Perhaps we are too far in? I've been doing some more digging into the inner workings of our "strategy" under Levy, and something that runs as a consistent theme enough to be considered a pattern is how we tend to cast a very wide net both in manager appointments and player signings, but not a deep one. Our weapon of choice is the sawed-off shotgun, not the sniper rifle. We fire wildly and widely, hoping something will hit and stick. I'll elaborate: In the PL era, of all the teams who have been there for 30+ years, we have had the second highest number of managers. Only Chelsea have had more. In the PL era, only two clubs have made more signings than us (646) and that is City (685) and, surprise surprise, Chelsea (689). By contrast, other 'rivals' have been far calmer in their approach. Liverpool have had 9 managers who have made 544 signings, Arsenal have had 5 managers who have made 506 signings and United have had 6 managers who have made 531 signings. This suggests that we have never really had a coherent strategy on the pitch (in complete contrast to the miracles happening off the pitch). Our approach has been haphazard, experimental and entirely unpredictable. As I said probably five years ago, we are still trying to emulate Chelsea without being able to match their spending. They are the closest club to us for the sake of a direct comparison in modes of operation, and if I'm right this would go some way to explaining why we have a fetish with former Chelsea managers. It also explains why we quite happily veer from one approach to a totally different one in the space of just a few years, both with manager style and market strategy. Expansive football didn't work? Try defensive. Signing experienced players didn't work? Try youngsters. Shotgun over sniper. That's us.
Apples v oranges comparison. If you can afford to spend the most money on players, you will tend to buy the very best, they will win things and so you won't need to upgrade them. If you are less rich, you will be forced to buy players lower down the tree, they won't win things and you will feel obliged to change them. All our issues arise from having less wealth than the trophy winning clubs. The only fix is having more wealth.
From outside i would say your problem in the recent past hasn't been the amount you have spent rather the poor judgement on players and their value .
The reason it is simple is that nothing is going wrong really. We are doing about as well as we should in a League where there are three teams who have been better than us for decades and two others injected with dodgy money. Look at any other league in Europe and see how well the club in our position does...
No it isn't. It's pretty clear that we need to sign fewer players. And hire fewer managers. The turnover on both fronts over the past 5-6 years has been ridiculous, I don't see how anyone can argue with that. The overwhelming majority of our signings tend to be in the £20-50m bracket which is well within our budget. Instead of signing 3 x £30m players which we often do and is very much in line with our scattergun approach, sign one player for £90m. You yourself have said this many times.
I think there is some truth in that because since the new stadium our net spend has been pretty high. But if we try to get a really quality player then they usually end up with one of our bigger competitors.
I agree it's a much better strategy but I don't now think it's possible because players in that price bracket would rather join Liverpool or Bayern or even Milan where they have a much better chance of trophies.
Your view that price and quality always align is just plain wrong imo or else my view of Richarlison is wildly inaccurate . The other point is you need to buy players who fit the team format and that may not be the "best" player . If the team is good the players look better than there actual ability level
The post-covid and FFP era has to a greater extent shifted the boundaries of football finance than anything else in decades. Very, very few clubs can afford to drop £90m on a player without major sales first. We are one of them. Levy takes full credit for this fact. I don't think a single club in Italy, Holland or Portugal can. In the world, only City, Liverpool, Real and Arsenal can do it. United are strapped. Bayern can only do it if they sell first. Same for Barca and Atletico. PSG seem to have totally abandoned their failed galactico rip-off project. We are therefore one of five teams on the entire planet who could drop £90m on a player without selling anyone in advance of the transfer. We are 8th on the most recent Forbes list and yet by an incredible quirk caused by Levy's business acumen and other club's poor running, we can out-spend 3 or 4 of the teams above us. This means that our real wealth is not translating into actual ambition. And that's what's so annoying. Levy has worked day and night to manoeuvre us into a position where we should be striking while these clubs are weak and we are strong, but we don't. Instead we piss about while they regain their strength.
West Ham signed Lucas Paqueta from Milan. The financial strength of English clubs nowadays means even those classed as midtable ones here can either sign players from far more prestigious sides or simply beat them to a transfer. Our problem is we don't use our stature or status as Europe's 8th or 9th richest club to target players we should be targetting. We've spent over £300m since Ange arrived yet you'd barely notice it. £125m has been spent in the last 2 and a half years on two strikers, on paper that should equal a lethal strikeforce, one that should rival Keane and Berbatov, instead we have one relegation calibre striker and one who'd probably make it at around 7th-9th in the league as a starter but not a top six/ top four.
one thing is, you guys keep shopping in the premier league and having to pay the premier league tax. Solanke had the additional bonus of the englishman tax. Why are you not going after the brightest european talents, especially since you can actually afford to chuck them in the side to play rather than them joining a top club but rotting on the bench. Case in point, you grabbed van der ven and apart from his injuries, he's looked different class. One that if he can stay injury free is going to be one of the best. Everyone else Spence bissouma johnson solanke the pigeon gray (and even then you don't even bother playing him) odobert (to be fair not much chance yet) Maddison (I think he's quality) Against Van Der Ven Porro Bentancur Kulusevski Vicario Romero Werner () Sarr Udogie Dragusin Bergvall (hasn't really played) I've just wrote this list out and actually it's a bit 50/50 on where you are purchasing from but i think the guys in the bottom list have been cheaper overall and more impactful than the list in the top
Think this might be the first current player to aim a dig at the hierarchy since Rose. ———————————- Cristian Romero on whether Tottenham are falling behind their rivals due to lack of investment: "The truth is, I would say no comment, but... Manchester City competes every year, you see how Liverpool strengthens its squad, Chelsea strengthens their squad, if one doesn't do well, they strengthen again, and now they're seeing results. Those are the things to imitate. The last few years, it's always the same people responsible [at Tottenham]. Hopefully, they [Tottenham hierarchy] realise who the true responsible ones are, and we move forward because it’s a beautiful club that, with the structure it has, could easily be competing for the title every year.”
The problem is that the officials are no longer told that they're refereeing a game, but that they're managing an event. It's not about making the correct decision and applying consistency in the name of fairness and sportsmanship, it's about writing the best story. They don't think that they're trying to police 22 ****ers, they think that they're directing a ****ing film. The game was the big Premier League selling point of the weekend, hyped as the most exciting fixture of the round. I'm sure that plenty of neutrals would agree that's what it turned out to be, to be honest. The whole sports part went out the window when Ceicedo wasn't dismissed, though. They've turned football into WWE Sports-Entertainment™.
Now I’ve had time to reflect, think deeply, remove the emotion and look at the bigger picture… you absolute ****s
Two of the clubs he mentions have had decades of sportswashing by murderous criminals. They're part of the problem. He can also stop ****ing moaning until he turns up for us and stops playing for Argentina when he's injured. He's going to **** off to Madrid at the end of the season and he's getting his excuses in now.
I don't blame him. It's barely even a criticism. When he was a youngster in Argentina I'm sure he dreamed of playing for either Real or Barca. I'd prefer it if he just did his job properly until it becomes a reality, though.
