A serious look at Mauricio Pochettino

[romufc]

It's because some posters see anybody praising a non-Utd manager as in some way demeaning the abilities of the current Utd manager - they are incapable of seeing anything without adding a Utd slant on it.

Poch is a class manager, look what he did when he came into the Prem with Southampton and now Spurs on a relatively low budget.

We keep blasting our players for being not so good. But have a look at some of the Spurs players.

Last season in the Champions League.

They had - Trippier, Rose, Sissoko, Winks, Lloris all starting. None of these are more talented than DDG, AWB, Pogba, Shaw.

We are so quick to criticise our own players as well, but when you think about it, they are good players just have struggled for some reason.

There is a toxicity to Manutd at the moment.

 

[roonster09]

Dude Liverpool spent huge sums of cash on the most expensive defender in the world and the most expensive GK in the world IN THE SAME WINDOW. That is light years away from what Spurs could do. Poch also has had to deal with Eriksen clearly wanting to leave the club for the past year.

Better to check facts when you want to use capital letters.

 

[Leftback99]

It's because some posters see anybody praising a non-Utd manager as in some way demeaning the abilities of the current Utd manager - they are incapable of seeing anything without adding a Utd slant on it.

If he's going to get praised then why can't people ask questions when it doesn't go as well? He's obviously a very good manager but it's got to the point where he's overrated if anything. He can do no wrong in many people eyes, "he got to the CL final" is a common come back to try shut down any possible critique.

Many seem to see him as the answer to all our problems, it's not that black and white.

 

[balaks]

Better to check facts when you want to use capital letters.

OK I WILL (WAS I WRONG?)

 

[United58]

OK I WILL (WAS I WRONG?)

Van Dijk in January and Allison in the summer haha.

But I agree with you - they were in very close proximity. Klopp's a cnut, but I'd rate him as the best manager in the world - but he has spent a lot to challenge.

 

[Amadaeus]

Lukaku was a lazy, unprofesional twat and i expect any manager worth his salt to get rid of him. I can almost guarantee you that if Poch was managing us, he would have done the same

He was not unprofessional with Mourinho. When Ole displaced him for Rashford, and told him he was not fast enough, of course any player will get upset. Pochettino has one of the best emotional intelligence in the game. Pochettino would have handled it much differently. Even after being displaced, Lukaku still put on some great performance for Ole. It seems a lot of fans have short memories. The game against Southampton and when Rashy got injured. The psg game that basically gave Ole his job as well.

 

[balaks]

Van Dijk in January and Allison in the summer haha.

But I agree with you - they were in very close proximity. Klopp's a cnut, but I'd rate him as the best manager in the world - but he has spent a lot to challenge.

Doh

 

[ash_86]

He was not unprofessional with Mourinho. When Ole displaced him for Rashford, and told him he was not fast enough, of course any player will get upset. Pochettino has one of the best emotional intelligence in the game. Pochettino would have handled it much differently. Even after being displaced, Lukaku still put on some great performance for Ole. It seems a lot of fans have short memories. The game against Southampton and when Rashy got injured. The psg game that basically gave Ole his job as well.

Don't think Lukaku would have lasted eitherway. He was basically hated by fans and his post exit interview he said it himself how he and rest two were always used as scapegoat for any loss. Lukaku was never going to live up to the tall asks of United. He also started talking about like in Serie A like 5-6 months back which showed he could not wait to get away. I think it was necessary that this move was good for both parties , good value fo us and he gets to sync up with conte. We risked tanking his values if we had delayed. Mistake in our part was not finding a replacement.

 

[Amadaeus]

Don't think Lukaku would have lasted eitherway. He was basically hated by fans and his post exit interview he said it himself how he and rest two were always used as scapegoat for any loss. Lukaku was never going to live up to the tall asks of United. He also started talking about like in Serie A like 5-6 months back which showed he could not wait to get away. I think it was necessary that this move was good for both parties , good value fo us and he gets to sync up with conte. We risked tanking his values if we had delayed. Mistake in our part was not finding a replacement.

I agree that for Ole as our manager, it was best for him to leave. He didn’t fit into his gameplan, so there was no point keeping him. In terms of replacement, I believe Ole wants to give youth a chances. Despite it looking otherwise in the first few games. That is one thing I admire about Ole. I believe we have a talented group of players coming through our academy so lukaku replacement can come from there at the moment. As strikers, we have three in Rashford, Martial and Greenwood. Maybe Sanchez as well. I believe rather than a straight replacement for lukaku, we should get a right attacker instead in Sancho. With Martial, Rashford and Greenwood alternating the striker positions. That would be ideal for me.

 

[ash_86]

I agree that for Ole as our manager, it was best for him to leave. He didn’t fit into his gameplan, so there was no point keeping him. In terms of replacement, I believe Ole wants to give youth a chances. Despite it looking otherwise in the first few games. That is one thing I admire about Ole. I believe we have a talented group of players coming through our academy so lukaku replacement can come from there at the moment. As strikers, we have three in Rashford, Martial and Greenwood. Maybe Sanchez as well. I believe rather than a straight replacement for lukaku, we should get a right attacker instead in Sancho. With Martial, Rashford and Greenwood alternating the striker positions. That would be ideal for me.

Yes certainly. We have some brilliant players knocking the door. Gomes, chong, greenwood will be heavily involved in the cup and Europa. Yeah if we could land CL, we have a very good at Sancho.

 

[Welby5]

Over the last 5 years Chelsea have a net spend of just 55 million more than Spurs. In that time we've won 2 titles, Europa League, FfA Cup and League Cup, while Spurs never won a sausage. Chelsea's net spend has been way better value for money!

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Over the last 5 years Chelsea have a net spend of just 55 million more than Spurs. In that time we've won 2 titles, Europa League, FfA Cup and League Cup, while Spurs never won a sausage. Chelsea's net spend has been way better value for money!

Yeah, your wage budget is about 100m a year more than ours and you gained a load of those net spend assets by having your club artificially pumped up by billions of petrodollars in the past, but continue with that insanely simplistic logic if you like.

 

[Inigo Montoya]

Yeah, your wage budget is about 100m a year more than ours and you gained a load of those net spend assets by having your club artificially pumped up by billions of petrodollars in the past, but continue with that insanely simplistic logic if you like.

You're right in everything you say.

The question I'd pose to you is; Would you swap the success of Chelsea while being in bed with owners like Abramovic or the Arabs?

i'm sure City fans are now seeing the success brought about from investment by morally and politically questionable owners and turning a blind eye to it.
Wouldn't a lot of clubs do the same?

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

You're right in everything you say.

The question I'd pose to you is; Would you swap the success of Chelsea while being in bed with owners like Abramovic or the Arabs?

i'm sure City fans are now seeing the success brought about from investment by morally and politically questionable owners and turning a blind eye to it.
Wouldn't a lot of clubs do the same?

Nah. Feck having a gangster like Abramovich having anything to do with my football club, and the Sheikhs are absolutely disgusting people.

Maybe if the club was in a state like City were when they got taken over I'd be more desperate, but there's no way I'd swap our current ownership for theirs now. You jump in to bed with people like that and the stain will never wash out, everything you accomplish will have a question mark over it. I have my issues with our current ownership and their ambition, but they're not evil people and they don't just view us as a propaganda tool/play thing.

 

[Welby5]

Yeah, your wage budget is about 100m a year more than ours and you gained a load of those net spend assets by having your club artificially pumped up by billions of petrodollars in the past, but continue with that insanely simplistic logic if you like.

So, there's something wrong with an owner of a football club to spend his own money on his own club? Maybe the old Chelsea owners of the 70's, who sold the club down the river were better? Or the Glaziers, who get stick for buying a club purelly to make money out of it, or yours who get it for not spending enough. Exactly what kind of owners should run clubs then? Oh, and what about Barca and Madrid having massive debts written off ? What about Italian giants propped up by car firms and billionaires? Fact is, 25 years ago, Ken Bates and the board drew up a longterm plan to turn bankruupt Chelsea around, on and off the pitch and it worked to perfection! It was nothing whatsoever like the pure pot luck City had!

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

So, there's something wrong with an owner of a football club to spend his own money on his own club? Maybe the old Chelsea owners of the 70's, who sold the club down the river were better? Or the Glaziers, who get stick for buying a club purelly to make money out of it, or yours who get it for not spending enough. Exactly what kind of owners should run clubs then? Oh, and what about Barca and Madrid having massive debts written off ? What about Italian giants propped up by car firms and billionaires? Fact is, 25 years ago, Ken Bates and the board drew up a longterm plan to turn bankruupt Chelsea around, on and off the pitch and it worked to perfection! It was nothing whatsoever like the pure pot luck City had!

You're ran by a gangster who can't enter the country anymore. I'm not going to enter in to a debate about the morality of sugar daddies in football, it's real boring watching fans of city/chelsea do mental gymnastics in order to justify the fact their clubs are ran by monsters. That and the fact this isn't the thread for it.

My point was that you're directly comparing net spend and ignoring the other huge advantages Chelsea possessed to get in to that position, and the fact you can afford to pay players a hell of a lot more. Your example was stupid.

 

[Welby5]

You're ran by a gangster who can't enter the country anymore. I'm not going to enter in to a debate about the morality of sugar daddies in football, it's real boring watching fans of city/chelsea do mental gymnastics in order to justify the fact their clubs are ran by monsters. That and the fact this isn't the thread for it.

My point was that you're directly comparing net spend and ignoring the other huge advantages Chelsea possessed to get in to that position, and the fact you can afford to pay players a hell of a lot more. Your example was stupid.

Chelsea have been in the top 6 biiggest money makers in world football, so they are spending what they're making. Also, the club had made huge strides in the years before Roman and were clearly the 4th most successfull club winning the Cup Winners Cup, 2 FA Cups, League Cup and twice in the CL. So even without Roman's money we were stil lway better than Spurs!

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Chelsea have been in the top 6 biiggest money makers in world football, so they are spending what they're making. Also, the club had made huge strides in the years before Roman and were clearly the 4th most successfull club winning the Cup Winners Cup, 2 FA Cups, League Cup and twice in the CL. So even without Roman's money we were stil lway better than Spurs!

I'm not interested in a dick swinging contest.

You posted some bullshit acting as if Chelsea and Spurs have been working with similar resources but you've won more, which is blatantly completely untrue. In fact it's completely fecking stupid.

 

[nore1975]

Pochettino has done a remarkable job at Spurs. Yes he hasn't won anything but given the way modern football finances go he has wheeled and sealed superbly. His eye for a player is generally spot on. All managers buy duds. I feel he has hit the ceiling at Spurs and possibly should have walked away after the ECF. To think he got Spurs to a ECF is remarkable. When he said he was just the coach I think that hinted at trouble behind the scenes at Spurs.
I wonder was it the cost of removing Mourinho that stopped United from wanting Pochettino. Mind you dealing with Levy is no picnic. Interesting to see how long Pochettino sticks it at Spurs. Where his post Spurs career takes him.

 

[slyadams]

I might be late to the party on this debate, but for me, as someone who didn’t really want Ole in the first place, I’d be delighted if Poch ended up at United. In terms of the current crop of managers in the world, taking away those who are unattainable (i.e. Pep and Klopp), he is a distance ahead of the rest in my opinion.

He’s as close as you can get to to a sure bet, he’s extremely well versed in the English game and he’s shown he’s happy to stay at a club and build for the long term. He’s everything we need right now and if/when our manager’s position becomes available then we should pay whatever his release would be. It seems bonkers to me that we’re cool paying £100m+ for the best players but not spending a similar amount to get the main cog in place.

 

[Amadaeus]

Pochettino has done a remarkable job at Spurs. Yes he hasn't won anything but given the way modern football finances go he has wheeled and sealed superbly. His eye for a player is generally spot on. All managers buy duds. I feel he has hit the ceiling at Spurs and possibly should have walked away after the ECF. To think he got Spurs to a ECF is remarkable. When he said he was just the coach I think that hinted at trouble behind the scenes at Spurs.
I wonder was it the cost of removing Mourinho that stopped United from wanting Pochettino. Mind you dealing with Levy is no picnic. Interesting to see how long Pochettino sticks it at Spurs. Where his post Spurs career takes him.

I agree with everything you said. Getting Spurs to the champions league final was remarkable and when you look at how Spurs net spent is lower than the likes of Southampton, Everton and Newcastle, it is beyond science towards how he is achieving top four consistently. This is not rocket science. Clubs that spends big are the most successful. I m interested to see how successful Pochettino will be when he goes to a club that has spending power. Everyone knows how great a manager Pochettino is, but he has been really limited. If Ole fails at United, Pochettino must surely be the favorite to replace him. Just like how Klopp put Liverpool back on top of Europe, i m confident Pochettino will be the man to do that at United if given the opportunity.

 

[JK-27]

With Woodward having snubbed Poch twice already, and continues to believe that he is somehow better at picking players to buy that LVG, Mourinho, and Ole, does anyone really think Poch has any interest whatsoever in taking the Utd job?

Woodward out.

 

[GlastonSpur]

With Woodward having snubbed Poch twice already, and continues to believe that he is somehow better at picking players to buy that LVG, Mourinho, and Ole, does anyone really think Poch has any interest whatsoever in taking the Utd job?

Woodward out.

You can't "snub" someone who never had any interest in coming in the first place.

 

[Welby5]

I'm not interested in a dick swinging contest.

You posted some bullshit acting as if Chelsea and Spurs have been working with similar resources but you've won more, which is blatantly completely untrue. In fact it's completely fecking stupid.

I mentioned one stat about the buying and selling of players which is fact! I keep hearing you lot whinge about not having money to buy players, so I pointed out that Chelsea's record on that has been better value for money than Spurs. You then come back and say it's wages, not the buying and selling of players.
I know where the money goes that Chelsea FC make during a year - into the club! You talk about Roman being dodgy, but I'd like to know where all the Spurs money went from TV, sponserships, shirt sales, match days, CL football, etc etc etc??? With your club being run on a million quid a year, you should have a war chest of billions stocked up by now. Seriously, where has all that money gone?

And please stop the downright lie that Chelsea are being bankrolled by Abramovich. Yes, he splashed the cash early on sorting out debts that were built up to refurbish the stadium before he arrived. Buying back Stamford Bridge, building a training complex ( the club did not have a training ground of their own) investing in the youth and money on players. But once the initial problems were sorted, he let the club run itself which he always said he would do and they've been living off their own money for years now.

Finally, to where his money came from. He has broken no law in Russia! The murky world of Russian politics and business is their business, not ours! Besides, Abramovich has invested heavily in remote, poor area of Russia bringing jobs to an area that was neglected by the government.
Dodgy dealings in politics and business go on from the America to China and everywhere else. The Russians are probably more blatant and open about what they get up to.











I mentioned the buying and selling of players stat which is a fact! For years now Chelsea have living off the money they make as a club, so it's a downright lie to say we're being bankrolled by Ambramovich. We didn't own Stamford Bridge or even have a training ground of our own so he sorted that out quickly. Invested heavily on our youth and splashed the cash on players in his early years. For me, that is what wealthy owners should be doing.for their - sort out the problems that need to be sorted and then let the club run itself. I also dont give a feck about the murky world of Russian politics and bussiness and how Roman became wealthy.

I'm not interested in a dick swinging contest.

You posted some bullshit acting as if Chelsea and Spurs have been working with similar resources but you've won more, which is blatantly completely untrue. In fact it's completely fecking stupid.

 

[balaks]

Sunday's match is absolutely massive now - I think if we lose it and play in the same crap way we have done recently then Poch's job will be on the line. I'm not happy to say that as I love the guy but things are obviously not right at the moment. I get the feeling this could be the beginning of the end.

 

[Welby5]

Sorry for the above post which has two different posts I made. The last one was made on my tv and I decides to delete it to make another one on my phone. For some, even though I deleted it, it's still ended up on my post on my phone.
Why no edit button on here?

 

[balaks]

Over the last 5 years Chelsea have a net spend of just 55 million more than Spurs. In that time we've won 2 titles, Europa League, FfA Cup and League Cup, while Spurs never won a sausage. Chelsea's net spend has been way better value for money!

Look at the starting base of strength of both squads prior to this. Chelsea already had a much stronger squad than Spurs and have also outspent them in the past 5 years. You can blow smoke up your ass all you want but it's a nonsense argument to make.

 

[Welby5]

Look at the starting base of strength of both squads prior to this. Chelsea already had a much stronger squad than Spurs and have also outspent them in the past 5 years. You can blow smoke up your ass all you want but it's a nonsense argument to make.

The Chelsea team that won the CL was rebuilt by the time they next won the league and that team was rebuilt spending £11 million a year more on transfers than Spurs.
You lot constantly look for excuses for your failure to win anything. Even in 2015/16 when Arsenal were bang average, City, Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool were shite, you basically had the title handed to you on a plate but still fecked it up.
Your club doesn't win because you have money grabbing owners, teams that bottle it and a manager who's never won a thing.
Chelsea win even when they're not all that good.

 

[charlenefan]

Sunday's match is absolutely massive now - I think if we lose it and play in the same crap way we have done recently then Poch's job will be on the line. I'm not happy to say that as I love the guy but things are obviously not right at the moment. I get the feeling this could be the beginning of the end.

I think you've been spending too much time on here with that kind of talk

Poch's job will never be on the line imo, there may be a mutual parting of the ways at some point/end of the season but only if Spurs are staring at relegation would Levy pull the trigger

Make no mistake though there's a massive rebuilding job at Spurs now, Trippier gone, Eriksen, Alderweireld and Vertonghen possible going next summer, Rose wanting out, Lloris in need of replacing (based on last seasons form). You might be right that this is the beginning of the end because does Poch want to stick around at Spurs and oversee that rebuild given he didn't really achieve all that much with the last squad he helped build?

 

[balaks]

The Chelsea team that won the CL was rebuilt by the time they next won the league and that team was rebuilt spending £11 million a year more on transfers than Spurs.
You lot constantly look for excuses for your failure to win anything. Even in 2015/16 when Arsenal were bang average, City, Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool were shite, you basically had the title handed to you on a plate but still fecked it up.
Your club doesn't win because you have money grabbing owners, teams that bottle it and a manager who's never won a thing.
Chelsea win even when they're not all that good.

That's absolute bollocks - how many times were we in the lead that season? Not once is the answer - we were always chasing.

Not making excuses but let's not rewrite history here. We should have won a lot more than we have.

 

[balaks]

I think you've been spending too much time on here with that kind of talk

Poch's job will never be on the line imo, there may be a mutual parting of the ways at some point/end of the season but only if Spurs are staring at relegation would Levy pull the trigger

Make no mistake though there's a massive rebuilding job at Spurs now, Trippier gone, Eriksen, Alderweireld and Vertonghen possible going next summer, Rose wanting out, Lloris in need of replacing (based on last seasons form). You might be right that this is the beginning of the end because does Poch want to stick around at Spurs and oversee that rebuild given he didn't really achieve all that much with the last squad he helped build?

I'm genuinely concerned about how things are at the club.

 

[Champagne Football]

Tottenham had a horror start to the season last season. They had more players in the later stages of the world Cup supposedly than any other club. Harry Kane arrived back burnt out and banjaxed. There was a muppetfest on here that Pochettino was garbage and overrated.

Then Spurs went on a frightening run that nobody saw coming. Pochettino somehow turned an exhausted threadbare squad into players who looked like they had just had a month off in the sun and were now fully recharged. When they got to the CL final it was widely regarded that we needed this man at OT at any cost.

Spurs lose a game or two as Tanguy and Lo Celso adapt and suddenly the muppet-fest begins again. The same fans who claimed last season that Van Gaal was much better than Klopp, due to Klopp never winning the CL before, are out in their droves again.

 

[FootyGirl88]

I'm genuinely concerned about how things are at the club.

If you beat Newcastle I'm sure you wouldn't have said this, things aren't that bad man

 

[balaks]

If you beat Newcastle I'm sure you wouldn't have said this, things aren't that bad man

We have been in absolutely dreadful form for months - Newcastle was just a continuation of rubbish performances. I still love Poch and hope he can get things together to turn it around but I'd be fibbing if I was certain he will.

 

[FootyGirl88]

We have been in absolutely dreadful form for months - Newcastle was just a continuation of rubbish performances. I still love Poch and hope he can get things together to turn it around but I'd be fibbing if I was certain he will.

What do you think the issue is? I thought you started well against Newcastle but then you switched off for the goal and looked out of ideas going forward. Could have been due to Eriksen not starting? You've made the right investments in terms of recruitment (Ndombele, Lo celso) but they will obviously need time to settle. I think you'll improve as the season goes on, from what I remember you guys have always been slow starters. x

 

[Member 39557]

Tottenham had a horror start to the season last season. They had more players in the later stages of the world Cup supposedly than any other club. Harry Kane arrived back burnt out and banjaxed. There was a muppetfest on here that Pochettino was garbage and overrated.

Then Spurs went on a frightening run that nobody saw coming. Pochettino somehow turned an exhausted threadbare squad into players who looked like they had just had a month off in the sun and were now fully recharged. When they got to the CL final it was widely regarded that we needed this man at OT at any cost.

Spurs lose a game or two as Tanguy and Lo Celso adapt and suddenly the muppet-fest begins again. The same fans who claimed last season that Van Gaal was much better than Klopp, due to Klopp never winning the CL before, are out in their droves again.

Being in the bottom 3 points wise for the last 15 games is more than losing a game or two. People are slating Solskjaer for our collapse at the end of last season, yet we're above Spurs and their revered manager in the form table.

 

[Scroto Baggins]

This thread got me curious about what the actual net spend is for teams since say 2014. So the last 5 years.

City 724mil
Utd 634mil
Arse 391mil
Chavski 147mil
Pool 175mil
Spuds 110mil

Didnt realise Arsenal had spent so much. Why are they constantly moaning on Arsefam TV? Like Kroenke has spent the equivalent of three packs of gum and a leg wax on the squad. That is a respectable re-investment in the team over 5 years.

Surely the Chavs have spent more than 147mil net?

Also still time remaining in the window in Spain for Spurs to have players(Eriksen) stolen.

Data scraped from this article and just added this years xfer window up to now

 

[base615]

Surely the Chavs have spent more than 147mil net?

Their net spend would be brought down significantly from the sale of Hazard at 100m etc. Him plus Costa, Matic, Oscar, Luiz, Lukaku were nearly 350m of incoming without counting any of the sub 30m transfer revenue.

Edit: About 745m Euros of incoming transfer fees since 2014 according to Transfermarkt. That does wonders for internet net spend pauper arguments.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

If you beat Newcastle I'm sure you wouldn't have said this, things aren't that bad man

Our fans have been a bit worried for a while now. We kind of wrote last season's league form off for various reasons, but we've started with the same shit performances this season.

I said after the City game it was the worst I've seen us play. Villa was terrible too. This is not a reaction to a one off result, our long term form is fecking awful.

 

[Welby5]

This thread got me curious about what the actual net spend is for teams since say 2014. So the last 5 years.

City 724mil
Utd 634mil
Arse 391mil
Chavski 147mil
Pool 175mil
Spuds 110mil

Didnt realise Arsenal had spent so much. Why are they constantly moaning on Arsefam TV? Like Kroenke has spent the equivalent of three packs of gum and a leg wax on the squad. That is a respectable re-investment in the team over 5 years.

Surely the Chavs have spent more than 147mil net?

Also still time remaining in the window in Spain for Spurs to have players(Eriksen) stolen.

Data scraped from this article and just added this years xfer window up to now

No, the Chelsea 147 mil is correct. We have been selling very well and buying at decent prices. 3 terrible recent buys though with 100 mil wasted on Bakayoko, Drinkwater and Bats.