FORMER Manager Watch: Nuno Espírito Santo

[WeGotLedley]

I feel the same, it upsets me that his abiding memory of Spurs will be getting abuse because he really did look sad. Equally his reputation is getting trashed in the media which just seems uncalled for, whatever we achieve this season, he contributed 5 league wins, which isn’t an easy thing, especially given what he had to put up with.

The season Poch got sacked he only had 3 wins and a couple of draws from 2 more games. Even Ramos didn get what Nuno did, given that he actually wanted the job, there is something profoundly unkind about his treatment.

It's exciting to have Conte of course it is, but I like the club and football a bit less today than I did.

Yeah. Think overall sentiment after a few days to reflect is while the football was terrible for large parts of games, what was thrown at him was pretty insane. The kane saga. The Argentina vs Brazil match that wasn't. Not getting the 1 player he asked for etc. And, there were patches that were good (City and 1st half vs Chelsea) in amongst the dross.
So - still glad he's gone as he was never the right style of manager. But feel like levy and fab should reflect on how they set someone up to fail. And genuinely hope Nuno takes a break but comes back somewhere and succeeds.

 

[spurs mental]

I'm sure it's been said but I've not seen one player wish him well or thank him on social media like we've seen previously. I know he only managed 15 games or so but it's pretty telling there was no bond between him and the players.

I absolutely can't wait to see these fuckers start running through walls again.

 

[Dougal]

He’s 47. I did not know that. His time at Spurs probably didn’t slow down the ageing process either.

 

[hughy]

I'm sure it's been said but I've not seen one player wish him well or thank him on social media like we've seen previously. I know he only managed 15 games or so but it's pretty telling there was no bond between him and the players.

I absolutely can't wait to see these fuckers start running through walls again.

I'm sure they would have sent him personal messages wishing him well etc. It seems a bit fake for them to come out and do it on social media after they clearly weren't interested in playing under him. If you look across the entire squad can you honestly say that one player, apart from possibly Skipp, gave 100% in ever appearance under Nuno? Nah.

 

[rez9000]

He would be surplus to requirements now though would he not? Or do you believe he was the missing link to make Nuno a success? Thanks enjoyed your reply.

That's kind of you to say, old chap.

But what I would say in reply is your attention is focused on the specific player, but that's not the point that I'm being critical of.

I'm not arguing the merits of whether we should have signed Traore specifically; I'm arguing about the inappropriateness of a chairman interfering with the footballing hierarchy he's supposedly taken a step back from. And doing so for financial reasons.

And added to that, the fact that Nuno's been sacked after only 17 games would not have been known at the time, so judging the decision about the appropriateness of signing Traore specifically can't be used as a gauge of whether that was a good decision or not.

All one needs to do is replace 'Adama Traore' with the words 'a player the coach wants' and the inappropriateness of Levy's action becomes clear.

 

[rez9000]

This is your take on what we were told, and that's fine.
My take is that Nuno, Paratici (and mendes) all tried to convince Levy that traore could play as a striker and so the second striker budget should be made available for him.
Traore is a great player - unplayable at times - but a striker he isn't. You do not have to research very long to find this out.

I don't expect any better from paratici - he likes to get deals done and will say anything. He's a salesman/deal-maker. But nuno was meant to be the man of integrity. He was meant to be honest. A football man. But the first time he is asked for an opinion, he sides with old friends against the interests of the club. Down to hell you go, nuno. This is life.

Of course we don't know this to be absolutely true, and we'll never know. But we know that we haven't a second striker, which is disgraceful. It is consistent with the view that nuno and paratici thought they could bounce Traore through at the last minute... to fill a gap... he is not suited to... to any extent.

I'm glad that Levy stood up to the scheming ~characters. Credit where credit is due.
I can't say I'm unhappy nuno has been sacked, so that is one problem gone. Paratici hopefully knows now that he can't get away with this shite.

See my reply to @piedpiper above

 

[newbie]

Poch, Jose you need to be a big personality to follow up I think he was to quite and distant.

 

[Ghost Hardware]

Conte's instagram Spaghetti Mafia grime tune haha what a legend! Hope he puts this on before matches in the changing room, I can imagine him listening to this smiling at the spaghetti mafia but also being buzzing.

This got deleted. Shame.

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

This got deleted. Shame.

I moved it to the Conte thread mate as posted it here by mistake.

 

[Deleted member 29446]

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

I still can't believe Conte is actually our manager, really didn't think we'd get him but credit Paratici & Levy for getting it done.

 

[the yid]

No emotion towards Nuno didn't think he'dmake Christmas and he hasn't so bye bye. Only 1 I feel sorry for is the Scottish lad quite liked him for some reason but he just had a kid and that so hope he lands on his feet

 

[carmeldevil]

Nice snooping around here, Emma

 

[Hazelton]

As much as I never wanted Nuno and I'm delighted to have Conte, it doesn't sit right with me what we did to this bloke. He was never, ever one of the first choices and he never stood a chance really. He was a proper stop-gap manager, we didn't even really try to hide it. That's not necessarily a bad thing if you're talking about a Sherwood or a Mason, because they never really expected to get the job, but you could tell Nuno wanted it.

I hope he gets another top job soon but I do feel as though this will have damaged his reputation considerably and now that Conte has come in, he's already been forgotten about by the media. He wasn't good enough but he didn't deserve this.

 

[whitesocks]

See my reply to @piedpiper above

...which misses the point.
There was a budget for attacking midfielders and a budget for strikers.
Setting budgets is not overly interfering.

The player the coach wanted rocketed in price and was out of the budget for midfielders. Now maybe if paratici had moved on one or 2 of our midfielders who haven't been performing - dele, winks, ndom - then that gap could have been bridged.
Or maybe for a player with no end product, wolves/mendes just pushed the price too high.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

you could tell Nuno wanted it

Be that as it may, his fate was in his own hands and had he been able to get us playing just to the sum of our parts, he’d not be in this situation.

 

[Montalbano]

Wolves was his level, now they have a better coach in Bruno Lage as well.

 

[spursfan77]

As much as I never wanted Nuno and I'm delighted to have Conte, it doesn't sit right with me what we did to this bloke. He was never, ever one of the first choices and he never stood a chance really. He was a proper stop-gap manager, we didn't even really try to hide it. That's not necessarily a bad thing if you're talking about a Sherwood or a Mason, because they never really expected to get the job, but you could tell Nuno wanted it.

I hope he gets another top job soon but I do feel as though this will have damaged his reputation considerably and now that Conte has come in, he's already been forgotten about by the media. He wasn't good enough but he didn't deserve this.

I never even really got that from him. If he really wanted it, he wouldn't have set us up in a way to only have one shot on goal a game. It was the worst football I have seen at Spurs in my time supporting us. Worse than the low points of the 90s. We've had enough shit times supporting us, we really don't deserve more and that is what he was serving up.

I really don't share the same sympathy for him as others. I have nothing against the guy. But that's the industry. He wasn't badly treated. Being badly treated would be us sacking him and then arguing about paying up his contract, which we haven't done.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

Someone wrote a whole article about this?! Football journalism is in the mud!

 

[rez9000]

...which misses the point.
There was a budget for attacking midfielders and a budget for strikers.
Setting budgets is not overly interfering.

The player the coach wanted rocketed in price and was out of the budget for midfielders. Now maybe if paratici had moved on one or 2 of our midfielders who haven't been performing - dele, winks, ndom - then that gap could have been bridged.
Or maybe for a player with no end product, wolves/mendes just pushed the price too high.

Without meaning to get into a 'no, you're missing the point' back and forth.... you're missing the point.

The point is that Levy interfered in a footballing matter when we were reliably informed that he wasn't going to do that anymore. Obviously how true that is we can't say for sure, but that's the premise we're working from.

And the thing that makes him open to criticism, and for which there is little to no defence, is that if he did it for the Traore deal, he could do it for another deal later on. I'm critical of his overriding his DoF and coach, especially that early in their tenures.

If they'd been there a few years and had developed a relationship with the chairman and the club then there may have been some leeway for a chairman to be so interventionist. But even then it should be a rare, if at all, action, and not one you take with people you've only just employed after saying that you're giving them autonomy.

It would benefit people if they took the Traore aspect of it out of their analysis. Ignore the temptation to consider whether Traore would have been a good or bad bad signing and concentrate on the interventionism displayed by the chairman - a chairman who has hardly covered himself in glory when it comes to signings over his entire tenure.

Would you be defending him quite so vociferously if he'd blocked a deal for a player you yourself would have wanted? Let's say hypothetically, Paratici and Nuno told him that they wanted Ronaldo and it would cost them £50m but he'd blocked that transfer for financial reasons. Would you be lauding discernment then?

My argument holds true regardless of the player. Yours, I apologetically have to say, doesn't.