Deja vu

[tommo84]

People don't like change. Generally we don't. The idea of changing job, moving house, or even a change to our daily routine scares people. I saw a survey a while ago that said most people have the same sandwich for lunch every day. We simply don't like change… except when it comes to football. As football fans we rejoice at the idea of a 'new era'. New signings, new shirt, new stadium, new manager – we go all weak at the knees in anticipation. Of course it could all go wrong. The new signings might be shit. The new stadium might have no decent pubs nearby and crap transport links. The new shirt might be made by Puma (or even Pony!). None of this occurs to the average football fan when we hear the word 'new'. Instead we just think 'new' means 'better'. Moreover, the positive buzz that accompanies any such change can often snowball and escalate among the fans. With everything going on at Spurs right now, the official website could announce we've signed Emile Heskey and Titus Bramble and the masses would probably celebrate. They would bring plenty of top flight experience to the club after all…

At Spurs right now there is a lot of change going on. Villas-Boas in, Sigurdsson in, Vertonghen in, new coaches, new shirts (as with every season!). There are even changes going on which aren't officially going on yet. Luka looks set for Madrid, his replacement is reportedly Moutinho, Adebayor looks set to become a permanent fixture at the Lane, and the pursuit of Hugo Lloris for a fee in excess of £10m suggests a new goalkeeper is another priority ahead of the new season.

The fans seem to be loving it. 'Exciting times' is the most common phrase I've seen on my twitter feed lately, and those who have been tweeting it are right; these are exciting times for Spurs fans, but I do feel we've been here before. In August 2004 we entered our first game of the season with a starting XI which boasted 9 changes from the team who started the last game of 2003/4, with much excited talk among the fans of a 'new era', even though very few of us knew anything about Timothee Atouba or Erik Edman. The season started well but it soon went very wrong and the man who had been employed to lead that particular 'false dawn', Jacques Santini, quickly departed. In 2008 there was a similar feeling of anticipation and excitement ahead of Juande Ramos' first full season in charge. We had spent heavily on new recruitments, with an emphasis on youth, and expectations among the fans were high. Lest we forget how that ended. 2 points, 8 games, and we still haven't sold Giovani Dos Santos.

So forgive me for exhaling an air of caution amidst the winds of change which currently blow through Tottenham, but there is a touch of déjà vu here. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with Villas-Boas' appointment as I've written before (very happy), and I agree with the signings/targets the club is making as we approach 2012/13. I am just all too aware that sometimes change doesn't equate to improvement or progress. In 2004 it did, eventually, but only after all parties admitted a mistake had been made and Martin Jol took up the reigns from Santini. In 2008 it equated only to the need for more change. I see fans on twitter hailing the arrivals of this player and that coach and how it signals a radical change in direction, and I find myself questioning, 'is it all necessary?!'.

While many outsiders disagree with the change of manager at the club, the majority are in agreement that the squad Villas-Boas inherits is one of the more talented already assembled in English football. Admittedly, of that squad, we are about to lose one its leading talents, Luka Modric, and there is some plausibility to the rumours that Van der Vaart could depart. If we lose those two, along with replacing Friedel between the posts with Lloris (or some other GK who possesses a greater ability than Hellboy to 'sweep up' behind the back 4 as is required by Villas-Boas' high line), insert Vertonghen at the heart of defence, and accommodate both Sigurdsson and Luka's replacement (be that Moutinho or whoever) in the 3 man midfield we are likely to play, that represents a whole new spine to our team. A team that should have finished third. A team that played attractive football. A team that, in short, wasn't broken but is in danger of being deconstructed and put back together again.

I'm not criticising Villas-Boas. Some of those changes to the spine of our team are a necessity. Big Brad did great last season, but while he could certainly do it for one more year, the club needs to look beyond that, and so if we can get Lloris or a 'keeper of similar international ability, we should definitely seize that opportunity. Vertonghen at centre-back? He's very talented and we need a replacement for King Ledley. Whilst we all love him, even the most ardent Ledley fan has to admit that it does our defence no favours to be chopping and changing every other game to accommodate the man's knees (By the way, I dabbled with the idea of typing kneeds and going for an easy pun. I resisted.). So, while we still have Steven Caulker and Michael Dawson no doubt chomping at the bit to start alongside Kaboul, the addition of a top class centre-back was a definite necessity.

In midfield there is clearly a need to fill whatever void Luka Modric is set to leave. Breaking our transfer record to bring in a like-for-like replacement in the form of Joao Moutinho would be something of an admission that the heart of our midfield was our greatest asset, and that we must endeavour to keep the dynamic of our midfield the same, even if we do change from a 2-man centre midfield to a midfield 3. Up front, ironically a new signing will represent one of the few areas of continuity for us if and when Adebayor is confirmed as a permanent addition in our striking ranks, but even here there will be significant changes afoot if Van der Vaart is allowed to depart. While there are legitimate questions over how Rafa would fit into a 4-3-3 system, since his arrival in 2010 he has been a regular source of goals, and goals are often the hardest thing to replace in a team, as we found in 2008 when we lost Berbatov and Keane and tried to replace them with Pav.

So it's hard to argue that many of the changes already made or expected shortly aren't needed, but such significant changes through the middle of the team places an equally great need for continuity out wide. There is no doubt that Kyle Walker and Gareth Bale will continue to operate in their respective wide positions, but if we are to experience a smooth and successful transition in the centre of defence and midfield, there is a case to be made that Benoit Assou-Ekotto and Aaron Lennon will be of equal importance, even though these are players who have had their critics among the Spurs faithful, and even more so among the media. As players who have divided the fans at times (since 2008 in Lennon's case, since birth in Benny's), it will be interesting to see what Villas-Boas makes of them. Their continued involvement and the attacking threat that quartet pose from out wide may enable us to paper over any cracks which appear through the spine as players, old and new, adjust to the new system and their new team-mates.

Yes these are exciting times, but the last time I felt this excited we had our worst ever start to a season and had to start again 8 games in. The changes we've made so far are exciting, but everyone at the club should be weary of making changes purely for the sake of it. The squad he inherits isn't as strong as the media often suggest, but perhaps Villas-Boas' first challenge is to step back and make sure his new regime doesn't try to fix some of those areas that weren't broken.

Taken straight from my blog: musingsofanangryfan.squarespace.com

The last one I did (on AVB's appointment) got a very positive response on twitter so thought I'd share the new one on here.

 

[Montasura]

Good post tommo, and very well written. I'll try to answer the one overriding question, that being Is Change Necessary?

In this case in particular I think change absolutely was necessary for two key reasons...the first being that the loss of Modric being all but a forgone conclusion. You rightly point out that this was the midfield that almost got us third place, but everyone knew that it was most likely his last season in a Spurs shirt and many, many posters on here, rightly, pointed out that to replace Modric was almost impossible, whereas the more obvious option was to replace our style of play, formation, etc. In essence that is what AVB will do, and neither Sigurdsson or Moutinho will be direct like for like replacements.

My second point relates not only to Spurs but is a more general answer to why change is necessary...simply because a lack of change breeds stagnation. That is fine if you are stagnating at the very top, therefore no real need to change. But, to move to a Spurs point of view, we weren't at the top. And if you want to make that next step upwards then, yes change is often necessary, a gamble needs to be taken. Of course it might not work out, but success doesn't often land in one's lap...more often one needs to have the balls to take that gamble and make a change. Ultimately when that first whistle blows on 18th August there will be a lot of finger crossing and only time will tell.

 

[greaves]

Yep, agreed (and good post above too), life and change are inextricably linked, co-dependent. We don't need a 'new Modric' any more than we need a messiah. We just need a team that works, and whatever individual parts necessary to make that happen. If AVB and Modric move on, then so be it. It's a brave new world with a brave new manager and a brave new set-up. Good. And if it feels like a bright new dawn that's because it is. If we crash and burn, big deal, we start over and the moaners and anxiety freaks can do their thing for as long as they need to. I think that's a positive way to look at things, for me anyhow.

 

[jolsnogross]

Real change at Spurs would be to stick with a manager over a full cycle or two of playing staff. But we don't do it. This will be Levy's sixth manager in about a decade. Would he run another company in the same way - constantly replacing managers after a year and a half or so?

Hopefully he's finally got it right with AVB. If he hasn't, he must surely admit that he's crap at picking managers a lot of the time and has a fetish about undoing the good work of the few good ones he picks.

That was a good article, by the way. There's a worry that a sparkly brand new manager with a continental name (double-barreled in this case!!) is breeding the sort of blind optimism that you identified. It'll be bloody hard to maintain the standard of the past three seasons. And AVB will know all about it if he finishes 5th, let alone a place or two lower.

 

[Gaz_Gammon]

I think that we need to kick a ball in anger before any qualification can be made on the greatness or not of the AVB appointment.

 

[Dougal]

Don't we already have a thread on this?

 

[beuller]

Already some great posts above.

All I will add is that as a consultant I see many different workplaces. I imagine some parallels can be drawn with the business of football.

In general, my most difficult projects come where the client is paralysed by a fear of change and stagnation has set in.

It's also difficult where staff turnover is unusually high.

I think what Daniel levy has done here and in the past is take a calculated gamble. With the position the club is in, he has decided someone more progressive than redknapp can take the club further.

If anything, the healthy position the club are in (financial and image) makes this the best possible time to make the change.

 

[camaj]

In Levy's defence, he's only made to errors in my book, sacking Graham and sacking Jol.

The post sums up something I've felt for a long time, that people don't like change and change for changes sake is often pointless. Finding the middle ground isn't easy. When change is necessary it's hard to convince people of it, especially when you can only justify that argument months later. I found myself in this position over the last two seasons. I also argued that sacking Jol was wrong, it did feel like change for the sake of change. I believe that was the time to stick with a manager who'd proved to be decent and that a steady ship with steady progress was needed. If AVB turns out to be decent then let him have at least as long as Harry if not more.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

Real change at Spurs would be to stick with a manager over a full cycle or two of playing staff. But we don't do it. This will be Levy's sixth manager in about a decade. Would he run another company in the same way - constantly replacing managers after a year and a half or so?

Hopefully he's finally got it right with AVB. If he hasn't, he must surely admit that he's crap at picking managers a lot of the time and has a fetish about undoing the good work of the few good ones he picks...

I have been debating whether to write the OP for about a fortnight and I'm quite pleased that someone else did it, because it needed writing and I can't be fucked to do it anymore.

There are several good responses, but I've quoted above the one that adds the other point that I would have made. I delayed writing anything about this because I can't any longer contain my contempt for the lemmings/sheep/fools who are all enthused and excited about the "brave new world" 1) because they have swallowed the club's blatant spin wholesale and 2) because the appointment of the new manager was rapidly followed by 2-3 signings, thus providing the novelty-fix that they require to sustain their short-attention-span enthusiasm for the club.

Signing Vertonghen is obviously a canny move and signing Sigurdsson is probably likewise, but neither move has anything whatsoever to do with the change of management, despite the flurry of idiotic press stories about how "AVB has already signed two players". Of course, Villas-Boas has absolutely fuck-all to do with these arrivals, which may even have been made more difficult by the change of management. Their proximity in time is just a mixture of good fortune and spin.

I've been a fan of managerial stability for years. I didn't want us to sack Jol; I grudgingly admitted that Ramos' position had become untenable about a week before he went; I think disposing of Redknapp (which does not appear to have been a "sacking", if you pay close attention to the actual statements at the time) bordered on the insane and certainly constitutes an act of recklessness.

In many ways, Redknapp dug his own grave with his tongue and then jumped into it and demanded "go on, sack me". He's a bit of an arsehole that way, always has been. Nevertheless, whatever the state of the working relationship between Harry and Daniel, in footballing terms, nothing was broken and nothing needed fixing, late-season slumps and media-motor-mouth irritations notwithstanding. The players felt comfortable, except during the three months when they thought their manager was about to abandon them for the England job. They liked playing for him and the squad felt like a team. That had a great intangible value and I think Levy is daft to have squandered it voluntarily, presumably under the misapprehension that it can be replicated at will by any manager.

Like every other Spurs fan, I'll be thrilled if Levy's latest unprovoked big gamble pays off: that Villas-Boas remains as our manager through 20 years of broad success, that our stadium development raises our profile, revenue and clout and serves, along with managerial stability under AVB, to establish Spurs as one of the world's major footballing powers.

But I don't like the risk profile. I wouldn't have done this now. I would have stuck with annoying Harry Redknapp until he was ready to retire and replaced him then.

 

[Thesoccershrink]

Very thoughtful article and replies. You're right, as a professional psychologist I know that change is generally stressful but the really toxic element in change, and thus stress, is lack of control. So changes you have no control over are really tough, those you chose less so.

One issue that may be in play here is the development of the game. Every profession, including my own, undergoes significant change every few years (or sooner). In my case the technology that allows me to do mini-EEGs (brain-maps) and brain training from my laptop has transformed my work and undoubtedly will shape the practice in general in the years ahead. So what are the developments in the game that seem to be important that could have influenced Levy to switch now?

Certainly there are some tactical and technical changes considering Barca and Spain's success. There are almost certainly training, nutritional and 'lifestyle' developments that need to be embraced. In short, Levy may have felt that Harry was not the one to adapt to the changing landscape and that he needed a younger, more visionary manager to lead Spurs and keep them at the forefront of the changing game. If that was the case I can't argue against Levy's decision-making. And if that was at least partly behind his decision then this appointment has to be judged in the longer term. The bar has been set high but I suspect that this is Levy's investment in the longer haul and that's what really matters not where we are in the table come December.

 

[doom]

Redknapp did indeed dig his own grave and obviously there were major issues going on between him and Levy. Redknapp lost my support not during our poor form but after Chelsea knocked us out of the CL, when he was mouthing off nonsense about managerial stability etc. it was so totally inappropriate and insulting to the fans. He had to go!
As has been pointed out, certain positions in the team need change and I believe we are not going gung-ho to change the team completely, AVB is not that stupid and he certainly didn't do that at Chelsea (another story). The players we have got and are getting in have so far had little input from AVB, goalkeeper centre half and midfield back up. It looks like AVB likes VDV and we may see Moutinho in as a Modric type replacement.
The changes which are the risky ones are AVB's way of playing the game, seemingly so so different from Redknapps approach. I don't buy into the Redknapp myth that the players loved playing for him, I think we'll find AVB just as amenable. The real changes will be tactical ones. We know AVB is a team formation genius but he has yet to get that right in the PL. For me that is the greatest risk and one that nobody will know will work until mid season at least. I'd argue that Spurs need to take these risks to progress. Sometimes we have had to take a step back under Levy but we have undeniably progressed since he took the reigns and I back his judgement on this.

oh and To DARE IS TO DO by the way!

 

[spud]

Taken straight from my blog: musingsofanangryfan.squarespace.com

The last one I did (on AVB's appointment) got a very positive response on twitter so thought I'd share the new one on here.

I'm glad that you did, tommo. Very enjoyable article, much of which I agree with. Look forward to seeing your next one.

 

[jimbo]

I'm a change hunter.

 

[HotspurFC1950]

People don't like change. Generally we don't. The idea of changing job, moving house, or even a change to our daily routine scares people. I saw a survey a while ago that said most people have the same sandwich for lunch every day. We simply don't like change… except when it comes to football. As football fans we rejoice at the idea of a 'new era'. New signings, new shirt, new stadium, new manager – we go all weak at the knees in anticipation. Of course it could all go wrong. The new signings might be shit. The new stadium might have no decent pubs nearby and crap transport links. The new shirt might be made by Puma (or even Pony!). None of this occurs to the average football fan when we hear the word 'new'. Instead we just think 'new' means 'better'. Moreover, the positive buzz that accompanies any such change can often snowball and escalate among the fans. With everything going on at Spurs right now, the official website could announce we've signed Emile Heskey and Titus Bramble and the masses would probably celebrate. They would bring plenty of top flight experience to the club after all…

At Spurs right now there is a lot of change going on. Villas-Boas in, Sigurdsson in, Vertonghen in, new coaches, new shirts (as with every season!). There are even changes going on which aren't officially going on yet. Luka looks set for Madrid, his replacement is reportedly Moutinho, Adebayor looks set to become a permanent fixture at the Lane, and the pursuit of Hugo Lloris for a fee in excess of £10m suggests a new goalkeeper is another priority ahead of the new season.

The fans seem to be loving it. 'Exciting times' is the most common phrase I've seen on my twitter feed lately, and those who have been tweeting it are right; these are exciting times for Spurs fans, but I do feel we've been here before. In August 2004 we entered our first game of the season with a starting XI which boasted 9 changes from the team who started the last game of 2003/4, with much excited talk among the fans of a 'new era', even though very few of us knew anything about Timothee Atouba or Erik Edman. The season started well but it soon went very wrong and the man who had been employed to lead that particular 'false dawn', Jacques Santini, quickly departed. In 2008 there was a similar feeling of anticipation and excitement ahead of Juande Ramos' first full season in charge. We had spent heavily on new recruitments, with an emphasis on youth, and expectations among the fans were high. Lest we forget how that ended. 2 points, 8 games, and we still haven't sold Giovani Dos Santos.

So forgive me for exhaling an air of caution amidst the winds of change which currently blow through Tottenham, but there is a touch of déjà vu here. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with Villas-Boas' appointment as I've written before (very happy), and I agree with the signings/targets the club is making as we approach 2012/13. I am just all too aware that sometimes change doesn't equate to improvement or progress. In 2004 it did, eventually, but only after all parties admitted a mistake had been made and Martin Jol took up the reigns from Santini. In 2008 it equated only to the need for more change. I see fans on twitter hailing the arrivals of this player and that coach and how it signals a radical change in direction, and I find myself questioning, 'is it all necessary?!'.

While many outsiders disagree with the change of manager at the club, the majority are in agreement that the squad Villas-Boas inherits is one of the more talented already assembled in English football. Admittedly, of that squad, we are about to lose one its leading talents, Luka Modric, and there is some plausibility to the rumours that Van der Vaart could depart. If we lose those two, along with replacing Friedel between the posts with Lloris (or some other GK who possesses a greater ability than Hellboy to 'sweep up' behind the back 4 as is required by Villas-Boas' high line), insert Vertonghen at the heart of defence, and accommodate both Sigurdsson and Luka's replacement (be that Moutinho or whoever) in the 3 man midfield we are likely to play, that represents a whole new spine to our team. A team that should have finished third. A team that played attractive football. A team that, in short, wasn't broken but is in danger of being deconstructed and put back together again.

I'm not criticising Villas-Boas. Some of those changes to the spine of our team are a necessity. Big Brad did great last season, but while he could certainly do it for one more year, the club needs to look beyond that, and so if we can get Lloris or a 'keeper of similar international ability, we should definitely seize that opportunity. Vertonghen at centre-back? He's very talented and we need a replacement for King Ledley. Whilst we all love him, even the most ardent Ledley fan has to admit that it does our defence no favours to be chopping and changing every other game to accommodate the man's knees (By the way, I dabbled with the idea of typing kneeds and going for an easy pun. I resisted.). So, while we still have Steven Caulker and Michael Dawson no doubt chomping at the bit to start alongside Kaboul, the addition of a top class centre-back was a definite necessity.

In midfield there is clearly a need to fill whatever void Luka Modric is set to leave. Breaking our transfer record to bring in a like-for-like replacement in the form of Joao Moutinho would be something of an admission that the heart of our midfield was our greatest asset, and that we must endeavour to keep the dynamic of our midfield the same, even if we do change from a 2-man centre midfield to a midfield 3. Up front, ironically a new signing will represent one of the few areas of continuity for us if and when Adebayor is confirmed as a permanent addition in our striking ranks, but even here there will be significant changes afoot if Van der Vaart is allowed to depart. While there are legitimate questions over how Rafa would fit into a 4-3-3 system, since his arrival in 2010 he has been a regular source of goals, and goals are often the hardest thing to replace in a team, as we found in 2008 when we lost Berbatov and Keane and tried to replace them with Pav.

So it's hard to argue that many of the changes already made or expected shortly aren't needed, but such significant changes through the middle of the team places an equally great need for continuity out wide. There is no doubt that Kyle Walker and Gareth Bale will continue to operate in their respective wide positions, but if we are to experience a smooth and successful transition in the centre of defence and midfield, there is a case to be made that Benoit Assou-Ekotto and Aaron Lennon will be of equal importance, even though these are players who have had their critics among the Spurs faithful, and even more so among the media. As players who have divided the fans at times (since 2008 in Lennon's case, since birth in Benny's), it will be interesting to see what Villas-Boas makes of them. Their continued involvement and the attacking threat that quartet pose from out wide may enable us to paper over any cracks which appear through the spine as players, old and new, adjust to the new system and their new team-mates.

Yes these are exciting times, but the last time I felt this excited we had our worst ever start to a season and had to start again 8 games in. The changes we've made so far are exciting, but everyone at the club should be weary of making changes purely for the sake of it. The squad he inherits isn't as strong as the media often suggest, but perhaps Villas-Boas' first challenge is to step back and make sure his new regime doesn't try to fix some of those areas that weren't broken.

Taken straight from my blog: musingsofanangryfan.squarespace.com

The last one I did (on AVB's appointment) got a very positive response on twitter so thought I'd share the new one on here.

Please go and join the filth Tommo.

 

[topaz]

Excellent piece and ensuing debate. I am with davidmatzdorf to the extent that I would not have taken the decision Levy did - I would have stuck with Harry for longer. Whatever the frustrations and the tactical deficiencies, Harry delivered the most exciting years we have had as Spurs fans for decades and you do not relinquish that without thinking very carefully indeed. Appointing AVB is a high-risk strategy - his failure at Chelsea, albeit largely because he was working with some of the least acceptable people on the planet, has set the press up for precisely the scenario David outlines - descending like a pack of ravening dogs as soon as results go astray.

Nevertheless, though I know that my brother, for example, is still sunk in the deepest gloom and cannot bring himself even to hope after the way last season finished, I find my own hopes still springing eternal - it's in the nature of being a football fan. It is absolutely clear that the transfer signings so far have had nothing to do with AVB - though an equally important signing, that of Bale to a new contract, probably did.

 

[Lucky22]

So, in a nut shell, you don't like change but realise it was needed?! That's an awful lot of writing to say what I have done in one simple sentence.

 

[tommo84]

So, in a nut shell, you don't like change but realise it was needed?! That's an awful lot of writing to say what I have done in one simple sentence.

Not quite. The overall (intended) point was that, while change is often welcomed by fans, it can leave a team vulnerable and at a time when there appears to be such a sudden clamour among the fans for wholesale change, Villas-Boas/Levy need to be careful to strike a balance between freshening things up and retaining some continuity/stability. That can only be achieved by identifying those areas which do need change and leaving other areas well alone. The news coming out of journos at today's press conference suggests Villas-Boas is well aware of this and so they think VdV will stay and also that we'll stick with the GKs we already have. Both would significantly reduce the disruption to the spine of the team and hopefully ease the transition to the new manager's way of playing.

I could have crammed it into one paragraph but I had a full hour to kill at work so...

 

[Lucky22]

I know exactly where you are coming from but forgive me if it simply comes across as a so-called typical Spurs fan putting a dampner on things.

In that regard, your link to Santini is a clever one but don't forget that from that failed plan we got Martin Jol and now we have Steffan Fruend as back-up to AVB! Smile my friend, smile!!

 

[tommo84]