What's new

Does Jose Mourinho deserve more credit for Spurs turnaround?

mawspurs

Staff
Jun 29, 2003
35,069
17,740
When Tottenham lost at Sheffield United at the start of this month it felt like another of Jose Mourinho's managerial reigns was about to implode.

Source:Daily Mail
 

spursbhoy67

Well-Known Member
Dec 20, 2006
1,316
1,475
By all accounts we are having an awful season, Leicester having a great one, Sheff Utd and Wolves playing great football and United on a roll.

Despite all that we are only four points off fourth place. Don't know if that says more about us or the quality of the Premier League.

I am not a fan of Jose at Tottenham, but will hold judgement on him until the end of next season.
 

Dillspur

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2004
3,747
9,926
By all accounts we are having an awful season, Leicester having a great one, Sheff Utd and Wolves playing great football and United on a roll.

Despite all that we are only four points off fourth place. Don't know if that says more about us or the quality of the Premier League.

I am not a fan of Jose at Tottenham, but will hold judgement on him until the end of next season.

Quality of the PL (IMO) 68 points will be the max the 4th placed team will get, I haven't checked but I would guess that's one of the lowest and max for 3rd 69, again I would guess that's one of the lowest for 3rd
 

Laboog

Well-Known Member
Jul 10, 2020
654
1,243
Quality of the PL (IMO) 68 points will be the max the 4th placed team will get, I haven't checked but I would guess that's one of the lowest and max for 3rd 69, again I would guess that's one of the lowest for 3rd

Last season - 3rd place 72, 4th 71
2017/18 - 3rd place 77, 4th 75
2016/17 - 3rd place 78, 4th 76
2015/16 - 3rd place 70, 4th 66
2014/15 - 3rd place 75, 4th 70
2013/14 - 3rd place 82, 4th 79
2012/13 - 3rd place 75, 4th 73

The 3rd and 4th position seem to be trending down while 2nd and first are higher point totals recently than in previous years. I think the league is more balanced 3-11 but that is most likely due to Tottenham, Arsenal, Man United, and Chelsea not being as dominating than in prior years instead of lower teams improving that much.
 

mil1lion

This is the place to be
May 7, 2004
42,344
77,598
If the table is taken since Jose arrived we're 4th just behind Utd so he's not doing too bad
It was always going to take time to change our philosophy due to the difference between Poch and Jose
We seem to be getting there now. I know his style will not be to everyones liking but honestly if we can win a trophy I don't mind.
Next season we need to show much improvement overall though. CL qualification and silverware has to be the target.
 

Dillspur

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2004
3,747
9,926
If the table is taken since Jose arrived we're 4th just behind Utd so he's not doing too bad
It was always going to take time to change our philosophy due to the difference between Poch and Jose
We seem to be getting there now. I know his style will not be to everyones liking but honestly if we can win a trophy I don't mind.
Next season we need to show much improvement overall though. CL qualification and silverware has to be the target.

Are you sure about that? Because I'm not entirely sure that is correct.
 

Dillspur

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2004
3,747
9,926
If the table is taken since Jose arrived we're 4th just behind Utd so he's not doing too bad
It was always going to take time to change our philosophy due to the difference between Poch and Jose
We seem to be getting there now. I know his style will not be to everyones liking but honestly if we can win a trophy I don't mind.
Next season we need to show much improvement overall though. CL qualification and silverware has to be the target.

Are you sure about that? Because I'm not entirely sure that is correct.

My mistake, we would be 3rd. UTD with their game in hand against palace
 
Last edited:

Spursmatty87

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2016
1,918
5,046
I think he’s done all he can from the mess we were in. The first 11 is basically the same as the last 3 years apart from lo Celso with losing eriksen.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
By all accounts we are having an awful season, Leicester having a great one, Sheff Utd and Wolves playing great football and United on a roll.

Despite all that we are only four points off fourth place. Don't know if that says more about us or the quality of the Premier League.

I am not a fan of Jose at Tottenham, but will hold judgement on him until the end of next season.

It has nothing to do with the "quality of the PL". The points total that would normally correspond to each league placing has been depressed by a few points because Liverpool have accumulated 93 points from 36 matches and have an 18 point lead, despite getting 1 point from their last 2 matches.

Also, there isn't a whipping-boy club in 20th place with 11-15 points and the whole table, including the relegation zone, is closely-packed, so there are fewer cheap-and-easy points available.

It's a purely arithmetical fact and has nothing whatsoever to do with the footballing quality of the other 19 clubs. There aren't as many points to go around, because Liverpool have them all!

Quality of the PL (IMO) 68 points will be the max the 4th placed team will get, I haven't checked but I would guess that's one of the lowest and max for 3rd 69, again I would guess that's one of the lowest for 3rd

As with most quantifiable questions in life, I have a spreadsheet ;) .

The lowest points total ever for 4th place (between 1995/96, when the league reduced to 20 clubs and the schedule to 38 matches, and 2018/19) was 60. The highest was 79, the average is 69 and the median is 68.

The lowest points total ever for 3rd place was 65. The highest was 83, the average is 74 and the median is 75.

The lowest points total ever for 2nd place was 68. The highest was 97, the average is 80 and the median is 80.

The lowest points total ever for 1st place was 75 (!). The highest was 100, the average is 87 and the median is 87.
 
May 17, 2018
11,872
47,993
It has nothing to do with the "quality of the PL".

...

Also, there isn't a whipping-boy club in 20th place with 11-15 points and the whole table, including the relegation zone, is closely-packed, so there are fewer cheap-and-easy points available.


That is the exact model I would expect with 20 reasonably similar quality teams. That's why people talk about the quality of the PL teams - any team can beat each other on a given day. There are no givens.

So despite rejecting the idea, your analysis supports it imo.
 

mil1lion

This is the place to be
May 7, 2004
42,344
77,598
My mistake, we would be 3rd. UTD with their game in hand against palace
According to BT Sport after the game we would be 4th
Either way it's really not that bad. Although we've definitely pulled it around since the return after our horrible run before the break.
 

enfieldyid

Active Member
Sep 22, 2004
63
164
Mourinho deserves some credit, but we have second or third best strike force in the Premier League. The problem we have had is Midfield and FullBack. Once we have signed a defensive midfielder and new fullbacks we will see even more improvement.

Mourinho’s counter attacking tactics have helped cover some of our weaknesses, but I think if Pochettino knew he would be backed, we would have turned it around.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
That is the exact model I would expect with 20 reasonably similar quality teams. That's why people talk about the quality of the PL teams - any team can beat each other on a given day. There are no givens.

So despite rejecting the idea, your analysis supports it imo.
I don't think the point being made by the post I was replying to was that the league was high in quality and competitive. I think the point being made was that the lower number of points was a sign that the league was low in quality and uncompetitive.

It's a sign of neither. It's a sign of having a runaway leader this season.
 

Locotoro

Prince of Zamunda
Sep 2, 2004
9,328
13,927
It has nothing to do with the "quality of the PL". The points total that would normally correspond to each league placing has been depressed by a few points because Liverpool have accumulated 93 points from 36 matches and have an 18 point lead, despite getting 1 point from their last 2 matches.

Also, there isn't a whipping-boy club in 20th place with 11-15 points and the whole table, including the relegation zone, is closely-packed, so there are fewer cheap-and-easy points available.

It's a purely arithmetical fact and has nothing whatsoever to do with the footballing quality of the other 19 clubs. There aren't as many points to go around, because Liverpool have them all!



As with most quantifiable questions in life, I have a spreadsheet ;) .

The lowest points total ever for 4th place (between 1995/96, when the league reduced to 20 clubs and the schedule to 38 matches, and 2018/19) was 60. The highest was 79, the average is 69 and the median is 68.

The lowest points total ever for 3rd place was 65. The highest was 83, the average is 74 and the median is 75.

The lowest points total ever for 2nd place was 68. The highest was 97, the average is 80 and the median is 80.

The lowest points total ever for 1st place was 75 (!). The highest was 100, the average is 87 and the median is 87.

My understanding of the use of that phrase is to denote the relative quality of the PL teams to each other.

As you've pointed out Liverpool are far and away ahead taking many of the points with them, but the remaining clubs are closer together in quality (if we use points as an indicator of quality of each respective team)

EDIT: just seen your second post. It may be a sign of having a runaway leader or it may be a sign of the remaining 19 being closer together one way or another. I'd subscribe to the notion of the lower clubs improving since we seem to have a number of clubs still playing in European competition
 

spursbhoy67

Well-Known Member
Dec 20, 2006
1,316
1,475
It has nothing to do with the "quality of the PL". The points total that would normally correspond to each league placing has been depressed by a few points because Liverpool have accumulated 93 points from 36 matches and have an 18 point lead, despite getting 1 point from their last 2 matches.

Also, there isn't a whipping-boy club in 20th place with 11-15 points and the whole table, including the relegation zone, is closely-packed, so there are fewer cheap-and-easy points available.

It's a purely arithmetical fact and has nothing whatsoever to do with the footballing quality of the other 19 clubs. There aren't as many points to go around, because Liverpool have them all!



As with most quantifiable questions in life, I have a spreadsheet ;) .

The lowest points total ever for 4th place (between 1995/96, when the league reduced to 20 clubs and the schedule to 38 matches, and 2018/19) was 60. The highest was 79, the average is 69 and the median is 68.

The lowest points total ever for 3rd place was 65. The highest was 83, the average is 74 and the median is 75.

The lowest points total ever for 2nd place was 68. The highest was 97, the average is 80 and the median is 80.

The lowest points total ever for 1st place was 75 (!). The highest was 100, the average is 87 and the median is 87.

Great information and cannot argue with facts.

My comment was tongue in cheek.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
EDIT: just seen your second post. It may be a sign of having a runaway leader or it may be a sign of the remaining 19 being closer together one way or another. I'd subscribe to the notion of the lower clubs improving since we seem to have a number of clubs still playing in European competition
I think you've missed my point, which is not about football, it's about numbers.

The remaining 19 teams are closer because there is a runaway leader. It's an inevitable arithmetical fact and will happen, irrespective of the quality, comparative or absolute, of the teams in the league.

If one team hoovers up 100 points or thereabouts, the remaining teams will be closer together: the teams in 5th-10th or thereabouts will have lower totals, irrespective of how strong or competitive the league is. There are simply fewer points left to go around. That makes them closer together.

In previous years, there have been big gaps in the table, up to 13 points between adjacent places. This season, the largest gaps are currently 5 points. The main contributory cause is the same: a runaway leader, plus the lack of a team with only 11 or 15 points (Derby, Sunderland...).
 

Johnny J

Not the Kiwi you need but the one you deserve
Aug 18, 2012
18,124
47,911
I think you've missed my point, which is not about football, it's about numbers.

The remaining 19 teams are closer because there is a runaway leader. It's an inevitable arithmetical fact and will happen, irrespective of the quality, comparative or absolute, of the teams in the league.

If one team hoovers up 100 points or thereabouts, the remaining teams will be closer together: the teams in 5th-10th or thereabouts will have lower totals, irrespective of how strong or competitive the league is. There are simply fewer points left to go around. That makes them closer together.

In previous years, there have been big gaps in the table, up to 13 points between adjacent places. This season, the largest gaps are currently 5 points. The main contributory cause is the same: a runaway leader, plus the lack of a team with only 11 or 15 points (Derby, Sunderland...).
But does this mean the PL is the best league in the WORLD (TM)?
Joking, good work David.
 
Top