Managerial Thread Part V - Tottenham in Tatters

[East Coast Bias]

Not sure if it was posted but David Wagner will be the new Young Boys manager (Swiss champions)

early in the week it sounded like Wagner to West Brom was as good as done. This is a better move for him.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

 

[Power Man]

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

I wanted a DoF, and Fonseca was his choice, so I support it to the fullest.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Ciao.

 

[Havre]

So what is the likelihood that Fonseca was actually anyone's first choice? We just randomly lucked out on our first choice becoming a free agent weeks before we hired a new manager?

Doesn't mean Fonseca might not do a fantastic job. Time will tell. Apparently Spurs desperately wanted LvG when Pochettino got the job so....

With Aurier going back to PSG Pochettino will soon be a free agent as well. But do we want a failed Pochettino back in 8 months?

 

[Evilo]

That Aurier thing is based on nothing serious though.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

 

[Havre]

Do you know what the tension with Fulham would be?

 

[Chimaera]

I thought he had a shot at a lower level EPL job. I guess the Bournemouth one is ok... but might be hard to get them promoted.

 

[Havre]

I would say of course he would have a shot, but two things; timing and long term career.

Would his long term career benefit more from getting Bournemouth playing good football rather than scrapping to survive - and potentially being relegated again in the PL?

Parker seems to be a bit like a small top 6 forward to me. Play him on the 4th line (a PL team just trying to survive) and he might not shine. Give him a team that got the quality to dictate games and I could see him being successful (obviously early days) - in other words playing him in the top 6.

 

[Savant]

I thought he had a shot at a lower level EPL job. I guess the Bournemouth one is ok... but might be hard to get them promoted.

Parker is terrible. He should have kept that Fulham team up. No idea why he was getting linked with other jobs for any reason other than he is English. Bournemouth is probably his level. Really don’t think Fulham is necessarily getting the short end of this.

 

[East Coast Bias]

Parker is terrible. He should have kept that Fulham team up. No idea why he was getting linked with other jobs for any reason other than he is English. Bournemouth is probably his level. Really don’t think Fulham is necessarily getting the short end of this.

I dont know man that roster was pretty awful. Fulham had zero talent.

 

[Savant]

I dont know man that roster was pretty awful. Fulham had zero talent.

Fulham had talent. They are not any worse than the likes of Burnley. Think a better manager could have kept them up. You could certainly argue no team in that range had a better midfielder than Anguissa and a better centerback than Andersen. They certainly had the best keeper in that group too in Areola

 

[Chimaera]

I don't agree. He played pretty creative football with what he had. Burnley has proven the ability to stay up, and play a football that isn't pleasant, but works in minimizing the damage. At least Fulham went for it at times.

 

[Havre]

I don't think Savant reflects consensus here at all. I don't want to make it out like Parker did a fantastic job at Fulham. Whatever issues they had they only won 5 out of 38 games. Clearly not brilliant.

But I think they got unlucky and they played a lot better football than most of the other bottom teams. Looking at xPTS Brighton and Fulham are the two big losers last season. Which perfectly aligns with my view watching these teams. Not suggesting xPTS is a perfect metric of course, but both of those teams, to me, were often in games in a totally different way than some of the other bottom teams.

And as mentioned earlier I think Parker's style of play translates well to bigger teams. Fulham played bravely even after that horrible start to the season - which often means teams will go Pulis - Fulham never did.

He has still a long way to go, but to say he is "terrible" seems a bit odd to me. I would say on the contrary. For a manager with that little experience he looks very promising and I don't think he did poorly last year at all. On the contrary, I think he did well for Fulham not going Sheffield United after the start they had.

 

[Savant]

I don't agree. He played pretty creative football with what he had. Burnley has proven the ability to stay up, and play a football that isn't pleasant, but works in minimizing the damage. At least Fulham went for it at times.

He played “creative” football because he had talent. Burnley stays up because they have less talent but play a siege mentality. You can say Burnley “know what to do” but they are still not good and 40 points is not a high bar to clear. Fulham had talent to finish with over 40 points

 

[Savant]

I don't think Savant reflects consensus here at all. I don't want to make it out like Parker did a fantastic job at Fulham. Whatever issues they had they only won 5 out of 38 games

Never cared about reflecting a consensus or not.

Parker should have been about to get at least 40 points with that team. He was backed in the January window too. He underachieved with that roster.

 

[Havre]

It was just a polite way of saying you are as usual exaggerating.

 

[hatterson]

Who was supposed to score goals for Fulham?

 

[Chimaera]

Who was supposed to score goals for Fulham?

Or defend.

Their team isn't that talented.

 

[Savant]

Who was supposed to score goals for Fulham?

Or defend.

Their team isn't that talented.

I mean that’s the managers job to figure out isn’t it?

40 points is marginally over a point a game. That is not a very high bar. No one is saying that Fulham are world beaters. I’m saying a team with Areola, Andersen, Anguissa, Loftus-Cheek and a decent forward group; a bottom half PL team can do worse than a forward group of Mitrovic, Reid, Lookman and Maja; should have finished 10-12 points higher at least.

 

[Chimaera]

So, three or four players who would likely play for other clubs? It's just not enough.

 

[Havre]

And I'm really not sure why RLC was mentioned. Looked extremely average the times I watched Fulham. That was not a fully fit and ready RLC playing.

If Fulham got Areola and Andersen. Players I rate highly. Then Burnley got Pope and Tarkowski. Not sure if I see much of a difference. I also believe Dyche is doing a brilliant job at Burnley. You don't need to be terrible to do worse than him. Biggest difference though is that Wood and partly Barnes serve a clear purpose up front. Same problem as with Brighton Fulham didn't have anyone to score goals. And they both suffered for it, but Brighton had enough talent to still survive (and Potter might be a bit ahead of Parker as well).

To me most bottom teams were well coached this year. WBA looked decent enough under Bilic. Southampton somewhat collapsed, but before that they looked solid. Brighton obviously. CP boring, but well drilled. Only SU completely lost it in my opinion. Tells you something about momentum in football as the same coach had them overachieve significantly the year before of course.

 

[Savant]

So, three or four players who would likely play for other clubs? It's just not enough.

It’s enough to get 40 points

you can’t tell me Sheffield Utd 19-20 was more talented than Fulham 20-21. BUT they had a better manager