That's an interesting comparison, but I think Spurs have greater quality in terms of depth than that Villa side did. They were truly wafer thin beyond the first eleven, whereas Redknapp has decent options to call off the bench.I've made this comparison over and over again recently, but it's pretty much nailed-on at this point, Spurs will finish sixth:
1. Man United 50
2. Chelsea 48
3. Liverpool 48
4. Aston Villa 47
5. Arsenal 42
6. Everton 37
1. Man Utd 90
2. Liverpool 86
3. Chelsea 83
4. Arsenal 72
5. Everton 63
6. Aston Villa 62
Same core problem as well, no squad depth.
I don't see their malaise as being linked to fatigue, certainly no more than all teams at the top. Look at Newcastle, for example, they've relied on a relatively small pool of players and they're actually getting stronger.
Redknapp has screwed his tactics up big time, if you ask me, and Spurs have lost momentum as a result.
Bale's position has been dicked about with, same as Modric - no surprise to see that their form has waned. He's persisted with playing VdV on the right flank at times which is a really unbalanced selection.
The key to Spurs' successes has always been really simple. The likes of Bale and Lennon keeping the width and terrorising their fullbacks, stretching the game and making space for the likes of VdV, Adebayor and Modric. Given their reliance on width, probably second only to United in the PL, they've missed a trick in not getting enough options in those areas. Beyond Bale and Lennon, they've had to rely on the likes of Kranjcar - good player, but he completely narrows the play.