How long are you willing to give a manager before declaring they were the wrong choice

[wrd]

I'm hoping this is unique enough for it's own thread and hopefully changes the discussion a bit but I'd like to know how long each of us are willing to give a manager before we would declare that we have seen enough to know that they're not the right person for the job.

I think to try and focus on the question itself, I want to establish two things.

One is that this question is fixed solely on the manager itself and so we need to take Levy out of the equation. Considered him set in stone, the club will back the manager as much as it does and so I would consider the managers ability to cope with that as part of his job remit. If people are unable to do that and bring that in here then you're showing an inability to let go of something and that's concerning because this is a hypothetical. I'm not saying you have to accept Levy into your hearts the same way you do Jesus, I'm saying let's focus specifically on the manager for this particular discussion and leave the board out of it.

Two is that who the manager is does not matter. I want to know how long we're willing to give anybody the chance to prove themselves. I know that our personal feelings towards managers will often shape how harshly we judge them so in this question, let's leave that at the door and focus purely on the job they do.

This only works if we're honest as well, It's no good saying you'd give them two seasons if really you know you'd give them 5 games. Let's try and see how long as a collective we actually would give a manager and I'm curious on what your criteria is. For example are you willing to tolerate poor football for a period of time if you felt you'd seen signs that a few transfer windows and tweaks and the manager having the squad how he shapes it will see us playing great football or do you need to see the attempt at progressive football right off the bat. I think both approaches have merit.

If the thread survives more than 5 minutes, I'll put my answer in the thread later down the line.

 

[JUSTINSIGNAL]

If the new manager is showing signs of playing an attacking brand of possession-based football, keeping us hovering around the top 6 in the league, competitive in the cups, then I would be happy to give them at least a season. I would expect some progress the season after in terms of pushing on in the league and looking to win a cup.

I wouldn’t expect us to go from where we are now to winning a cup next season or pushing top 3 in the league though. Just needs to show progression and I’m happy to give him time.

 

[For the love of Spurs]

The manager might be correct but without the correct support network (which ENIC doesn’t give managers) honestly I am cautious.

Best I can judge the manager on is patterns of play, are they creating a good style of football. If they can’t do that by half a season then for me it’s perhaps the wrong choice. But as managers at this club manage with one hand tied behind their back who knows.

So with that in mind, half a season to impose a style. With the current owners I won’t expect any success so that isn’t a factor.

 

[King of the Lane]

Its a complex question imo as there are a lot of factors that go into it. For instance, I had much less patience with Nuno as I knew instantly that he was such a wrong fit for us and it wasnt going to get better. Conte on the other hand I wanted to give 2 seasons to and see if he could change not just the results but also the mentality/culture of the club.

Moving on to whoever will be next - I would say in all honesty 12 months. In that period I would want to see a defined playing style start to take shape, evidence that the players are buying into the methods/tactics and I would want to see some encouraging attacking play. Im not expecting us to suddenly become amazing in 12 months but there should be signs of improvement that would make me have confidence in the new manager. 12 months is enough time to see some aspects of change imo.

 

[wrd]

The manager might be correct but without the correct support network (which ENIC doesn’t give managers) honestly I am cautious.

Best I can judge the manager on is patterns of play, are they creating a good style of football. If they can’t do that by half a season then for me it’s perhaps the wrong choice. But as managers at this club manage with one hand tied behind their back who knows.

So with that in mind, half a season to impose a style. With the current owners I won’t expect any success so that isn’t a factor.

This is why it's important to have a conversation irrespective of the owners because by doing so maybe then we will better understand what the job actually is as opposed to having discussions about managers who are wanted which ignore the context of what managing Spurs actually is. If we can't on this forum ever have a conversation without relating back that way, then basically we're making a choice to stay miserable. I'm not saying those conversations shouldn't happen, I'm saying in order for the discourse to progress, we need to be able to discuss both scenarios separately and then once we've made some headway, we could try bring it all back together.

 

[Tucker]

Really depends. I think you need to give at least 12 - 18 months. But sometimes you can just tell it’s not going to work out and I actually think sometimes we should be cutting our losses sooner rather than later.

Look at Nuno. We all knew it was over a couple of weeks before he went, Conte too should have been got rid of during the World Cup when it was clear he wouldn’t be committing.

The first thing any new coach has to do is get a feel good factor going and show there’s a plan that we can all get behind. If they do that then you give them the time to implement it. A bad patch of form is something we should let them ride out. But sometimes its just blatantly obvious they aren’t working out.

 

[Dougal]

Any manager willing to work for Levy at this point is the wrong choice.

 

[SUIYHA]

A lot of people will react based on whether they wanted the appointment at the time. If not then they'll be quick to say I told you so if it doesn't work out quickly.

To me the most important thing in the first season is to establish an attractive style of play and start shaping the squad with players that we can build the team around for the next few years. In Poch's first season we were inconsistent and there were a few heavy defeats in the big games, but you could see what he was trying to do with the pressing style and the emergence of young players - and in the big defeats we'd actually gone toe to toe with big teams but been a bit wasteful in our finishing and lost out to individual mistakes or moments of opposition brilliance.

Whereas I turned on AVB quickly. A boring set of pre-season games I could forgive, but in his second or third game we were at home to Norwich who were obviously going to put 10 men behind the ball and play for a draw - he picked Sandro and Livermore as a defensive pivot in a 4-5-1 and spent the game hoofing long balls up to Defoe as an isolated lone striker despite him being about 5ft tall. Clearly that was never going to work out.

 

[mil1lion]

First thing for me is the effort of the players. This shouldn't take long for any new manager. They need to get the players pressing forward again. I literally need to see that from the first few games. If they continue to drop back with this passive shit we've been watching I'll be concerned. After that the tactical side will take more time but if there's signs of good pass and movement with attacking play then I'll give them up to the start of the 2nd season. I would expect the play to come together by then particularly if they have this pre-season with all of next season. The 2nd season should come together and not regress like this season under Conte especially if certain players drop back to type again.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Really depends. I think you need to give at least 12 - 18 months. But sometimes you can just tell it’s not going to work out and I actually think sometimes we should be cutting our losses sooner rather than later.

Look at Nuno. We all knew it was over a couple of weeks before he went, Conte too should have been got rid of during the World Cup when it was clear he wouldn’t be committing.

The first thing any new coach has to do is get a feel good factor going and show there’s a plan that we can all get behind. If they do that then you give them the time to implement it. A bad patch of form is something we should let them ride out. But sometimes its just blatantly obvious they aren’t working out.

Either you give someone time, or you don't.

If you think you "can just tell its not going to work out" then, by definition you are not giving them time.

I'm fine with either answer - but lets not pretend we want to give a manager time to settle, implement his philosophy, and get players who fit that philosophy - particularly if we are blessed with the ability to "just tell".

 

[dontcallme]

Really depends. I think you need to give at least 12 - 18 months. But sometimes you can just tell it’s not going to work out and I actually think sometimes we should be cutting our losses sooner rather than later.

Look at Nuno. We all knew it was over a couple of weeks before he went, Conte too should have been got rid of during the World Cup when it was clear he wouldn’t be committing.

The first thing any new coach has to do is get a feel good factor going and show there’s a plan that we can all get behind. If they do that then you give them the time to implement it. A bad patch of form is something we should let them ride out. But sometimes its just blatantly obvious they aren’t working out.

Agree, time itself isn't enough.

Should Arsenal have given Rioch time and not bothered with Wenger? He was only there a year, surely not enough time.

I'm happy to give manager's time. It's when they lose the dressing room that I start to think their time is up.

Nuno wasn't going to work, Ramos could have got us relegated. I'm glad we didn't give them time.

 

[Tucker]

Either you give someone time, or you don't.

If you think you "can just tell its not going to work out" then, by definition you are not giving them time.

I'm fine with either answer - but lets not pretend we want to give a manager time to settle, implement his philosophy, and get players who fit that philosophy - particularly if we are blessed with the ability to "just tell".

Sorry but that’s nonsense. Sometimes it’s very clear that even with a million years to implement their ideas that certain managers just aren’t going to be successful. Nuno being a prime example.

Other managers have massive fallings out with the players, club, fans or all three and so arent going to work.

Pochettino had us playing some pretty awful stuff early on in his tenure, but it was clear he was building something and so time was afforded to him. But had he instead alienated the key players, told Levy he was a ****, and said the fans are a bunch of losers then he would likely have gone before the end of his first season.

 

[dontcallme]

Sorry but that’s nonsense. Sometimes it’s very clear that even with a million years to implement their ideas that certain managers just aren’t going to be successful. Nuno being a prime example.

Other managers have massive fallings out with the players, club, fans or all three and so arent going to work.

Pochettino had us playing some pretty awful stuff early on in his tenure, but it was clear he was building something and so time was afforded to him. But had he instead alienated the key players, told Levy he was a ****, and said the fans are a bunch of losers then he would likely have gone before the end of his first season.

Exactly.

If the next manager comes in. Gets us playing with some level of togetherness and has the like of Kane and Son performing well and behind his vision, I'd be happy.

If we finished 8th but I thought good things were happening then I'd happily give him time.

But if he's pissing players off and there's unrest among the best players then he's likely not the right man for us.

Should we have given Sherwood time to make things worse?

 

[mil1lion]

It really is a matter of whether the players buy into the new manager or not. When Poch came in he got rid of a few lazy players who didn't fit and the rest of the squad bought in. We did have some great professionals at the time like Eriksen, Lamela and Vertonghen. The youngsters also bought in, Mason being one of them and Kane the other. It's just a question of who fits with this set of players because even though some will be sold a majority will stay. I do feel a manager who is likeable, able to communicate well to the players and allows the players to be free and express themselves is most likely to work. When Ramos came in he brought this discipline to the team not that far from Poch but his English was bad and the players at the time didn't enjoy playing for him. I think Poch had the ideal combination of hard work without too many restrictions or instructions to follow and by the time we got him his English was better.

 

[dontcallme]

It really is a matter of whether the players buy into the new manager or not. When Poch came in he got rid of a few lazy players who didn't fit and the rest of the squad bought in. We did have some great professionals at the time like Eriksen, Lamela and Vertonghen. The youngsters also bought in, Mason being one of them and Kane the other. It's just a question of who fits with this set of players because even though some will be sold a majority will stay. I do feel a manager who is likeable, able to communicate well to the players and allows the players to be free and express themselves is most likely to work. When Ramos came in he brought this discipline to the team not that far from Poch but his English was bad and the players at the time didn't enjoy playing for him. I think Poch had the ideal combination of hard work without too many restrictions or instructions to follow and by the time we got him his English was better.

For me, the big difference in Ramos' first season and Poch's was Ramos tried to do too much, too quickly.

He tried changing all the players diets, adding in additional training sessions and other big changes. Results went bad and he led us towards relegation. Poch was also a system manager, part of this was the high press but he was forced to play Townsend and Chadli, who didn't suit this at all.

Poch adapted until he got the squad closer to his vision, Ramos didn't.

Whoever we hire, is not going to get a squad with the playing style, professionalism and ability that the manager wants. He is going to need to manage this.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Sorry but that’s nonsense. Sometimes it’s very clear that even with a million years to implement their ideas that certain managers just aren’t going to be successful. Nuno being a prime example.

Other managers have massive fallings out with the players, club, fans or all three and so arent going to work.

Pochettino had us playing some pretty awful stuff early on in his tenure, but it was clear he was building something and so time was afforded to him. But had he instead alienated the key players, told Levy he was a ****, and said the fans are a bunch of losers then he would likely have gone before the end of his first season.

That's rubbish.

Again - either you give a manager time - or you don't. I am agnostic - but you can't have it both ways.

 

[dontcallme]

That's rubbish.

Again - either you give a manager time - or you don't. I am agnostic - but you can't have it both ways.

You sound more religious than agnostic with your refusal to view the different factors in the discussion.

Do you think we should have given Sherwood and Nuno time? As you seem to think time is the only factor in the discussion, I can only assume that you do.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

You sound more religious than agnostic with your refusal to view the different factors in the discussion.

Do you think we should have given Sherwood and Nuno time? As you seem to think time is the only factor in the discussion, I can only assume that you do.

We gave Sherwood time.

I think we should have given Nuno time. We should have given Poch more time. We should have had Mourinho finish out the season.

But again - I am fine with the idea of saying managers and players do not deserve the benefit of time. I am fine with anyone who says they should be given time.

But, you can't have it both ways. Give them time, if I like them, but sack them immediately if I don't like them. That's just bullshit.


The reality is - teams change managers far too frequently. Either a manager can manage, or he can't. It's does not ebb and flow like the tide. I have supported, and will support, who ever manages the club. I'd prefer to see that any new manager get the time to implement their philosophy, get their players, and get the full support of the club while that happens.

If you have the magic ability to "just tell" - then you should be involved in the hiring decision, and we would save a lot of turnover.

 

[dontcallme]

We gave Sherwood time.

I think we should have given Nuno time. We should have given Poch more time. We should have had Mourinho finish out the season.

But again - I am fine with the idea of saying managers and players do not deserve the benefit of time. I am fine with anyone who says they should be given time.

But, you can't have it both ways. Give them time, if I like them, but sack them immediately if I don't like them. That's just bullshit.


The reality is - teams change managers far too frequently. Either a manager can manage, or he can't. It's does not ebb and flow like the tide. I have supported, and will support, who ever manages the club. I'd prefer to see that any new manager get the time to implement their philosophy, get their players, and get the full support of the club while that happens.

If you have the magic ability to "just tell" - then you should be involved in the hiring decision, and we would save a lot of turnover.

Sherwood managed us for around half a season. I don't think that constitutes time.

It's not bullshit. If a manager isn't getting great results but the players are behind him and you believe good things are upcoming, then I'm happy for him to be given time.

If he loses the dressing room and it is believed he is not up to the task, then you look to get rid.

This is not having it both ways. This is treating two different situations differently.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Sherwood managed us for around half a season. I don't think that constitutes time.

It's not bullshit. If a manager isn't getting great results but the players are behind him and you believe good things are upcoming, then I'm happy for him to be given time.

If he loses the dressing room and it is believed he is not up to the task, then you look to get rid.

This is not having it both ways. This is treating two different situations differently.

If you can tell inside of 3 months that you have the wrong manager - then you sack the person who hired the manger.

ANd, sometimes -its the players who are the problem, not the manager.

That's why I laughed when someone said above that Poch did not alienate the players - when there was a huge shift at the club, where Poch and several senior players had a falling out early in his tenure...