The way forward for THFC ??

[Spurlock]

Sometimes things need to hit rock bottom

Our problem is we are in a comfort zone as a club

I don't really care if we get knocked out tomorrow or wether we qualify for next season's CL

I'm sure I'll hear the argument about attracting players but I'm not bothered because we don't really attract any wow signings anyway

So...yeh I don't care I think it's the wake up calls we need and we are not good enough to play 2 games a week anyway

 

[The RDBD]

Sometimes things need to hit rock bottom

Our problem is we are in a comfort zone as a club

I don't really care if we get knocked out tomorrow or wether we qualify for next season's CL

Levy does, and will have to respond accordingly.


"we are not good enough to play 2 games a week anyway"

What do you mean by "good enough" ??

 

[Spurlock]

Levy does, and will have to respond accordingly.


"we are not good enough to play 2 games a week anyway"

What do you mean by "good enough" ??

We tend to struggle with a few changes it seems to our strongest XI

I'd rather we have no midweek distractions and play just weekends in the PL with our strongest XI

Obviously domestic cups are played midweek but our recent success in them further proves my point imo

 

[Spurs61]

I still believe that as a club we just do not have an overriding priority.
We want good football / we want trophies. But which is the number one objective.
If it is to win the Premiership then we need to appoint a manager with that as his sole objective and then to give him enough time and money to build towards that even if there are rocks in the road. How to identify the kind of manager who can handle a large club which has been semi successful for some years and with demanding fans who may not appreciate some of the football needed on the journey is not an easy task. Poch was on the road but ultimately was not given the money when he really wanted it.
Alternatively we can go down the road of Jose/Conte - big reputations and past success but not necessarily regarding Spurs as a club as good as their past experience. Nothing to prove - if they fail it is Spurs fault not theirs.
I wish I had some answers but until someone a lot cleverer than me can make the decision we cannot expect to know "the way forward"

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

Levy does, and will have to respond accordingly.


"we are not good enough to play 2 games a week anyway"

What do you mean by "good enough" ??

It's long been said that Conte's teams have issue playing twice a week, with his stint at Chelsea held up as the main piece of evidence: no Europe and they strolled to the league, but two games a week the following season saw them stutter

In our case the issue is the depth is really not able to offer like-for-like replacements, most obviously Davinson Sanchez lacking the passing to play CCB or control to play RCB yet he is cast as Dier or Romero's understudy and inevitably makes a costly error

 

[The RDBD]

I still believe that as a club we just do not have an overriding priority.
We want good football / we want trophies. But which is the number one objective.

I contend that entertaining football as the absolute
minimum, is more likely to result in more trophies
as well as easily satisfy the financial bottom lines.

I do note however that since the 80s, apart from
FA cup 1991 + CL final 2019, Spurs have got to
cup finals where the less said about most of the
football over those seasons, the better.

 

[Spurlock]

I still believe that as a club we just do not have an overriding priority.
We want good football / we want trophies. But which is the number one objective.
If it is to win the Premiership then we need to appoint a manager with that as his sole objective and then to give him enough time and money to build towards that even if there are rocks in the road. How to identify the kind of manager who can handle a large club which has been semi successful for some years and with demanding fans who may not appreciate some of the football needed on the journey is not an easy task. Poch was on the road but ultimately was not given the money when he really wanted it.
Alternatively we can go down the road of Jose/Conte - big reputations and past success but not necessarily regarding Spurs as a club as good as their past experience. Nothing to prove - if they fail it is Spurs fault not theirs.
I wish I had some answers but until someone a lot cleverer than me can make the decision we cannot expect to know "the way forward"

why one or the other?

I’ve seen both achieved

Pool being the recent club to achieve it imo

They spend similar amounts to us so it’s not a case of only the dodgy clubs can do it. Chelsea is a dodgy club with a manager most on here craved, who have spent 600 million on players in the last 6 months yet they still play **** football.

It’s about structure, getting the right people in, headhunting from other clubs(for example I’d be chasing Brighton’s scouting network), surely this saves money in medium to long term too. This comes from the top and the man at the top doesn’t care and doesn’t know enough about the football aspect, he’s more concerned with getting Beyoncé booked again. Might sound tongue in cheek but that is a fact from what I see.

If that’s Chelsea under Roman then Potter would already be gone and the money would be spent in a better way than has been spent by their new owner whose methods resemble a trolley dash.

The energy, the drive, the focus comes from the top down…as always

Clubs who win things, regardless of where their money comes from, have owners focused to the point of obsession to see the team win things. Whatever may be their drive, motivation, that is not the issue. They demand success and they usually get it…our owner demands another Beyoncé concert even though he’s had his full quota for the year according to the local council but by hell will he get that concert because that is his focus…even if he has to pay fines.

The way forward is owners that give a **** about the football team

 

[Citizen Kane.]

why one or the other?

I’ve seen both achieved

Pool being the recent club to achieve it imo

They spend similar amounts to us so it’s not a case of only the dodgy clubs can do it. Chelsea is a dodgy club with a manager most on here craved, who have spent 600 million on players in the last 6 months yet they still play **** football.

It’s about structure, getting the right people in, headhunting from other clubs(for example I’d be chasing Brighton’s scouting network), surely this saves money in medium to long term too. This comes from the top and the man at the top doesn’t care and doesn’t know enough about the football aspect, he’s more concerned with getting Beyoncé booked again. Might sound tongue in cheek but that is a fact from what I see.

If that’s Chelsea under Roman then Potter would already be gone and the money would be spent in a better way than has been spent by their new owner whose methods resemble a trolley dash.

The energy, the drive, the focus comes from the top down…as always

Clubs who win things, regardless of where their money comes from have owners focused to the point of obsession to see the team win things. Whatever may be their drive, motivation, that is not the issue. They demand success and they usually get it…our owner demands another Beyoncé concert even though he’s had his full quota for the year according to the council but by hell he will get that concert because that is his focus…even if he has to pay fines.

The way forward is owners that give a **** about the football team

We and Liverpool (and Arsenal) differ in very few crucial ways.

1) Pool weren't scared of selling their star players to fund a new chapter. People (myself included) mocked them when they sold Coutinho, but they were acting with foresight - demolishing the garage to build a two floor extension with a water feature. Walker aside, we've clung on far too stubbornly to our main assets, usually holding on to them until their value had plummeted (Toby, Eriksen, Dele, Dier all examples of this).
I think we've been doubly traumatised by the way Real made us their feeder club a decade ago, as well as more recently a total lack of trust in our own ability to invest funds raised.

The latter can be fixed. The former can't be helped. If Liverpool can't keep players away from the likes of Barca and Bayern, neither can we. It is hubris to suggest otherwise and to my mind, Levy's whole speech about not selling any more key players after Walker was clearly meant seriously as if his personal pride was at stake. He has pursued it stubbornly ever since but his thinking is completely skewed.

Not selling your best players to a bigger club doesn't make you a de facto big club too. It just makes you brave with a generous sprinkling of stupid. Winning trophies and increasing global following makes a big club. We've lost sight of that in recent years.

2) Pool and Arsenal created a vision, appointed a manager to carry out that vision, and backed them both properly and more importantly - through difficult periods. Pool are doing this for a second time under Klopp. In the course of his reign, we've failed to back Poch, failed to stand by him during a difficult period, appointed three successors without any vision, failed back any of them, and then we sit and wonder why we are basically back to where we were in Poch's first season.

Levy is a commercial and business genius, but the longer this misadventure continues, it is abundantly clear that his knowledge and understanding of football fits comfortably on a postage stamp.

Reappointing Poch four years after sacking him would, for me, be the single greatest indictment of this fact. It effectively writes off entire cycle while openly admitting we had zero real plan when we first sacked him and have had zero real plan since.

For my part, I would argue that he should step down as overall Chairman with immediate effect. The club should then split into two corporate wings; Tottenham Hotspur Football Club and Tottenham Hotspur Holdings. Levy can take control of the latter and find a new chairman for the former. He shouldn't have any control over sporting decisions ever again. There is little to no evidence he has a clue what he is doing, and were it not for the chance appointment of three managers in his 22 year tenure, we'd probably be no better off than we were under Sugar.

 

[Spurf]

We and Liverpool (and Arsenal) differ in very few crucial ways.

1) Pool weren't scared of selling their star players to fund a new chapter. People (myself included) mocked them when they sold Coutinho, but they were acting with foresight - demolishing the garage to build a two floor extension with a water feature. Walker aside, we've clung on far too stubbornly to our main assets, usually holding on to them until their value had plummeted (Toby, Eriksen, Dele, Dier all examples of this).
I think we've been doubly traumatised by the way Real made us their feeder club a decade ago, as well as more recently a total lack of trust in our own ability to invest funds raised.

The latter can be fixed. The former can't be helped. If Liverpool can't keep players away from the likes of Barca and Bayern, neither can we. It is hubris to suggest otherwise and to my mind, Levy's whole speech about not selling any more key players after Walker was clearly meant seriously as if his personal pride was at stake. He has pursued it stubbornly ever since but his thinking is completely skewed.

Not selling your best players to a bigger club doesn't make you a de facto big club too. It just makes you brave with a generous sprinkling of stupid. Winning trophies and increasing global following makes a big club. We've lost sight of that in recent years.

2) Pool and Arsenal created a vision, appointed a manager to carry out that vision, and backed them both properly and more importantly - through difficult periods. Pool are doing this for a second time under Klopp. In the course of his reign, we've failed to back Poch, failed to stand by him during a difficult period, appointed three successors without any vision, failed back any of them, and then we sit and wonder why we are basically back to where we were in Poch's first season.

Levy is a commercial and business genius, but the longer this misadventure continues, it is abundantly clear that his knowledge and understanding of football fits comfortably on a postage stamp.

Reappointing Poch four years after sacking him would, for me, be the single greatest indictment of this fact. It effectively writes off entire cycle while openly admitting we had zero real plan when we first sacked him and have had zero real plan since.

For my part, I would argue that he should step down as overall Chairman with immediate effect. The club should then split into two corporate wings; Tottenham Hotspur Football Club and Tottenham Hotspur Holdings. Levy can take control of the latter and find a new chairman for the former. He shouldn't have any control over sporting decisions ever again. There is little to no evidence he has a clue what he is doing, and were it not for the chance appointment of three managers in his 22 year tenure, we'd probably be no better off than we were under Sugar.

I don't think the move to spit the club would make any difference in any case we have a Director of Football which effectively does that. Levy controls the money and that will continue as long as he is here and as he has made a massive success of that, it's not likely he would pass that to someone else while he has an interest in Spurs.
Where are players to go after Spurs? They will not be good enough to go to clubs who can afford their wages so they will hang around and be difficult to shift. That's not Levy's fault that's a product of Spurs being on the fringe of the very top. ENIC's success in getting Spurs to become a regular top 4 club has created the problems in both buying the right players and getting rid of players who we feel have reached the end of their usefullness to the club.
This is not a computer game it's a real club with real people and that means it never quite works as seamlessly as you might like.
Liverpool, Arsenal and United all have been bigger draws for players than Spurs it's therefore easier for them to attract the top players needed. Spurs are trying to get there and the new stadium is a massive part of that.
But we haven't won anything fans complain. Have you noticed what has happened since the PL was formed? That's why we have found it so difficult to win a cup. There are now 6 clubs for Spurs to try to compete with. The reality is that we are lucky to be competeing at all and if wasn't for the moves Levy has made we could well be mid table as we were for years before he arrived.

 

[PowerSpurs]

We and Liverpool (and Arsenal) differ in very few crucial ways.

1) Pool weren't scared of selling their star players to fund a new chapter. People (myself included) mocked them when they sold Coutinho, but they were acting with foresight - demolishing the garage to build a two floor extension with a water feature. Walker aside, we've clung on far too stubbornly to our main assets, usually holding on to them until their value had plummeted (Toby, Eriksen, Dele, Dier all examples of this).
I think we've been doubly traumatised by the way Real made us their feeder club a decade ago, as well as more recently a total lack of trust in our own ability to invest funds raised.

The latter can be fixed. The former can't be helped. If Liverpool can't keep players away from the likes of Barca and Bayern, neither can we. It is hubris to suggest otherwise and to my mind, Levy's whole speech about not selling any more key players after Walker was clearly meant seriously as if his personal pride was at stake. He has pursued it stubbornly ever since but his thinking is completely skewed.

Not selling your best players to a bigger club doesn't make you a de facto big club too. It just makes you brave with a generous sprinkling of stupid. Winning trophies and increasing global following makes a big club. We've lost sight of that in recent years.

2) Pool and Arsenal created a vision, appointed a manager to carry out that vision, and backed them both properly and more importantly - through difficult periods. Pool are doing this for a second time under Klopp. In the course of his reign, we've failed to back Poch, failed to stand by him during a difficult period, appointed three successors without any vision, failed back any of them, and then we sit and wonder why we are basically back to where we were in Poch's first season.

Levy is a commercial and business genius, but the longer this misadventure continues, it is abundantly clear that his knowledge and understanding of football fits comfortably on a postage stamp.

Reappointing Poch four years after sacking him would, for me, be the single greatest indictment of this fact. It effectively writes off entire cycle while openly admitting we had zero real plan when we first sacked him and have had zero real plan since.

For my part, I would argue that he should step down as overall Chairman with immediate effect. The club should then split into two corporate wings; Tottenham Hotspur Football Club and Tottenham Hotspur Holdings. Levy can take control of the latter and find a new chairman for the former. He shouldn't have any control over sporting decisions ever again. There is little to no evidence he has a clue what he is doing, and were it not for the chance appointment of three managers in his 22 year tenure, we'd probably be no better off than we were under Sugar.

The main difference between Liverpool or Arsenal and Spurs is that both have been consistently in the top three clubs in the country for decades and have challenged for and won the League many times. They had revenue far in excess of ours when ENIC took over. We have improved beyond recognition since then but we have only just caught Arsenal on revenue and are still behind Liverpool. Consequently both these clubs have more expensive players than us and pay them higher salaries. Performance on the pitch is obviously going to lag revenue growth.
There is no evidence that Levy lacks football knowledge. If that were the case we would not be outperforming our revenue in league position most years.

 

[PowerSpurs]

We and Liverpool (and Arsenal) differ in very few crucial ways.

1) Pool weren't scared of selling their star players to fund a new chapter. People (myself included) mocked them when they sold Coutinho, but they were acting with foresight - demolishing the garage to build a two floor extension with a water feature. Walker aside, we've clung on far too stubbornly to our main assets, usually holding on to them until their value had plummeted (Toby, Eriksen, Dele, Dier all examples of this).
I think we've been doubly traumatised by the way Real made us their feeder club a decade ago, as well as more recently a total lack of trust in our own ability to invest funds raised.

The latter can be fixed. The former can't be helped. If Liverpool can't keep players away from the likes of Barca and Bayern, neither can we. It is hubris to suggest otherwise and to my mind, Levy's whole speech about not selling any more key players after Walker was clearly meant seriously as if his personal pride was at stake. He has pursued it stubbornly ever since but his thinking is completely skewed.

Not selling your best players to a bigger club doesn't make you a de facto big club too. It just makes you brave with a generous sprinkling of stupid. Winning trophies and increasing global following makes a big club. We've lost sight of that in recent years.

2) Pool and Arsenal created a vision, appointed a manager to carry out that vision, and backed them both properly and more importantly - through difficult periods. Pool are doing this for a second time under Klopp. In the course of his reign, we've failed to back Poch, failed to stand by him during a difficult period, appointed three successors without any vision, failed back any of them, and then we sit and wonder why we are basically back to where we were in Poch's first season.

Levy is a commercial and business genius, but the longer this misadventure continues, it is abundantly clear that his knowledge and understanding of football fits comfortably on a postage stamp.

Reappointing Poch four years after sacking him would, for me, be the single greatest indictment of this fact. It effectively writes off entire cycle while openly admitting we had zero real plan when we first sacked him and have had zero real plan since.

For my part, I would argue that he should step down as overall Chairman with immediate effect. The club should then split into two corporate wings; Tottenham Hotspur Football Club and Tottenham Hotspur Holdings. Levy can take control of the latter and find a new chairman for the former. He shouldn't have any control over sporting decisions ever again. There is little to no evidence he has a clue what he is doing, and were it not for the chance appointment of three managers in his 22 year tenure, we'd probably be no better off than we were under Sugar.

And specifically on Coutinho...it's fine to sell any player if you get a bid for more than he's worth. We've never got a bid for Dele, Eriksen or Kane that was in that category.

 

[The RDBD]

I don't think the move to spit the club would make any difference in any case we have a Director of Football which effectively does that. Levy controls the money and that will continue as long as he is here and as he has made a massive success of that, it's not likely he would pass that to someone else while he has an interest in Spurs.
Where are players to go after Spurs? They will not be good enough to go to clubs who can afford their wages so they will hang around and be difficult to shift. That's not Levy's fault that's a product of Spurs being on the fringe of the very top.

Spurs have seriously controlled the wage bill
(as a % of revenue) . However, the typical wages for squad
players is still higher than what the "a step down" clubs
can afford (this is the essence of 'wage poisoning' ) .


"ENIC's success in getting Spurs to become a regular top 4 club has created the problems
in both buying the right players and getting rid of players who we feel have reached the
end of their usefullness to the club."

The sadly requires a very brutal approach.
You have to effectively starve a player of so much
starting XI football, that they are compelled to
drop their wages to go elsewhere.

But as we have seen with Adeb***r / GLC / NDombele,
some appear to be happy to sit on the bench and
force a club to sort it (get them loans etc) .

< you cannot eat your cake and then have it >

 

[The RDBD]

The main difference between Liverpool or Arsenal and Spurs is that both have been consistently in the top three clubs in the country for decades and have challenged for and won the League many times. They had revenue far in excess of ours when ENIC took over. We have improved beyond recognition since then but we have only just caught Arsenal on revenue and are still behind Liverpool. Consequently both these clubs have more expensive players than us and pay them higher salaries. Performance on the pitch is obviously going to lag revenue growth.

The gap to the "Sky 4" has been hard to bridge
for a club run as a "business of its own account" ,


"There is no evidence that Levy lacks football knowledge.
If that were the case we would not be outperforming our revenue in league position most years"

A more objective judgement would be to do data analytics
on club + ,manager + revenues + PL prowess + UEFA prowess,
for the PL, for the period starting when ENIC bought Spurs.

At worst I would contend that they have done no worse than
other clubs in the PL on :

1. selecting and keeping managers who have moved the club upwards

2. how soon they have got rid of a manager once it appears
things are not working for the better

 

[Citizen Kane.]

I don't think the move to spit the club would make any difference in any case we have a Director of Football which effectively does that. Levy controls the money and that will continue as long as he is here and as he has made a massive success of that, it's not likely he would pass that to someone else while he has an interest in Spurs.
Where are players to go after Spurs? They will not be good enough to go to clubs who can afford their wages so they will hang around and be difficult to shift. That's not Levy's fault that's a product of Spurs being on the fringe of the very top. ENIC's success in getting Spurs to become a regular top 4 club has created the problems in both buying the right players and getting rid of players who we feel have reached the end of their usefullness to the club.
This is not a computer game it's a real club with real people and that means it never quite works as seamlessly as you might like.
Liverpool, Arsenal and United all have been bigger draws for players than Spurs it's therefore easier for them to attract the top players needed. Spurs are trying to get there and the new stadium is a massive part of that.
But we haven't won anything fans complain. Have you noticed what has happened since the PL was formed? That's why we have found it so difficult to win a cup. There are now 6 clubs for Spurs to try to compete with. The reality is that we are lucky to be competeing at all and if wasn't for the moves Levy has made we could well be mid table as we were for years before he arrived.

You make some solid points Spurf, as does PS too.

I think it has been precisely Levy's financial genius that helped us navigate the developing PL and soon after that, the advent of blood money clubs when Roman took over the chavs.

Whereas under Sugar we were very much operating with a small club mentality focused only on the immediate future, Levy came in with a proper long term plan. But that plan was almost solely financial. At its pinnacle was the construction of a new stadium, but along the way we saw concerted and coordinated efforts to increase our global fanbase (remember the huge PR pushes in the States and Far East 10-15 years ago?) as well as a really prudent market strategy of buy low sell high that saw the likes of Carrick, Berbatov, Modric etc. purchased, developed, sold at enormous profit and then said profit reinvested into the team.

It was the fact that we were such a well oiled club that allowed us to float above teams who for many years would normally finish above us. Villa, Everton, Newcastle, Leeds etc. To an extent, those clubs - despite huge fanbases - still retained the small club mentality of the pre PL days, and they suffered badly as a result. We were very fortunate to stumble upon BMJ and then Harry who through their football acumen took advantage of our extremely healthy finances to propel us up the league, overtaking poorly run clubs in the process.

Since then it has become much harder to rely exclusively on financial prudence. City changed the landscape and now Newcastle have done so too. Which means there are now at least four rival clubs (Utd, City, Chelsea, Newcastle) to whom financial prudence is irrelevant as money is meaningless.

In this new environment, building Go-kart tracks won't make much of a difference either. It can't. Not unless we intend to build a hundred of them. This new environment requires smart thinking beyond the financial realm. It requires sensible footballing decisions too. It requires patience. It requires certain risks to be taken and difficult periods to be weathered.

And it is in this category that I have very little confidence in Levy. And I think the evidence suggests I am right.

 

[Spurf]

You make some solid points Spurf, as does PS too.

I think it has been precisely Levy's financial genius that helped us navigate the developing PL and soon after that, the advent of blood money clubs when Roman took over the chavs.

Whereas under Sugar we were very much operating with a small club mentality focused only on the immediate future, Levy came in with a proper long term plan. But that plan was almost solely financial. At its pinnacle was the construction of a new stadium, but along the way we saw concerted and coordinated efforts to increase our global fanbase (remember the huge PR pushes in the States and Far East 10-15 years ago?) as well as a really prudent market strategy of buy low sell high that saw the likes of Carrick, Berbatov, Modric etc. purchased, developed, sold at enormous profit and then said profit reinvested into the team.

It was the fact that we were such a well oiled club that allowed us to float above teams who for many years would normally finish above us. Villa, Everton, Newcastle, Leeds etc. To an extent, those clubs - despite huge fanbases - still retained the small club mentality of the pre PL days, and they suffered badly as a result. We were very fortunate to stumble upon BMJ and then Harry who through their football acumen took advantage of our extremely healthy finances to propel us up the league, overtaking poorly run clubs in the process.

Since then it has become much harder to rely exclusively on financial prudence. City changed the landscape and now Newcastle have done so too. Which means there are now at least four rival clubs (Utd, City, Chelsea, Newcastle) to whom financial prudence is irrelevant as money is meaningless.

In this new environment, building Go-kart tracks won't make much of a difference either. It can't. Not unless we intend to build a hundred of them. This new environment requires smart thinking beyond the financial realm. It requires sensible footballing decisions too. It requires patience. It requires certain risks to be taken and difficult periods to be weathered.

And it is in this category that I have very little confidence in Levy. And I think the evidence suggests I am right.

Good post CK. I think the truth is that the phrase, sensible football decisions, is almost an oxymoron. Over and over again PL clubs prove how unexact a science picking football players is. The very top players cost so much because of this. When you get to the level of Ronaldo, Messi, Bale, Mbappe, everyone can see how good they are so even United struggle to sign them. When you drop to the next level, it's not so obvious who will be the next Modric and perhaps the level below that, which is where Spurs are fishing it gets harder again, who will be the next Defoe.
The part of Levy's job, where he has been vulnerable, is picking the right personel, the right expert. But again look how many managers Chelsea have had, a place where money is no object, and still they struggle to find a long term successful manager. Even City have had a number of managers before 'god' arrived. Look at United and their struggle since Fergusson retired. Fortunately Ten Hag didn't live up to his name as it was only seven. Perhaps we should call him Seven Hag now.
What you really need is some luck and just hope that when that luck appears we have the right man installed to take advantage of it.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

You make some solid points Spurf, as does PS too.

I think it has been precisely Levy's financial genius that helped us navigate the developing PL and soon after that, the advent of blood money clubs when Roman took over the chavs.

Whereas under Sugar we were very much operating with a small club mentality focused only on the immediate future, Levy came in with a proper long term plan. But that plan was almost solely financial. At its pinnacle was the construction of a new stadium, but along the way we saw concerted and coordinated efforts to increase our global fanbase (remember the huge PR pushes in the States and Far East 10-15 years ago?) as well as a really prudent market strategy of buy low sell high that saw the likes of Carrick, Berbatov, Modric etc. purchased, developed, sold at enormous profit and then said profit reinvested into the team.

It was the fact that we were such a well oiled club that allowed us to float above teams who for many years would normally finish above us. Villa, Everton, Newcastle, Leeds etc. To an extent, those clubs - despite huge fanbases - still retained the small club mentality of the pre PL days, and they suffered badly as a result. We were very fortunate to stumble upon BMJ and then Harry who through their football acumen took advantage of our extremely healthy finances to propel us up the league, overtaking poorly run clubs in the process.

Since then it has become much harder to rely exclusively on financial prudence. City changed the landscape and now Newcastle have done so too. Which means there are now at least four rival clubs (Utd, City, Chelsea, Newcastle) to whom financial prudence is irrelevant as money is meaningless.

In this new environment, building Go-kart tracks won't make much of a difference either. It can't. Not unless we intend to build a hundred of them. This new environment requires smart thinking beyond the financial realm. It requires sensible footballing decisions too. It requires patience. It requires certain risks to be taken and difficult periods to be weathered.

And it is in this category that I have very little confidence in Levy. And I think the evidence suggests I am right.

This is why our first post-Conte decision needs to be a DoF and not a manager.
We need to establish a footballing structure and stop bouncing from one coach to the next.

Levy should continue to do what he does in terms of the finances and club assets.
He needs to hire somebody else to do the bit that he understands less about, though.
Doing both is too much for a chairman and it's too much for a manager to pick up, too.

As I've said for bloody ages it all went wrong for Wenger when he lost David Dein.
Guardiola has Txiki Begiristain at City, who also did a similar job at Barca.
Red Bull established themselves with Leipzig, Salzburg and Liefering under Ralf Rangnick.

My other common rant is that we need to improve and integrate the academy properly.
It would help in a variety of different ways, even purely financial ones.
We should also look into developing feeder clubs, as much as I dislike the idea in general.
Our appalling loan situation is doing a number on us.

 

[The Huddlefro]

This is why our first post-Conte decision needs to be a DoF and not a manager.
We need to establish a footballing structure and stop bouncing from one coach to the next.

Levy should continue to do what he does in terms of the finances and club assets.
He needs to hire somebody else to do the bit that he understands less about, though.
Doing both is too much for a chairman and it's too much for a manager to pick up, too.

As I've said for bloody ages it all went wrong for Wenger when he lost David Dein.
Guardiola has Txiki Begiristain at City, who also did a similar job at Barca.
Red Bull established themselves with Leipzig, Salzburg and Liefering under Ralf Rangnick.

My other common rant is that we need to improve and integrate the academy properly.
It would help in a variety of different ways, even purely financial ones.
We should also look into developing feeder clubs, as much as I dislike the idea in general.
Our appalling loan situation is doing a number on us.

The issue we will have, if Poch is a preferred solution, is that he doesn’t really like working with DoF structures. I’m also not sure Levy is overly enamoured with them, more that he was a big fan of Paratici from afar and took the opportunity to bring him in to change things up.

Again, as we’ve said for ages, I’m not sure we have any joined up thinking on the footballing side of things without Paratici around. Both off the pitch and on it, we’re reactive rather than proactive, and long terms we’re not going to have a lot of success with that approach on either front.

 

[Billy The Spur]

Tottenham Hotspur Football Club that was (yes there is still a football team in N17) is now an entertainment and sports enterprise run by accountants, their main focus is using the clubs own money to increase the value of their investment, and they can do that without any sporting success. Having a load of bean counters running your football club will never be good for delivering silverware.

 

[humanbeingincroydon]

The issue we will have, if Poch is a preferred solution, is that he doesn’t really like working with DoF structures. I’m also not sure Levy is overly enamoured with them, more that he was a big fan of Paratici from afar and took the opportunity to bring him in to change things up.

Again, as we’ve said for ages, I’m not sure we have any joined up thinking on the footballing side of things without Paratici around. Both off the pitch and on it, we’re reactive rather than proactive, and long terms we’re not going to have a lot of success with that approach on either front.

Levy is definitely a fan of DoF structures, which is why he's had one in place for the best part of twenty years

However, in those twenty years Levy has also had reason to be wary
David Pleat - brought in to scout lower league talent, so not really a DoF in spite the job title, but did his job
Frank Arnesen - stuck to the remit of signing young English talent who can develop plus some canny signings and showed he was just as adept at signing players for Santini's system as Jol's vision of playing this game called "football"...then got tapped-up by Chelsea
Damien Comolli - decided to play Football Manager on Levy's dime, undermined Jol at every turn because he wanted to work with Juande Ramos, and is still claiming he was unfairly sacked fifteen years later
Franco Baldini - seemed to misunderstand the brief: was told that youth was the plan...then spunked £100m on players who was by and large ill-suited for Villas-Boas and definitely ill-suited for Poch
Fabio Paratici - has done the job he was brought into regardless of what bankruptspurs et al says, even if suggesting Nuno is a mark against him, although currently has a black cloud hovering over his head

 

[PowerSpurs]

Tottenham Hotspur Football Club that was (yes there is still a football team in N17) is now an entertainment and sports enterprise run by accountants, their main focus is using the clubs own money to increase the value of their investment, and they can do that without any sporting success. Having a load of bean counters running your football club will never be good for delivering silverware.

So what exactly would a perfect owner do to deliver silverware? I can see that spending £500m of your own money on buying players might work but why should anyone do that unless they expect a return on their investment.
Most clubs actually work exactly like Tottenham do. The owners of Liverpool, Man U and Arsenal don't put much money in either. Almost no owners invest altruisticly. Some launder dirty money though