To be fair every club’s done their fare share of overpaying for utter dross so I wouldn’t say we’re a bigger culprit than most others, albeit that 5 or 6 year spell Pre-Paratici was some dark times for us in the market. I do agree the excellent negotiator tag died years back for Levy though.
FFP isn't the thing limiting our expenditure though...it's the covenant on the stadium loans. I don't know exactly what it is set at but if it requires cashflow to cover the interest payments x2 which wouldn't be unusual then that would tally pretty much exactly with the amounts we've been spending since we moved in.
At the moment, Spurs average a 2-1 result per game. Only the Poool currently do better (3-1) . "We're going from extremes almost on a weekly basis as we'll batter one side then draw or lose the next with limp performances, the losses have been some absolute dreadful watches as bad as anything in recent years, Sunday's draw to Fulham wasn't much better either, they deserved to win." That is effectively the truth of it, and the reason why : 1. the pts total is conflict in with the above stat 2. I have stated the PL campaign is in a precarious position
If you did the wage histograms for Spurs and Citeh, would they say be isomorphic in variance but the "bin" values be twice as large etc. I wonder what the histograms look like for the entire PL (are there patterns that correlate with table positions etc) .
I think it's far to soon to judge Solanki as he has only played 10 games. Interestingly if you look at the scoring rate of the players you mention you find that even now Solanki is scoring at a similar rate. Solanki a goal every 2.5 games Berbatov 2.5 Defoe 3.00 Sherrinham 2.4 Keane 2.6 On that basis Solanki is up there with those players you mention. However the reason I picked Greaves and Kane is because they were at another level. Look at their stats. Greaves 1.45 Kane 1.48 Clearly at another level to all the players above, in terms of goal scoring.
I got hooked at looking at the scoring rate of top players. Haaland 1.05 Messi 1.09 Ronaldo 0.93 The only one to score at more thana goal a game. (The geatest goal scorer of all time?) Madrid stats. Mbappe 1.09 Pele 1.02 Maradonna 1.63 Cruyff 1.26 MIssed Lewandowski 1.06
So a league looks like this. 1. Ronaldo 2. Pele 3. Haaland 4. Lewandowski 5. = Messi Mbappe 7 Cruyff 8 Greaves 9 Kane 10 Maradonna I know it's nonsense because players offered more than just goalscoring. Maradonna was clearly on another level to Haaland on the field as was Cruyff bu interesting nevertheless.
Harry at Bayern is something else. So far 0.88. If he keeps that going he will be number 1 in the world on my measures.
Not sure your statistics are correct though, Spurf. Solanke’s played 17 for us so far for the record too. The actual stats I make are: Berbatov: 2.2 Keane: 2.7 and 3.4 Defoe: 2.75 and 2.35 Sheringham: 2.01 and 3.07 Solanke: 2.8 He’s currently at a worse scoring rate than all of the players in their first spells at the club and their goal stats are also spread across far more games making the feats further impressive. And if anyone wants to laugh or cry, Richarlison is at 4.5.
I make Richarlison 5 so obvioulsy we are at the mercy of the net and where we get our figures. We would tie ourselves in knots arguing about the figures and get nowhere. For example I have taken the main spells of these players at their main clubs or at Spurs for our strikers, so it's not meant to be definitive. It's a guide.
I went through Wiki and Transfermarkt and they seem to have similar numbers, generally reliable sites. I took their stats from Spurs spells only though as if I done goals from other/ main clubs there’d possibly be goal stats from lower leagues which I think would unfairly tinker with scoring records due to lower leagues being easier to score in. Case in point with Solanke’s goals in his whole career he’d be at 3.15 but if you minus his two years in the Championship his goal record in top flight football would be 4.2.
Funningly enough I used the same sources but I added together the different spells that Defoe, Keane and Sherringham spent at Spurs and made one figure. Of course all players get different stats with different teams. Look at Harry at Bayern for example. All this is why I don't generally get involved with stats but the comparisons are there and for me it remains too early to judge Solanki or for that matter the current team. I see this as a 2 or 3 year project but whether Ange lasts long enough to see it through remains to be seen. Spurs remain on a hair trigger when it comes to responding to Manager performances. I would like to see this current project taken to it's conclusion and buying young players suggests Spurs are looking longer term but I am not confident they'll stick with it if it gets a bit rough as it is now.
I think part of the problem for Ange and it's something CK has touched on too is that he hasn't so far shown he's capable of improving any player so the only likely way this project does evolve is by the board giving him better players, something I'm not overly confident in them doing. I really want it to work for Ange but I think we need 3-4 players who'd likely command wages similar to Son, as wages now seem to be the best indicator of quality more so than fees, seeing as Richarlison and Solanke at £60m & £65m should've in theory represented great players but their £90k salaries are in line with sort of midtable standard calibre Prem players, Spurs need better than that standard.
I wouldn't say he hasn't improved players, as Pedro Porro is clearly much improved under him compared to how he was under Conte and he's certainly got more out of Sarr and Bissouma (but playing them would tend to do that...) - though his system nerfing Sonny is an issue
I disagree re Porro. He's still making the same basic mistakes defensively and going forward hasn't been quite the same threat he was last season. He's a good player but I feel our appreciation of him is rooted more in the fact that his predecessors were simply awful by comparison. I wouldn't mind at all giving Spence a run out on that flank for a bit.
Porro barely had half a season under Conte though. He's given Sarr more game time but just look at Sarr's performance at Milan away under Conte and you'll see the talent's always been there, he just needed the faith. Bissouma's probably been one of the most criticised players in the team since Ange arrived. Agree on Son. I don't think the system suits Maddison and possibly Bentancur too. Maddison needs to play as a 10 and Bentancur was far better under Conte operating as a box to box midfielder, not a DM. He'd have potentially beaten Kane to our POTY had he not gotten the ACL that year.
Yeah comparing Porro to Doherty or Aurier makes him seem good. Compare him to Kyle Walker and you see the issue. Same as Solanke, compare him to Richarlison and he’s an improvement, but compare him to Kane and you see the drop off in standard
Spot on. And it carries through too many positions in the team. Compare Maddison to Lo Celso, he's a clear improvement. Compare him to Eriksen and you'll need a change of underwear. Same for Bissouma - Sissoko - Dembele. And Romero - Dier - Alderweireld. And Johnson - Moura - Dele.
