The Tottenham Hotspur "Spiral" Watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
cini65 said:
You keep repeating this. But your basis for being well run is just bizarre. For a start, why does it matter to you whether a football club who don't make financial contributions to you is financially well run or not? What difference does it make to any fan if their club spends money or saves it in the bank? If they save it, the fan gets nothing. If they spend it, the fan gets nothing.

Chelsea and City are not likely to go under. So in what way are they badly run? They spend money available to them. They play very attractive football. They win trophies. If they DIDN'T spend the money they have available to them I'd consider them a badly run entity. If you have money to spend and choose not to then you're an idiot. Either spend it, invest it or give it to charity. Letting it sit in a bank doing nothing is not being 'well run'.

And you keep ignoring the point that spurs also squander multimillions on players, just because they break even over a five year period. They could have chosen to not buy those duffers and pocket the money instead and leave it sitting in a bank account (which seems to be your one stipulation for being well run even when it's the opposite). Or they could have chosen to spend it on better players.

It just strikes me that you're jealous of teams that spend more than you, and when they spend it you come out with tired rhetoric of them being 'badly run'.
Click to expand...

Their spending helps out other clubs. His logic is ****ed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Ginger Marks
cini65 said:
You keep repeating this. But your basis for being well run is just bizarre. For a start, why does it matter to you whether a football club who don't make financial contributions to you is financially well run or not? What difference does it make to any fan if their club spends money or saves it in the bank? If they save it, the fan gets nothing. If they spend it, the fan gets nothing.

Chelsea and City are not likely to go under. So in what way are they badly run? They spend money available to them. They play very attractive football. They win trophies. If they DIDN'T spend the money they have available to them I'd consider them a badly run entity. If you have money to spend and choose not to then you're an idiot. Either spend it, invest it or give it to charity. Letting it sit in a bank doing nothing is not being 'well run'.

And you keep ignoring the point that spurs also squander multimillions on players, just because they break even over a five year period. They could have chosen to not buy those duffers and pocket the money instead and leave it sitting in a bank account (which seems to be your one stipulation for being well run even when it's the opposite). Or they could have chosen to spend it on better players.

It just strikes me that you're jealous of teams that spend more than you, and when they spend it you come out with tired rhetoric of them being 'badly run'.
Click to expand...
One club loses a hundred million in the transfer market per season and another (Spurs ) lose four hundred thousand a season and you give it the " So What" ...shake your head and tell me if you hear anything
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock
seabreeze said:
One club loses a hundred million in the transfer market per season and another (Spurs ) lose four hundred thousand a season and you give it the " So What" ...shake your head and tell me if you hear anything
Click to expand...
Correct I don't care. What difference does clubs losing or making money make to YOU? It doesn't.

And why aren't you castigating spurs for not saving the money they spent on their duffers? They'd be in the black if they did. You keep avoiding that one...
 
cini65 said:
Correct I don't care. What difference does clubs losing or making money make to YOU? It doesn't.

And why aren't you castigating spurs for not saving the money they spent on their duffers? They'd be in the black if they did. You keep avoiding that one...
Click to expand...
Duffers , they finished higher the Man City the past few season . Bit of a duffer post . " Correct , I don't care " .... Proves my point about " Big spenders" fans .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock
pieguts said:
So as a fan, how do you influence this spend?
Click to expand...
Exactly.
And like all City and Chelsea fans were supposed to stop supporting their club when they started spending big <laugh>
Fans can do **** all to influence what is spent and what it is spent on, so this whole argument is ****ing stupid.

What kind of ***got uses the fact that their team has good accounts as banter anyway <doh>
What have football fans become!
 
Bodinki said:
Exactly.
And like all City and Chelsea fans were supposed to stop supporting their club when they started spending big <laugh>
Fans can do **** all to influence what is spent and what it is spent on, so this whole argument is ****ing stupid.

What kind of ***got uses the fact that their team has good accounts as banter anyway <doh>
What have football fans become!
Click to expand...

Although Chelsea will always be the club that bought their way to success from relative obscurity, I tend to agree. The landscape is what it is now. If you don't spend the money, then you get left behind. Spurs will find this out when their best players will be lured away to big clubs who pay them the going rate. As for fans, we don't see any of this 'net spend save', we don't get to benefit from it. I watched Arsenal sell our best players and stash £200m in the bank and for what ? To see Chelsea and City overtake us as they splashed the cash.
 
Bodinki said:
Exactly.
And like all City and Chelsea fans were supposed to stop supporting their club when they started spending big <laugh>
Fans can do **** all to influence what is spent and what it is spent on, so this whole argument is ****ing stupid.

What kind of ***got uses the fact that their team has good accounts as banter anyway <doh>
What have football fans become!
Click to expand...

I'm of the opinion that football (EPL) could be played behind closed doors and the transfer fees and salaries would be the same. There is so much money involved these days, the match going fans contribution is irrelevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bodinki
As a fan it makes little difference unless the extra money made from the efficient running of the club is used to improve the squad and produce more success.

However, fans would do well to remember that most of the Prem clubs are owned by hard nosed businessmen.

They’re here to make money, not out of any great love of ‘soccer’
 
  • Like
Reactions: Born again Humanitarian, Spurlock and Sucky
pieguts said:
I'm of the opinion that football (EPL) could be played behind closed doors and the transfer fees and salaries would be the same. There is so much money involved these days, the match going fans contribution is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Yup, the percentage of a clubs income that comes from gate receipts now is miniscule when compared to TV money, Sponsorships and merchandising.
 
Reading between the lines all I can conclude is that Chelsea fans want some love for their bankrolled success. It won't be happening lol

Like I said it could be any club...and why do fans talk about other aspects of their clubs and not just what happens on the pitch? Same reason we have an opinion on a footballer being a dickhead off it, same reason we hate certain players due to their detest full attitude towards the club you choose e.g Wilshere. The same reason we laugh at certain clubs for not selling their tickets etc etc....it all comes from the same root thoughts...you can't pick and choose

And on that note I'm going for a yawny walk in Vienna...Layta.
 
Spurlock said:
Reading between the lines all I can conclude is that Chelsea fans want some love for their bankrolled success. It won't be happening lol
Click to expand...

Dont talk bollocks <laugh>

Like any club got any love regardless of how they won ****.
Everyone hated United in the 90's, and despised Liverpool in the 80's.
 
Bodinki said:
Dont talk bollocks <laugh>

Like any club got any love regardless of how they won ****.
Everyone hated United in the 90's, and despised Liverpool in the 80's.
Click to expand...

Count me out.

I had a lot of respect for the Poool empire, both league
and UEFA (Champions) cup. As a Spurs supporter in the
80s, for any team to front up and beat them in the league
was a big deal such was their domination.

My contempt for Man Utd in the 90s was not for their on-pitch
success, but the on-pitch antics of some of their players and
the apologist culture that went with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock and Skylarker
Success breeds contempt, always has, and always will.
The "bought the league" bollocks, is just something rival fans use to placate themselves for their own teams failings.
Any team that had lasting success bought it, one way or another.
PSG will win the CL this season for that very same reason.
 
Spurlock said:
Reading between the lines all I can conclude is that Chelsea fans want some love for their bankrolled success. It won't be happening lol

Like I said it could be any club...and why do fans talk about other aspects of their clubs and not just what happens on the pitch? Same reason we have an opinion on a footballer being a dickhead off it, same reason we hate certain players due to their detest full attitude towards the club you choose e.g Wilshere. The same reason we laugh at certain clubs for not selling their tickets etc etc....it all comes from the same root thoughts...you can't pick and choose

And on that note I'm going for a yawny walk in Vienna...Layta.
Click to expand...

A walk in the cold air?

Freezing breath on a window pane?

..... means nothing to me <ok>
 
Bodinki said:
Success breeds contempt, always has, and always will.
The "bought the league" bollocks, is just something rival fans use to placate themselves for their own teams failings.
Click to expand...

More like pondering how much better their own clubs
would be if they had won the lottery too


"Any team that had lasting success bought it, one way or another."

There is a difference between "buying" it thru sustained financial
nous + on-pitch success, and a lottery money cash injection.


"PSG will win the CL this season for that very same reason."

Sure.
So I will admire on the on-pitch performance of the squad they
have assembled, but have no respect for the fact it took a
lottery win to assemble that squad.

< YMMV >
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock, PINKIE and Skylarker
On the way to winning the title we won 3-1 away at Man City ... it was live on BT sport and they put up the following stats pre-match ....

Cost of the Leicester City team = £26 million
Cost of the Man City team = £226 million

Raheem Sterling alone cost virtually double our whole team <laugh>

Now don't misunderstand ... even £26 million is not to be sniffed at -

What it did prove, quite refreshingly mind, is that spending the most money doesn't guarantee success ... it does however, make it much more likely <ok>
 
  • Like
Reactions: PINKIE
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back