Did Spurs over over achieve?

G

Guest

Guest
There are a few suggestions and stories in the media and online to suggest that Spurs over achieved this season… Really?

If you look at it objectively, when you consider the team, then I don’t think this is the case at all, just a viewpoint reserved for those that think Spurs’ adventure into the top four is just that, an adventure that will soon come to an end. This, in their eyes, will most likely be during their stay at Wembley.
Tottenham’s season of firsts

Let’s look at the past two seasons with a bit more objectivity than some pundits have done. Spurs finished third last season having managed to beat themselves out of a deserved second spot. This season, they were much more clinical in their final few games of the season, beating Leicester 6-1 and Hull 7-1 in the last two games of the season, both of which were away from home, and along the way, managed to beat and equal some impressive Spurs records:

14 consecutive home wins, beating the previous record of 12 set in the 1919/20 season.
Unbeaten at home for the first time in the Premier League era, a feat last achieved in the 1964/65 season in the old League One.
Nine-game unbeaten run in the Premier League, beating the previous record.
Least amount of goals conceded during a full season (26), beating the previous record of 32 set in the old Second Division in 1908/09.
Scored more and let in less than any other club this season, with three players hitting 20+ goals and, of course, Harry Kane retaining the golden boot.
Hugo Lloris just missed out on the golden glove with the goal let in against Hull. He would have shared the accolade with Chelsea’s Thibaut Courtois.

If you take everything into account, then surely Spurs slightly under-achieved, because over the past two seasons, a team this good, breaking all sorts of records in the process, should have won a trophy? They pushed both eventual winners of the Premier League both this and last season, when no other club could get near them. Spurs’ stats over the past two seasons prove they are not punching above their weight and are, in fact currently, the best team in the Premier League.
Where does ‘over-achievement’ come from?

I think the reason for this perception that Spurs are ‘over-achieving’ is based on the usual suspects, the top five and how much they spend annually. These teams being: Manchester United, Chelsea, ars*nal, Manchester City and Liverpool.

Spurs are seen as a ‘smaller’ club with less financial clout -they are the tenth richest club in the world- to be able to buy in world-class talent. The fact is, Spurs are a very well-run club, with a strict wage structure. Yes, this can hamper them in bringing in world-class players, but, frankly, it doesn’t matter in the slightest. They now have a world-class manager who has a vision. A vision shared by Daniel Levy, the club chairman, which is to build something lasting.

Young raw talents, such as Dele Alli and Eric Dier, bought from other clubs for far less than the likes of Paul Pogba, have improved immensely under Mauricio Pochettino. Harry Kane and Harry Winks from the academy have shone since getting their chance in the first team. Pochettino has a philosophy and it seems to be working wonders at Spurs. He has brought together a group of players and turned them into a team, each player playing for his teammate. He has instilled a never-say-die attitude that has seen Spurs win games in the dying seconds, such as the 3-1 away win at Swansea this season. The exciting style of football is possibly the best in the league right now.

harry_winks_kane.jpg

Chelsea had no European football to contend with this season and no real injury crisis to find a way around. Had they had European football as Spurs did, then the Premier League could easily have ended up somewhere else. All things considered, Spurs certainly played to their strengths and, as is always the case with football, had they had a little more luck, things could have been a lot different.

United, Liverpool and ars*nal are all struggling. They are behind Spurs in terms of the quality of their team and league position. These sides didn’t under-achieve. They achieved the most they could in the league, hindered by their own lack of first team quality and potentially the tactics of their respective managers. They finished behind Spurs because, to put it simply, they are inferior sides. Yet, two of these clubs still won trophies this season, United the EFL Cup and Europa League and ars*nal the FA Cup.
Did Spurs under-achieve?

Did Spurs over-achieve? No, certainly not. Did they play as a team and for each other? Most definitely. Will this continue? Yes, I think it will. Spurs are growing as a club and with a new ground just over a year away, they will become a force to be reckoned with both here and in Europe.

Under-achieved? For such a good team, an exciting brand of football and what they are obviously capable of, yes, I think the players and manager will also think they under-achieved after having such a great season on the back of the last one. Making the top four in second place is a fantastic result considering the financial restraints put on the club, but had they won something, it would have silenced all the doubters that are still out there.

Let us know your thoughts on Tottenham’s season in the comments section below!
 
Copied the above from SNN, found it interesting and agree with the sentiments that spurs didn't over achieve and should have won a trophy by now. However, last seasons form means that Spurs have to be one of the favorites for the EPL in season 2017/18.
 
This 'over acheiving' thing is another of the false badges of honour a section of our fans cling to in the abscence of trophies . We have improved a lot this season just gone, added to a slightly improved season the year before but we haven't won as much as a small sausage and that is what counts.

I would argue that the realistically it is more the underachievement of the richer teams cited in our 'overachievement' ;

1. A rsenal had their worst PL season in 20 years, and until doing that were ahead of us but still won a trophy. In fact that is three FA Cup trophies since Porky arrived'.
2. Chelsea downed tools the season before last, gifting lots of teams (including us) one place higher in the league than could be expected. They have won two titles in the period we have been 'overachieving' with Porky including the season just finished.
3. City - Definite underachievers in the season just finished, and about the only one I would say we have overachieved on. Swapping managers doesn't help and Pep had a shocker really, but they have still won two trophies since Porky arrived.
4. United have floundered around for 4 or so seasons post Fergie. After a season with Mourinho they are showing strong signs that is coming to an end, and won two trophies in our overachieving year to our none. They have won three trophies since Porky arrived.

Ifanyone is looking for a truly genuine overachieving side, that would be Leicester 2015-16.
 
It depends on what over-achieving is rated against........if it was based on our player wage bill, and on the premise that better players are paid more, then we did overachieve to get 2nd place. If its on trophies then of course we achieved nothing at all.
 
Dublin spurs fan - 5/6/2017 21:39

Last 2 seasons. Points total
Spurs 156
Chelsea 143
ars*nal 146
City 144
Liverpool 136
United 135
Leicester 125
Everton 128
Click to expand...


It would be interesting to know what the totals are since MP arrived.
 
I think we achieved in line with our squad. It may have cost less but the quality is right up there. Had Kane , Rose and Lamela been available all season we may have gone closer to the title or even won it.
 
Not winning anything with this team would be underachieving
 
Leicester over achieved. This season proves it.

We are one position better than last year. We improved incrementally.
 
80deg16minW - 6/6/2017 09:53

Leicester over achieved. This season proves it.

We are one position better than last year. We improved incrementally.
Click to expand...

It's a sad indictment of some of our 'fans' who wish to denigrate our progress; to first be called over-achievers or under-achievers you have to agree upon on a criteria - not use the pathetic puerile benchmark of our rivals simply 'under-achieving'.

There's an old adage in football that's completely true; you can only beat the team that are put in front of you - and that we did for most of the last two seasons, breaking record after record. Of course there were notable poor performances, but that happens to all sides at all times, the trick is to minimise them and continue to build squad depth and quality and of course a mental strength to go the extra distance to win.

All the evidence shows unequivocally that we continue to incrementally improve, despite the gap financially between us and our peers being enormous - some understand that it not 'just' about annual revenues but the huge accumulated advantage they've incurred financially for the last 16-20 years.

I could explain at great length why in business that puts you at a considerable market place disadvantage, but some fans seem to think that market rules simply get suspended in some never-never land when it comes to competing in the PL..

Leicester was a 1:100 year statistical anomaly, but the uninformed cling to it as some sort of justification for their complete lack of financial and competitive acumen. Fantastic Leicester, loved the story, but it's a fairy tale they'll never repeat.

What is important is keeping up our incremental improvement and our direction of travel; do that (no simple feat, although some obviously think it is!) and the glory will follow.

If some what to keep denigrating our progress, go become an ars*nal supporter, the sort who will only support their team when they're winning., there's enough of them.

 
Nick Real Deal - 5/6/2017 22:02

I think we achieved in line with our squad. It may have cost less but the quality is right up there. Had Kane , Rose and Lamela been available all season we may have gone closer to the title or even won it.
Click to expand...

Lamela has been here 4 years what difference has he ever made lol. He has not been missed and is expendable. An average joe who we need to sell.
 
RichmondSpur - 6/6/2017 10:15

Nick Real Deal - 5/6/2017 22:02

I think we achieved in line with our squad. It may have cost less but the quality is right up there. Had Kane , Rose and Lamela been available all season we may have gone closer to the title or even won it.
Click to expand...

Lamela has been here 4 years what difference has he ever made lol. He has not been missed and is expendable. An average joe who we need to sell.
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree; whilst I still don't think he's as bad a you do - he is slightly above average, but not worth what we paid for him and I too believe we could have done better and still can.

I'd happily sell sell him IF we can attract a player a class above him.
 
Spursex - 6/6/2017 10:48

RichmondSpur - 6/6/2017 10:15

Nick Real Deal - 5/6/2017 22:02

I think we achieved in line with our squad. It may have cost less but the quality is right up there. Had Kane , Rose and Lamela been available all season we may have gone closer to the title or even won it.
Click to expand...

Lamela has been here 4 years what difference has he ever made lol. He has not been missed and is expendable. An average joe who we need to sell.
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree; whilst I still don't think he's as bad a you do - he is slightly above average, but not worth what we paid for him and I too believe we could have done better and still can.

I'd happily sell sell him IF we can attract a player a class above him.
Click to expand...

The class above him player should have been here two seasons ago. It is as clear as day that he is a weak link that should have been upgraded.
 
It's not clear as day . He was getting better and better and virtually first on the team sheet. He is an Eriksen or Son replacement even Alli if injured. He will have to make sub appearances if he comes back. Then we will see what difference he makes for those with short memories.
 
It's as clear as day for those who can see it. He can make his substitute appearances for a mid to lower prem team or in the championship, more befitting to his limitations.
 
I think there is one or two that I would move, I agree we paid way too much for him. But I do feel his positive attitude benefits the club.
I also wouldn't mind betting that if can match last season points haul it would be good enough to win the league.
 
Like Ex, I only see a gradual improvement under Poch as being the important talking point. It would be a good time to drag out the polling thread from before last season where we all made our predictions and see how much we over/underachieved based off the average of those.

I seem to remember a lot of people thinking that we were going to drop down to 5th or 6th again because Man Utd, Chelsea, Citeh and Liverpool were going to spend big and climb to the top. It didn't happen like that and we arguably missed out on the title because of Chelsea having a less busy schedule and not having many, if any big injury problems. We drew too many games at a time when we had lost Harry and Toby to long term injuries.

Now it is on to next season and our expectations will be raised once again, hoping Poch can push us further still.
 
We out performed the season before with Rose, Toby, Kane and Lamela missing for large chunks. Rose and Lamela didn't come back. Rose and Lamela are creative players. Who can say how the loss of them affected us ? We don't know how they would have fitted in or contributed to our improvement.
 
You could write thousands more words about it, but all I know is my expectation. We exceeded it in our league play by quite a stretch this season, while I was irate over the one cup match with Son at LWB. I'm also impatient for trophies. Saying I'm impatient for trophies is not to say that I'm not very pleased with how this group has come along, and disappointed at a second place finish only because they outperformed what I expected by several places to even be in that position.

Views of this past season will likely change dramatically depending on what happens in the next 2-3. We'll either end up back where we were pre-Redknapp, push on to bring home some form of bacon, or keep missing out on trophies but finish in the CL money. Who the F knows? Some will practically relish failure because of individuals at the club that they despise--player/managers/management--and that won't change regardless of whether we start winning things. If/when we win something that fits their definition of success, they'll still put it down to luck or accident and discount the contribution of those they dislike. Another group would be thrilled to simply get into a pattern of consistent top 4 finishes even without trophies. I'm in neither of those groups. We've done better than I expected, but it'll take wins to make me look back on these past two seasons as great successes.

With a group that's not all that experienced at winning, if our ascent to trophies is, in hindsight, a period that saw us finishing top 4 2-3 times before we did so, it's reasonable to think that's a steep learning curve. The ability to win trophies consistently isn't dependent on how starved we are for it to happen.
 
We underachieved in Europe, no doubt about that.

However, I agree with Matic. If the collective expectation of our fans was to finish with 87 points, 87 goals scored, 25 conceded and just 3 defeats in the League, then yes, we slightly underachieved.

But that wasn't the reality. 4th place this year was Liverpool on 76 points which meant we had to achieve our highest PL points tally to finish top 4, top 5 even, as Arse finished there with 75. Setting as many PL and all-time bests in one season as we did cannot be seen as underachieving, quite the opposite in fact.

I'd loved to have won something this year, and I'd really love this particular team to do it, but its possible to have a great season while falling short. Its also possible to have a poor season and win a trophy (like '91 when we finished with 49 points but won the FA Cup or '99 when we had 47 points but won the League Cup or '08 when we finished with 46 points but again won the League Cup).

Is it really much worse to have a side that plays some great stuff over a prolonged period than a team that frustrates the crap out of us almost weekly, but manages to sneak a trophy.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.