SPURS ARE A TRAGIC FOOTBALL CLUB - Farsical piece on Vice

[SelbYido]

"It’s a place talent goes to fizzle while mediocrity rises to the top."

Two words, one of them rhymes with "Bale"...

 

[Spurger King]

"It’s a place talent goes to fizzle while mediocrity rises to the top."

Two words, one of them rhymes with "Bale"...

I know you're a chef but I don't see what this article has to do with Kale.

 

[ralvy]

Sadly the nail that they hit was on the crazy fence, and they hit it with the crazy hammer.

Also the crazy fence is in crazy-town, in the state of new crazyville (population: CRAZY).

And I bet the major of crazy-town is some French women in her 40s called Celine.

 

[Kingstheman]

This is amusing so I'll continue. And since Jambreck mentioned Shakespeare earlier on, I'll respond to your claim of no nerve being hit with "the lady doth protest too much methinks".

Since you've taken the time to write a lengthy response, I'll try to engage with each point made.


It's a matter of opinion, but I thought it was quite funny. The analogies weren't that stretched and the descriptions of some of our issues was fresh. This thread suggests that neither of us is alone in our differing opinions.


That's part of the guy's joke. We're a selling club. Players that come here and do well look to leave to achieve something. That's why mediocrity rises to the top of our club, because if you're any better, you leave (get it?). As annoying and as horrible as that is for us, it's amusing to non-Spurs fans. Campbell, Sheringham, Carrick, Berbatov, Modric, Bale....left and had success or are likely to have more success than we'll have. That's a tough truth right there. When we look like we're about to break into the big time, something happens (possibly self-imposed) that undermines us.

And you can say that's the long and short of it all you want, but we've been selling players that had long contracts left with us. And we chose to sell them, despite them wanting to leave as well. Liverpool, as a recent example, haven't chosen that route.


That is also the guy's point. We sell brilliant individual quality that we'd like to keep, if we're honest, and buy in 'bulk' replacements who aren't as good. You seem convinced that that's a winning strategy. And maybe it's just the best we can manage. But it's an amusing point to make - we sell class players and buy in decent players and prospects.....but that contributes to our constant transitional season syndrome.


The thing is, if none of the five players you mention are better than VdV, then that makes our plan A weaker. Not stronger. That's a thing about Plan A, it comes before Plan B. And here's an alternative strategy, especially considering VdV seems to be the one guy not on the record as wanting to get out. We could have kept him and signed one of the above as cover!


I think our central midfield ought to be just two of them (preferably Dembele and Sandro), but AVB can't help himself by playing three of them quite often. So we have four really decent central midfielders, none of them really a classy passer, although Dembele may qualify. Playing Sandro and Capoue was a baffling decision against Fulham, and AVB kind-of acknowledged that by hauling them off. When Dembele is injured, he should replace him with a ball playing midfielder, possibly Paulinho, and not another tackler like Capoue. Just my two cents.

But it is somewhat funny that we have these decent midfielders and AVB seems to want to fit four of them into two places, not ahve two on and two for cover as you suggest. And we have one left back. It's not as if this is new to us either...we had 4 very high level keepers last year and two strikers. So it's funny to non-Spurs fans that we tend to overload some positions and leave ourselves hopelessly exposed in others.


That is an impression I have from him. He ushers high quality passers, like VdV and Huddlestone out the door because they lack the athleticism he requires. That's fine as far as it goes, but it suggests to me that he's more worried about losing than he is about going out to win. The guys that came in can retain possession, but they seem unable to unlock defences. Now that was tough for Modric and VdV to manage, so it's difficult to see how Capoue and Sandro will manage it.

He's certainly more cautious than I'd like him to be. The main effect of his so-called style is to remove a striker to play the one-up-front model. If you play midfielders like Paulinho or Holtby behind a lone striker, you'll end up with the paucity of goals we've experienced this year. Too many players behind the ball, too risk averse. I had, and still have, high hopes that Paulinho will turn into a Lampard-esque goal-scorer. But the jury is out on that. And AVB's number 10, whoever he picks, is not playing as a number 10. He's playing as a third midfielder, clogging the space and leaving the striker isolated. Hopefully that wont continue.

I know the counter argument to that is top level modern football requires you to dominate possession and not get over-run in midfield. And amusing response to that that I saw on another thread somewhere was that we looked really in control for long periods when 0-3 down at City.



As I mentioned above, you protest a little too much about the nerve. And no, I don't think you've deconstructed it persuasively. And I'm afraid to say he wrote far more entertainingly than your supposed deconstruction of it (and, in fairness, my response to you too).


Even though we disagree, I have found this amusing and appreciate your time and effort to engage. But I think your dead wrong about this amusing article. Maybe this response goes some way to addressing your arguments.



There are definitely some funny home truths in there for the non-joyless and non-obsessed-with-Spurs footy fan. And you use the buzzword "gel" so much without ever really embarking on why you think it's inevitable. The counter argument is that these guys just aren't as good as you think they are, and aren't as good as their predecessors, so no amount of hair-product over time will change that. I hope it is just a matter of time, but some of the stationary play and static off-the-ball 'movement' may well be a feature and not a bug of our play. That's a fair criticism at the moment - over-cautious, non-dynamic football by players we think are better than that but who the outside world thinks may not be. That's insightful for me because it's a view outside the Spurs bubble. And I think the guy wrote it up in a funny way. I don't agree with it all - I think we're well ahead of the dark nineties and early naughties - but there's a lot in the piece to admire, in a funny self-deprecating way.

Another thing, of course, is that if two or three of our new 'stars' do 'gel' and start making an impact, we'll just sell them off anyway for our next transitional season!

And finally, one of the difficulties we're encountering this year that is well covered in the original article is how we compare to other teams. It's a fact that Arsenal are joy to watch unless you're a bug-eyed Spurs-supporting hater of Arsenal. And Arsenal are just one example....a couple of seasons ago we were the Liverpool of this season - prone to the odd poor result, but pretty much exciting most of the time. Now we seem to have the odd poor result without the excitment. Everton have a new manager and a raft of new players, but appear not to be suffering from gel deficiency.

And in Ozil and Cazorla, Arsenal have a couple of technicians that would walk into any side in the world and who have a bewildering touch. We don't have players that compare -despite spending 30, 26 and 17 million on three new ones, and I don't see any amount of gel changing that fact either.

Klaxon!

Thread overtaking alert!

Massive posts alert!

Huge reply quote offs alert!

Klaxon!

Run for the hills....

 

[jambreck]

Gah! I hate these quotathons! But here goes:

I thought it was quite funny. The analogies weren't that stretched and the descriptions of some of our issues was fresh. This thread suggests that neither of us is alone in our differing opinions.

There was some truth in what he wrote. But there was nothing revelatory about it. And his conclusions were either just plain wrong or risibly premature. Which kind of rendered the whole, bloated lot of it a monumental waste of time. His and mine (though not yours, I appreciate).

That's part of the guy's joke. We're a selling club. Players that come here and do well look to leave to achieve something. That's why mediocrity rises to the top of our club, because if you're any better, you leave (get it?). As annoying and as horrible as that is for us, it's amusing to non-Spurs fans. Campbell, Sheringham, Carrick, Berbatov, Modric, Bale....left and had success or are likely to have more success than we'll have. That's a tough truth right there.

Save for three or four clubs - plus, perhaps, a few petrodollar fuelled clubs - every club in the entire world is a selling club. Arsenal included. And let's be honest here......the only clubs that have plundered / can hope to plunder our spoils are from among that elite band of clubs. And they have invariably paid a high price for their plunder whenever they've come calling.

And you can say that's the long and short of it all you want, but we've been selling players that had long contracts left with us. And we chose to sell them, despite them wanting to leave as well. Liverpool, as a recent example, haven't chosen that route.

No different to Spurs with Modric first time around. Not to mention that the only offer that Liverpool received for Suarez was an insult. So hardly any great credit in resisting.

That is also the guy's point. We sell brilliant individual quality that we'd like to keep, if we're honest, and buy in 'bulk' replacements who aren't as good. You seem convinced that that's a winning strategy. And maybe it's just the best we can manage. But it's an amusing point to make - we sell class players and buy in decent players and prospects.....but that contributes to our constant transitional season syndrome.

To be precise, we buy replacements that aren't as good now but who might well become as good or better within the next couple of years. Of course we can't replace Bale with a ready made new Bale (Kenneth McEvoy is still in the early cloning process). That's because, if there was such a player, we wouldn't be able to afford him and, instead, one of that elite band of clubs would sign him. We have to find the players who aren't at that level yet but who have the potential to become the next Bale. That is our business model. It is the way it has to be. And, to that end, those who know about these things say that Erik Lamela has the potential to be even better than Bale.

The thing is, if none of the five players you mention are better than VdV, then that makes our plan A weaker. Not stronger. That's a thing about Plan A, it comes before Plan B. And here's an alternative strategy, especially considering VdV seems to be the one guy not on the record as wanting to get out. We could have kept him and signed one of the above as cover!

If we have suffered as a result of selling VDV and if it was our decision to sell, then it is just a misjudgement on our part. It isn't a failing inherent to the club. After all, we've generally got most calls right over the past 8-9 years. It's why we're unrecognisable from the club that lurched between mid table mediocrity and relegation battles throughout the 90's and early 00's.

That is an impression I have from him. He ushers high quality passers, like VdV and Huddlestone out the door because they lack the athleticism he requires. That's fine as far as it goes, but it suggests to me that he's more worried about losing than he is about going out to win. The guys that came in can retain possession, but they seem unable to unlock defences. Now that was tough for Modric and VdV to manage, so it's difficult to see how Capoue and Sandro will manage it.

Eriksen, Holtby and Lamela all arrived at the club highly regarded as creators.

He's certainly more cautious than I'd like him to be. The main effect of his so-called style is to remove a striker to play the one-up-front model. If you play midfielders like Paulinho or Holtby behind a lone striker, you'll end up with the paucity of goals we've experienced this year. Too many players behind the ball, too risk averse. I had, and still have, high hopes that Paulinho will turn into a Lampard-esque goal-scorer. But the jury is out on that. And AVB's number 10, whoever he picks, is not playing as a number 10. He's playing as a third midfielder, clogging the space and leaving the striker isolated. Hopefully that wont continue.

How many top teams routinely field two strikers these days? Ever fewer, at least, I'd wager. Let's not forget that we usually only played one up front under Harry too, when we were generally perceived to have played highly entertaining football. Agreed, though, that we're not playing a true no. 10 under AVB.

Everton have a new manager and a raft of new players, but appear not to be suffering from gel deficiency.

Most of those new signings are not, however, new to the Premier League. And a couple of them already know the new manager well, having played under him at Wigan.

And in Ozil and Cazorla, Arsenal have a couple of technicians that would walk into any side in the world and who have a bewildering touch. We don't have players that compare -despite spending 30, 26 and 17 million on three new ones, and I don't see any amount of gel changing that fact either.

They wouldn't walk into any team in the world. That's why Arsenal have them. Ozil couldn't walk into the Real Madrid team often enough - which is why he was sold. Cazorla....very good player but wouldn't be a starter at any of the aforementioned elite clubs.




Phew! I got through it.

 

[jolsnogross]

Gah! I hate these quotathons! But here goes:
Phew! I got through it.

Thanks for taking the time. I'm going to let it go now since we've already sent in a couple of long point-by-point responses. We disagree on a fair amount, but I think we generally agree that certain things are just a reality for us as a club and we have to do the best we can in those circumstances. I reckon we could be doing better though, and the original article proved to a worthwhile and funny outsiders perspective about Spurs.

 

[StartingPrice]

Thanks for taking the time. I'm going to let it go now since we've already sent in a couple of long point-by-point responses. We disagree on a fair amount, but I think we generally agree that certain things are just a reality for us as a club and we have to do the best we can in those circumstances. I reckon we could be doing better though, and the original article proved to a worthwhile and funny outsiders perspective about Spurs.

I will let Jambreck's post stand for most of my answers - though some I would have answered differently, and so on.

Two very minor additions:
I don't know if you have got this idea, but I am not fulminating at any idea that we are a selling club? We are! Most clubs are, even United were compromised into handing Ronaldo (Greasy not Fat) over, remember? "Real Madrid...I wouldn't give them a virus." But he did. Afaiac, and I made posts to this affect in the Summer, and the previous one, when most folk were moaning about Modric/Bale-Gate, I considered as being a step up the ladder. I look at it this way: unless/until we are regulars in CL and, Gawd-knows, challenging for the blessed thang, players who reach the level of those two are going to want to compete at the highest level their talents will take them. And they are going to want to win things - and who can blame them? Who would want to look back on a career knowing you had the ability to have a full medal-cabinet and, maybe, showing the odd CC? What is important is that United were absolutely desperate for those two, as were Chelsea - but we resisted that, and sold them out of the country. It is hard to compete if you are selling your best players, at least in an immediate sense...it is! But it is far harder if you are not only selling them, but selling them to the clubs you aspire to supplant, innit? We are still ho's, it is just that RM are the top of the tree as far as pimps go, and they don't even live with us

Also, it is interesting that you mention Everton. I said at the start of the season that I would be pretty peeved if I were an Evertonian. They finish above Liverpool, again, and still all they get is quietly dismissed while everyone is falling over themselves to make Liverpool genuine title contenders (which they ain't). And I never got the hostility shown by some on here to Martinez. he worked miracles at Wigan, he really did. Every Summer he would have his best players poached, and have to scout and sign replacements. Every Autumn they would start slowly while he readjusted his team. Every spring he would have them integrated, and playing good stuff. He would keep them up, a minor miracle in itself, with all due respect, and then the whole process would start over. A club that really was constantly in transition, and yet not only did he keep them up, and against expectations, but he did it with style. I always considered him a legitimate candidate for the Spurs job, and I always considered Everton to be every bit as much a threat as Liverpool, if not more.

The other stuff could demand threads galore, so, meh