Backroom & executive staff

[The Prophet]

Just now, Mr Raspberry Jam said:

Anything concrete on ten Hag? Or are all these links/rumours from the Dutch Telegraph article? 

 

Aye, all from the Telegraph article. The British press know about as much as we do.

[Whitley mag]

The idea of Overmars has really started to grow on me and feels a good fit.

 

Unlike Campos and others mentioned he has PL experience and the Ajax model with serious cash behind it would be something else. If we could get him and Ten Hag it would be an absolute coup and send out a major message.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by Whitley mag

[MagCA]

I’m not sure Ten Hag would come but would you take Overmars and Fonseca?

[Doc]

. If I must.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by Doc

[Happinesstan]

6 hours ago, The Prophet said:

 

Aye, all from the Telegraph article. The British press know about as much as we do.

Could just be his agents playing dirty in the Dutch press.

[nbthree3]

 

[Whitley mag]

If Overmars does come I would think there’s every chance ten Hag would follow in summer.

 

 

[Ben]

Overmars has employed Hag at a couple of different clubs if he comes it will be on the condition Hag joins him straight away.

[Manxst]

http://sportwitness.co.uk/gets-chance-goes-belief-dof-will-take-newcastle-job-start-january/
 

sounds promising for Overmars according to this fella.

[SUPERTOON]

Sounds promising, does anyone know who was at Ajax first him or Ten hag 

[Optimistic Nut]

18 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

Sounds promising, does anyone know who was at Ajax first him or Ten hag 

What came first, the winger or Ten Hag?

[gjohnson]

On 24/10/2021 at 19:06, Whitley mag said:

The idea of Overmars has really started to grow on me and feels a good fit.

 

Unlike Campos and others mentioned he has PL experience and the Ajax model with serious cash behind it would be something else. If we could get him and Ten Hag it would be an absolute coup and send out a major message.

 

 

 

Always thought Overmars was the best winger/playmaker I ever saw.

 

Could be just from watching him make our fullbacks look like children every time we played Arsenal.

 

As an aside....smallest feet in PL record. Might have been why he could do absurd things with crosses. 

[Guest HTT II]

Just now, gjohnson said:

Always thought Overmars was the best winger/playmaker I ever saw.

 

Could be just from watching him make our fullbacks look like children every time we played Arsenal.

 

As an aside....smallest feet in PL record. Might have been why he could do absurd things with crosses. 

Nah, he was very good, but a speed merchant, basically a better Gillespie, Pires and Ljunberg were far better wide players for Arsenal. Robben and Giggs are two of the best wingers I’ve ever seen, who towards the end of their careers, could also adapt their game to play different roles. 

[gjohnson]

Just now, HTT II said:

Nah, he was very good, but a speed merchant, basically a better Gillespie, Pires and Ljunberg were far better wide players for Arsenal. Robben and Giggs are two of the best wingers I’ve ever seen, who towards the end of their careers, could also adapt their game to play different roles. 

He played in a time where being a speed merchant was good enough, and effective enough to cause serious damage.

 

Pires was great though. Was massively disappointed as an 11 yr old that he didn't come to us after Metz even though we were linked for what seemed like an eternity.

 

Ljungberg was obviously decent, but never saw enough of him to make any kind of lasting impression. 

 

Giggs is fairly obvious and rightly judged as one of if not the the best wingers of his generation

 

Robben was great too, but i always had the impression he only went to Chelsea for the money (guess we need to get used to that for a while), but to be fair he's been consistently excellent since leaving them too.

 

 

[Kid Icarus]

Could be wrong but the goals he was getting for Arsenal at the time felt unheard of for a winger. You could maybe argue that he'd have been more suited to the game now than he was then. 

[Guest HTT II]

1 minute ago, kisearch said:

Could be wrong but the goals he was getting for Arsenal at the time felt unheard of for a winger. You could maybe argue that he'd have been more suited to the game now than he was then. 

It helped him in the way Arsenal played, he was great for them and for a spell, easily one of the best wingers in the game at that time. I just thought as a footballer, there have been better and especially at Arsenal, again Pires and Ljunberg and then Robben at Chelsea. Overmars was class though and so quick and direct and a decent finisher too.

[gjohnson]

Just now, kisearch said:

Could be wrong but the goals he was getting for Arsenal at the time felt unheard of for a winger. You could maybe argue that he'd have been more suited to the game now than he was then. 

No he just had some telepathic understanding with Bergkamp kind of like Shearer and Bellamy here.

 

Sometime a pair of players just click and become massively influential

 

He'd be useless in todays game as there is little to no place for an out and out attacking winger. As someone said before he was totally reliant on speed, but had enough skill to make it count when there was only one fullback to beat. Simply wouldn't work now as he'd be marked by 2/3 and wouldn't have the time or space to do what he was able

[Guest HTT II]

5 minutes ago, gjohnson said:

He played in a time where being a speed merchant was good enough, and effective enough to cause serious damage.

 

Pires was great though. Was massively disappointed as an 11 yr old that he didn't come to us after Metz even though we were linked for what seemed like an eternity.

 

Ljungberg was obviously decent, but never saw enough of him to make any kind of lasting impression. 

 

Giggs is fairly obvious and rightly judged as one of if not the the best wingers of his generation

 

Robben was great too, but i always had the impression he only went to Chelsea for the money (guess we need to get used to that for a while), but to be fair he's been consistently excellent since leaving them too.

 

 

Aye we were in for Pires at one point apparently, now he was a playmaker, and not just a winger, he could play either flank, off of Henry or even through the middle, such an underrated player. Ljunberg was class too, not rapid, not particularly skilful, but a machine with energy, and a real instinct for scoring/getting into attacking positions. He could play a number of roles too. Giggs was dynamite, again massively underrated in the game in terms of the world wide game, he was genuinely world class, better than the likes of Figo for me, another great winger, but who wasn’t exactly a winger if that makes sense. Robben didn’t go to Chelsea for money, if you read up on him as a person, he doesn’t seem money orientated, he improved even more after leaving Chelsea. He was often selfish at Chelsea and very inconsistent as a result, afterwards he was selfish in a good way in that he was mor clinical in front of goal, again of that makes sense. 

[Kid Icarus]

Not sure about that mind. I remember him being doubled up on and it just meaning that the likes of Anelka, Bergkamp and Wright were left free. 

[Kid Icarus]

Pretty sure Neville always says Overmars was the hardest player to play against by a mile, not just because of him, but because of everyone else around him making it more or less impossible to do anything about. 

[Guest HTT II]

Overmars was a very traditional out and out winger at the time, again like a better Gillespie, that Arsenal side were originally all about pace and movement with Bergamp the pivot through the middle and Wright the out and out goalscorer, a lot of their goals come from the flanks in the way ours did originally under KK with Sellars/Fox, Ginola/Gillespie. Overmars today I think would still be effective in a Man City team/type of set up because he was so good in front of goal and had good quick feet. He’d be to them what Sterling is kind of to them. Today wingers are a dying breed, the top fullbacks are more like traditional wingers and your wingers more like forwards like Sterling has become. I don’t think at the highest level a team needs a traditional winger or such players can be effective as a winger like they used to be. Ginola would excel today playing more through the middle like a kind of CF for example or wide of a forward 3 either side than as a plane old style traditional winger. Ironically Solano played on the wing for us, but was much more of a playmaker than a winger, with Robert the opposite, such balance. You need the right central midfield though for such players. 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by HTT II

[gjohnson]

3 minutes ago, HTT II said:

Aye we were in for Pires at one point apparently, now he was a playmaker, and not just a winger, he could play either flank, off of Henry or even through the middle, such an underrated player. Ljunberg was class too, not rapid, not particularly skilful, but a machine with energy, and a real instinct for scoring/getting into attacking positions. He could play a number of roles too. Giggs was dynamite, again massively underrated in the game in terms of the world wide game, he was genuinely world class, better than the likes of Figo for me, another great winger, but who wasn’t exactly a winger if that makes sense. Robben didn’t go to Chelsea for money, if you read up on him as a person, he doesn’t seem money orientated, he improved even more after leaving Chelsea. He was often selfish at Chelsea and very inconsistent as a result, afterwards he was selfish in a good way in that he was mor clinical in front of goal, again of that makes sense. 

Pires was still just a kid when we were after him...it was the Metz UEFA cup game that got the attention, but for some reason it didn't come off and we missed out on a brilliant footballer, despite him being far too French for his own good. 

 

Giggs was absolutely sublime, but was hugely overrated...eg 'that' goal against Arsenal. Yes it looks good, but ignores the fact that every Arsenal defender stood off and basically let him pass them. 

 

Robben did go to Chelsea for the money. He was that good at the time that he had basically the pick of anywhere he wanted...remember Chelsea had just been bought when he moved and were basically just above mid table at the time. We'd beaten them to Europe a few times in a row before Roman came in.

[Lenny]

Bit late to the party but I thought Overmars was a fair bit better than Ljungberg (who was also decent).

[gjohnson]

2 minutes ago, HTT II said:

Overmars was a very traditional out and out winger at the time, again like a better Gillespie, that Arsenal side were originally all about pace and movement with Bergamp the pivot through the middle and Wright the out and out goalscorer, a lot of their goals come from the flanks in the way ours did originally under KK with Sellars/Fox, Ginola/Gillespie. Overmars today I think would still be effective in a Man City team/type of set up because he was so good in front of goal and had good quick feet. He’d be to them what Sterling is kind of to them. Today wingers are a dying breed, the top fullbacks are more like traditional wingers and your wingers more like forwards like Sterling has become. I don’t think at the highest level a team needs a traditional winger or such players can be effective as a winger. 

Agree. Out and out wingers are virtually extinct.

When 442 comes back in to fashion (and it will) they might re-appear

[Guest HTT II]

1 minute ago, gjohnson said:

Pires was still just a kid when we were after him...it was the Metz UEFA cup game that got the attention, but for some reason it didn't come off and we missed out on a brilliant footballer, despite him being far too French for his own good. 

 

Giggs was absolutely sublime, but was hugely overrated...eg 'that' goal against Arsenal. Yes it looks good, but ignores the fact that every Arsenal defender stood off and basically let him pass them. 

 

Robben did go to Chelsea for the money. He was that good at the time that he had basically the pick of anywhere he wanted...remember Chelsea had just been bought when he moved and were basically just above mid table at the time. We'd beaten them to Europe a few times in a row before Roman came in.

We were at one point looking at Pires, Henry and Zidane and even Bergkamp in the 90s. Baggio, Signori, Weah, basically any player that was up and coming or at the peak were on our radar. Such happy days.
 

Giggs’ goal against Arsenal is overhyped, as an all-round footballer though, he for me was way underrated, he later played central, could play left and right, off the striker or even as a deep lying anchorman, he was that good. He wasn’t as flamboyant after his first few years in the way Rooney wasn’t once he settled in at Man Utd, because they had to sacrifice a lot of their game and flair for the greater good of the team, that somehow detracted from them in ways as flair/attacking players.

 

Robben was a hot prospect at the time, but he didn’t go to Chelsea for just the money man, he went because it was a huge step up for him and he went on to prove he was a genuine top-class/world-class footballer at the highest level following that. Chelsea were filthy rich at the time, but so were Man Utd who were after him, Barcelona, Real, AC Milan, Bayern, Arsenal even. 
 

Before Roman, Chelsea were level with ourselves very much in terms of spending and league placing/aims, but had success in Europe and with domestic cups, they were primed to challenge for the league, they were spending heavily before Roman come in let’s not forget. He took it to another level of course, but at the time, that level was at the level of what Man Utd had been spending for example. Rio, Ronaldo, van Nistelrooy, Veron et al.