about Neville and Carraghers raction on this one.........aye telling you wait to the guys find ooot they will be going nuts, an spfl manager in the best league in the world, fs.
 
Wellington said:
We have to stop using Europe as a yardstick when we just got humiliated in an all-time worst performance in the groups.

Sorry lads, I’d rather dominate Scotland like they have for the last decade, than win some knockout ties. We’ll fall behind their trophy room before 2030, no way am I cool with that.
Click to expand...
Fair enough - take European results out of the equation then
Do you think AP's up to the Spurs job ?
Do you think it would be an inspired appointment with a good chance of success ?
 
Viatrophy said:
Serious question is that from the qualifying rounds? Because that obviously explains it. I can’t imagine we got too many points from getting beat in every game.
Click to expand...


Of course it includes the Qualifiers, there's little doubt or argument that our group games were embarrassing but you can't discount those 2 Qualifiers both tough games and a great achievement to qualify.
 
Shengus Malengus said:
He's not suggesting swapping a title win for a European final appearance.

He clearly stated a European final WIN.
Click to expand...
Aye but that’s just daft cos we would all trade the nacho novo Falkirk cup final for a European cup

The way he’s taking is different though
 
academical said:
Fascinating thread. Rooted in the mistaken yet persistent belief that Postecoglou is a poor manager.

Hands up, I was among those who thought he was a dud when Celtic appointed him. As did every Celtic fan I know. He seemed like a rebound appointment after Howe jilted them (which he was), but he came with a decent pedigree - league wins in Australia and Japan, and managed Australia at the World Cup. And a couple of bad results while he was building his team cemented the view that his experience wasn't relevant to Europe.

He recruited well from markets he knew, chose a swashbuckling style that blew away the weaker teams in Scotland, and went on a two season run of virtual invulnerability (domestically). Yet we kept hearing narratives about how his luck would change, he would get found out, his style would tire his players, it would lead to injuries and burn out, and bad results when they came (they never did) would dent his team’s confidence.

We’re still underestimating him. It’s not so outlandish that Spurs want him. His weaknesses are apparent, when playing more tactically astute teams that know how to defend against all-out attack. But he’ll get to trade up to better players, and maybe, just maybe, he’ll win Spurs a cup or get them back into Europe - which is success from where they are right now.

And he’ll be a big loss to Celtic, who seem to have no obvious replacement lined up. I expect a period of instability for them, some unhappy players in the dressing room, and a faltering start to next season. If Beale can take advantage, Rangers could build a league-winning lead by the Autumn.
Click to expand...

As always, the truth isn't necessarily one thing or the other, it's a mixture and relies a lot on the context.

He has absolutely bought well, at least initially. Bought players for his style. Put square pegs in square holes. His style is very well coached into them, every single player knows what is expected of them. And that style is in many ways pefect for most games in Scotland...it even worked against Rangers until more recently when things have been a bit tighter, though they've still got results.

But his style doesn't work as well if we go back to 3 subs, as an example. So in that regard he's been fortunate. He's been able to outspend the rest by orders of magnitude, which again is pretty fortunate. He has failed in European football with this style, and failed pretty overwhelmingly. He has also had the luxury of Rangers dropping points where we really shouldn't, meaning even in games where they're not overwhelming the opposition, there is a lack of pressure and they inevitably get the job done. That's fortunate, though their domestic record can't be questioned, it is very, very good. But he clearly has no other option but to play that style, which means good teams can and have worked it out and he can't change it.

We'll see how he gets on at Spurs. If I was a betting man I'd go with what I said earlier in the thread - an initial good run followed by a quick and unrecoverable drop-off. If he's getting Spurs into the CL and winning a cup, I'll eat the leftovers of that poster's trousers from earlier in the thread.
 
simply_the_best said:
We gained more co-efficient points than they did this season.
Click to expand...
simply_the_best said:
Of course it includes the Qualifiers, there's little doubt or argument that our group games were embarrassing but you can't discount those 2 Qualifiers both tough games and a great achievement to qualify.
Click to expand...

Mate seriously clutching here. We gained more co-efficient points and beating USG and PSV was brilliant but you can’t compare qualifiers to the group stages. If a shettleston said that to me I’d literally laugh in their face.
 
Won't be a surprise if they try going for another with links to the city group. E.g Maresca, or even take a punt with Vieria
 
BrooklynBlue said:
It’s the overall campaign, of course. Getting through the qualifiers against two very decent sides was an excellent performance - or are we now just to dismiss this?

Achieving CL qualification was a success. The group stage was a disaster but that’s not what I am debating.
Click to expand...

Bad comparison then. If Patrick Thistle went a season unbeaten in the Championship would you take them seriously if they said they got more points than us? Celtic literally didn’t play qualifiers (because of our amazing Euro exploits).
 
Viatrophy said:
Mate seriously clutching here. We gained more co-efficient points and beating USG and PSV was brilliant but you can’t compare qualifiers to the group stages. If a shettleston said that to me I’d literally laugh in their face.
Click to expand...
They shat the bed in a group they should have finished third at worst. Ajax was our rival for third. We had an horrendous injury list, during that campaign.
 
muttley said:
We were architects of our own downfall in most cases. The Fat Man, however, has been an unmitigated failure in Europe. No Rangers Manager successful on the domestic trophy front would be given the same free pass by the media on that issue as he has.
Click to expand...
Walter had the rattlers on the mantelpiece during NIAR yet was constantly criticised by the media for the poor overall performances in Europe. Most Bears agree(d) the teams were underachieving in Europe for the most part and did not have to have this shoved down their throats by jealous media fuckwits.
 
Zapp Brannigan said:
As always, the truth isn't necessarily one thing or the other, it's a mixture and relies a lot on the context.

He has absolutely bought well, at least initially. Bought players for his style. Put square pegs in square holes. His style is very well coached into them, every single player knows what is expected of them. And that style is in many ways pefect for most games in Scotland...it even worked against Rangers until more recently when things have been a bit tighter, though they've still got results.

But his style doesn't work as well if we go back to 3 subs, as an example. So in that regard he's been fortunate. He's been able to outspend the rest by orders of magnitude, which again is pretty fortunate. He has failed in European football with this style, and failed pretty overwhelmingly. He has also had the luxury of Rangers dropping points where we really shouldn't, meaning even in games where they're not overwhelming the opposition, there is a lack of pressure and they inevitably get the job done. That's fortunate, though their domestic record can't be questioned, it is very, very good. But he clearly has no other option but to play that style, which means good teams can and have worked it out and he can't change it.

We'll see how he gets on at Spurs. If I was a betting man I'd go with what I said earlier in the thread - an initial good run followed by a quick and unrecoverable drop-off. If he's getting Spurs into the CL and winning a cup, I'll eat the leftovers of that poster's trousers from earlier in the thread.
Click to expand...
Won't last the season and will be at another club before season is out.

Thats not all on him though, just that spurs are a basket case as well. So good riddance ya fat prick
 
SDF said:
They'll push the boat out as much as possible I'd wager. No danger are they taking a risk against a Rangers team that has a manager who knows what he's doing domestically.

Their support would go apeshit if they settled for Brown or Kennedy.

I don't think they'll land a Rodgers or Favre but it wouldn't shock me if they got someone like Marsch.
Click to expand...

The actually were throwing up the white flag with AP. Gerrard was in place and they thought they needed the building blocks with little to no hope of winning the title that year. They hit lucky with AP, their signings, covid timing and Villa taking Gerrard. They won’t be in that same market again like you say.
 
gersandproud said:
Fair enough - take European results out of the equation then
Do you think AP's up to the Spurs job ?
Do you think it would be an inspired appointment with a good chance of success ?
Click to expand...
He’ll either do incredibly well or disastrously bad. It can only go those ways. His style depends on a midfield skill/effort superiority and I can’t see Hojbjerg or Skipp dominating the EPL for 38 games, they’ll take some batterings IMO.
 
academical said:
Yet we kept hearing narratives about how his luck would change, he would get found out, his style would tire his players, it would lead to injuries and burn out, and bad results when they came (they never did) would dent his team’s coconfidence.
Click to expand...


His luck amd results did change drastically, the minute they called last years winter break early and then allowed 5 subs.
 
Viatrophy said:
All of that is true but not relevant to my previous point. We still lost every game and barely laid a glove on anyones. If that had been them we’d piss ourself laughing.
Click to expand...
We've had multiple seasons laughing at them in Europe. As brutal as that campaign was, we've had far more success.
 
Coopers left foot. said:
We've had multiple seasons laughing at them in Europe. As brutal as that campaign was, we've had far more success.
Click to expand...

Again I agree but that’s not the point I was replying to. Saying we got more coefficient points when we played qualifiers and they didn’t is a very disingenuous argument and the sort of thing I’d laugh at them for,
 
Viatrophy said:
Again I agree but that’s not the point I was replying to. Saying we got more coefficient points when we played qualifiers and they didn’t is a very disingenuous argument and the sort of thing I’d laugh at them for,
Click to expand...
I got that bud. But still we knocked out a very good psv side. Onwards and upwards.
 
Everything is relative on the Euro debate.

Of course we got humiliated. But the fact remains our group was far, far harder.

if we had Leipzig and Shakhtar, I’m dreaming of 2nd and frankly not tolerating anything less than third.
 
DoubleWhopper said:
Everything is relative on the Euro debate.

Of course we got humiliated. But the fact remains our group was far, far harder.

if we had Leipzig and Shakhtar, I’m dreaming of 2nd and frankly not tolerating anything less than third.
Click to expand...

We would’ve got pumped from them as well we were absolutely horrific in Europe.
 
Viatrophy said:
Bad comparison then. If Patrick Thistle went a season unbeaten in the Championship would you take them seriously if they said they got more points than us? Celtic literally didn’t play qualifiers (because of our amazing Euro exploits).
Click to expand...

Viatrophy said:
Again I agree but that’s not the point I was replying to. Saying we got more coefficient points when we played qualifiers and they didn’t is a very disingenuous argument and the sort of thing I’d laugh at them for,
Click to expand...

Yes, when we're in Pot 3 due to co-efficient points gained it'll be a right laugh.

It's not as though the qualifers were against teams from Malta, for example. PSV were as good as a number of sides in the group stages. You can hardly dismiss those games. The yahoos don't exactly have a great record in those types of matches.

We're talking about the overall European campaign. We acknowledge how shit the group stages went. Theirs was arguably worse given the teams they were against.
 
BrooklynBlue said:
Yes, when we're in Pot 3 due to co-efficient points gained it'll be a right laugh.

It's not as though the qualifers were against teams from Malta, for example. PSV were as good as a number of sides in the group stages. You can hardly dismiss those games. The yahoos don't exactly have a great record in those types of matches.

We're talking about the overall European campaign. We acknowledge how shit the group stages went. Theirs was arguably worse given the teams they were against.
Click to expand...

I’m not dismissing those games but to say we gained more coefficient points when those points only include qualifiers they they didn’t play is a bad faith argument.
 
Manc Bear said:
Serious question, why would he want to leave the prem league and london?
Click to expand...
According to many, and I think he is quoted as asying.
He wants to manage them, at some stage.
Don't shoot the messenger.

I grew up with the guy.
And as it's been said on here many.
Many. Many times, he comes from good stock.
Grew up a massive Gers supporter.father ran Rangers buses etc....
But he got his head turned (as you would) when he signed for their boys club.

I will leave it at that.
 
LarkfiedLoyalNS said:
We would’ve got pumped from them as well we were absolutely horrific in Europe.
Click to expand...

I’m not so sure.

It all just escalated for us, Amsterdam was a nightmare. We held our own v Napoli for an hour then after the red card, the game and the campaign utterly folded.

If we’re facing the likes of Shakhtar on a neutral venue early in the group, I’d be fancying us to get a good result. Then you’re only one home win from being in with a shout of third.

We seem to be on two extremes re Postegoclou. Extreme praise and constant excuses and deflection.

It really is as simple as the middle ground - his style works very well domestically and is hopeless in Europe.

We’ve seen them go to the likes of Betis and Leverkusen and throw away 2 goal leads.

his “philosophy” just isn’t conducive to these higher levels - you don’t keep getting exposed like that through bad luck.
 
Viatrophy said:
Mate seriously clutching here. We gained more co-efficient points and beating USG and PSV was brilliant but you can’t compare qualifiers to the group stages. If a shettleston said that to me I’d literally laugh in their face.
Click to expand...

Our win over PSV was better than anything they did in Europe last season. In hindsight, that was a terrific result.
 
Wellington said:
We have to stop using Europe as a yardstick when we just got humiliated in an all-time worst performance in the groups.

Sorry lads, I’d rather dominate Scotland like they have for the last decade, than win some knockout ties. We’ll fall behind their trophy room before 2030, no way am I cool with that.
Click to expand...
Tbh the Champions League campaigns of 1996/97 & 2009/10 were worse than last year.
 
Viatrophy said:
I’m not dismissing those games but to say we gained more coefficient points when those points only include qualifiers they they didn’t play is a bad faith argument.
Click to expand...

It's hardly 'bad faith' when it's the rules of the competition. It's odd the contortions made to justify their performances.

The end result of both our CL group stages was last place. They should have been looking at challenging for 2nd place vs. Leipzig and Shakhter.
 
BrooklynBlue said:
It's hardly 'bad faith' when it's the rules of the competition. It's odd the contortions made to justify their performances.

The end result of both our CL group stages was last place. They should have been looking at challenging for 2nd place vs. Leipzig and Shakhter.
Click to expand...

Yes the end result of both of our performances was last place but you started by saying our last place was somehow better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top