The season ahead, starting from now.

  • 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!
Boss said:
SOS, if you posted this before the Arsenal game, you would have had a few people say "if we beat Arsenal then we're title challengers", funny as them posters seem to have gone missing? maybe waking up to reality isn't always a place some like to be.

But going onto to our realistic expectations, top four is where we have to finish, after all, isn't that why we sacked Redknapp? to bring in a more younger manager, a new system which could take us forward and allow us to progress and in all honesty I don't see much progression other then finishing 3 points more then Redknapp based on Bale turning himself into the welsh messi, as aside from that I see a disjointed boring team which relied on one great player to mask problems with AVB and his tactics.

This year as we know, we have sold our best player and its not realistic for a club like ours to sell Bale and replace him like for like, as we're not a champions league club and instead have to look at the second tier of players, players that could be great, players that have great potential but aren't the finished article.

So when you put together a team of players with potential it really does take time for them to form a team unit, but that is why the manager is so important as he has to not just get results, but allow the new players to develop and settle but looking at our line up agaisnt Arsenal, we had Townsend, Chadli, Paulinho, Capoue, Soldado and Dembele as our midfield/attack. Dembele is the only survivor from last year, and if we look around europe and the teams which are successful, they don't tend to have a complete overhaul and expect instant success...unless you're Pep at Barca!

However the club in reality has to be in the champions league, but we have Man City/Chelsea/Man Utd/Ourselves/Arsenal and Liverpool all competing for these positions within the top four, three of them teams will break away into a title race leaving us, liverpool and Arsenal to fight for 4th, and which team is playing catch up? Ourselves, which team is relying on players to gel and form a team unit while picking up points? Us.

We have made things hard for ourselves, but thats our problem and I hope we can finish 4tth but in all honesty I wouldn't be surprised if we finish 5th or 6th and that wouldn't be acceptable.
Click to expand...

Think you've hit a number of nails on the head there Boss.

The Arsenal game was a reminder that we're perhaps not as good as what we thought we were... (YET!). Though losing to Arsenal by a single goal from a defensive area isn't bad going overall.

Top 4 is where we "need" to be as like you say, it's what Harry was sacked for.

It's been no secret our football under AVB has been less attractive though at times I think it has been more effective, admittedly a lot of the time we relied on Bale's heroics to win the game but we've seen a lot more grit and a higher work rate than what we usually saw under previous squads.

What we have now is a team/ squad of players, many with immense talent and on paper, I'd say better than any squad we've had under AVB/ Harry/ Ramos/ Jol. When you look at Lloris, Kaboul, Vertonghen and Sandro, all of who have been with us at least a season, these guys are good enough to play for any top team in Europe in my opinion. With that core, we've now added 2 of the worlds best young talents in Lamela and Eriksen, a finisher of the highest pedigree in Soldado, a Brazilian engine in Paulinho, a Sandro-esque French international in Capoue and another off of Belgium's growing talent line - Chadli. Yes, of course there's going be a bedding in period, hopefully it won't take too long but if these players can reach their potential then I think any team in the world would struggle to beat us. AVB has a massive task to ensure he gets the best out of these guys, unlike last year, he's had the true backing of the board now and it seems he's managed to bring in a lot of players "on his list he gave Levy" which he mentioned in an interview.

The pressure is really on now to achieve a minimum of 4th place, this season more so than ever I'd say, I do believe this team can achieve it but only time will tell on that.
 
PowerSpurs said:
All managers have strengths and weaknesses and they all make mistakes. I think AVB is an upgrade on Redknapp but its still a tall order to finish 4th when there are five clubs with a bigger budget. We've swapped a wonder-player for a deep squad and I think we've got a chance of 4th or better but I won't be too disappointed if we end up 5th because that is still punching above our weight.
Click to expand...

You can't hide behind the budget excuse forever though. The gap between your budget and the top four in this league is nowhere near the gap between Dortmund and Bayern. The players you've brought in have come with the ambition of playing Champions League football and winning things, as have Liverpool's signings. Playing the budget card won't be enough to satisfy the likes of Suarez, Sakho, Lamela, Paulinho et al. You've got a very good squad of players that (on paper) can compete with most sides in Europe.
 
District Line said:
You can't hide behind the budget excuse forever though. The gap between your budget and the top four in this league is nowhere near the gap between Dortmund and Bayern. The players you've brought in have come with the ambition of playing Champions League football and winning things, as have Liverpool's signings. Playing the budget card won't be enough to satisfy the likes of Suarez, Sakho, Lamela, Paulinho et al. You've got a very good squad of players that (on paper) can compete with most sides in Europe.
Click to expand...

They're is a pretty bloody big difference though. Lets use NET spend as that is the figure that actually means something:

City: ~£90m
Chelsea: ~£60m
Arsenal: ~£35m
Man Utd: ~£30m
Spurs: ~£10m

What about wages? I bet we have a much lower wage budget than all of those by some margin.
 
District Line said:
You can't hide behind the budget excuse forever though. The gap between your budget and the top four in this league is nowhere near the gap between Dortmund and Bayern. The players you've brought in have come with the ambition of playing Champions League football and winning things, as have Liverpool's signings. Playing the budget card won't be enough to satisfy the likes of Suarez, Sakho, Lamela, Paulinho et al. You've got a very good squad of players that (on paper) can compete with most sides in Europe.
Click to expand...

It's not an 'excuse' its a reason. If our squad gels and we stop giving away silly points to weaker clubs then we would likely finish top 4. Then our budget will increase and we should be able to stay there. That's AVB's goal obviously but I won't be too critical if he didn't achieve it.
 
Spurm said:
Lets use NET spend as that is the figure that actually means something:
Click to expand...

Not to me it doesn't...to me, it's the fact that we have spent £100m+ on new players and that is how I will judge the season. I won't look at it that we only spent £10m net...but that may just be me.
 
Barney'sowner said:
Not to me it doesn't...to me, it's the fact that we have spent £100m+ on new players and that is how I will judge the season. I won't look at it that we only spent £10m net...but that may just be me.
Click to expand...

But we are talking about budgets, NET is the figure that matters there.
 
Spurm said:
They're is a pretty bloody big difference though. Lets use NET spend as that is the figure that actually means something:

City: ~£90m
Chelsea: ~£60m
Arsenal: ~£35m
Man Utd: ~£30m
Spurs: ~£10m

What about wages? I bet we have a much lower wage budget than all of those by some margin.
Click to expand...

Not to the players. And that's what it all comes down to.

P.S Not disagreeing with you just looking at it from a players perspective.
 
"But we are talking about budgets, NET is the figure that matters there."

Gross transfer totals are a general value placed on the abilities of the
players bought.
Net totals are a measure of the business management of your club.
ROI is a measure of the improvement for your net spend.

So if Spurs still don't get a CL slot for zero net spend, then the ROI is poor.
From the gross spending viewpoint, the ROI would be even worse (the on paper
increase in talent has underperformed) .
 
Arsenal have spent a net of 30 million (we really mgged off Roma), a bit less if you factor in the loan payments we received for all the players we loaned out. Not sure about your figure for spurs either, thought you spent close to 110 million? Anyway, you probably know better.
But if you look at it like that, surely you have to consider the wages of the players? Bringing in 7? Internationals will have added at least 350k a week (probably a lot more) to your wage budget, while the likes of us have trimmed around 200k off it.
Regardless, that isn't the teal point here, the fact is that you really screwed real Madrid, in such a way that will never come about again, and that if your 110 mill spend doesn't amount to anything, it will be a complete and utter failure, as you'll never have as good an opportunity as this to finally bridge the gap (although I still believe one season of the spuds finishing ahead does not mean the gap is closed)
Plus, how in the name of holy hell will you pay all these wages without champions league football, a big stadium, or the massive sponsorship that comes with being perceived as an elite club?
 
How can you expect an increase in ROI for a net spend of zero?
I don't understand this stuff but that makes no sense. If you have spent zero net then surely you expect your return to be the same or worse unless your competitors have a negative net?
 
Theo Net-Breaker said:
Arsenal have spent a net of 30 million (we really mgged off Roma), a bit less if you factor in the loan payments we received for all the players we loaned out. Not sure about your figure for spurs either, thought you spent close to 110 million? Anyway, you probably know better.
Click to expand...

£110 isn't a million miles off being correct. But we shipped out about £25m worth of players before Bale. So if anything our net is less than the £10m i quoted

Theo Net-Breaker said:
But if you look at it like that, surely you have to consider the wages of the players? Bringing in 7? Internationals will have added at least 350k a week (probably a lot more) to your wage budget, while the likes of us have trimmed around 200k off it.
Click to expand...
I don't know the exact figures but i don't think ours has increased. The players we brought in were on relatively low wages. I thought soldado was on £45k/w in Spain. Chiriches is now on about £15k/w i think. We lost some of our biggest earners in Bentley, Gallas and Bale.
 
Barney'sowner said:
Sure about that? In the season he was sacked, Spurs did indeed finish 4th!
Click to expand...

I think it was a case of a) throwing away 3rd which resulted in us leaving ourselves open for Chelsea to win CL and jump in over us - which they did b) England fiasco and c) I think Levy wanted AVB.

Levy mentioned AVB was brought in to go to "the next level" so AVB finishing 5th is not meeting the targets.
 
"How can you expect an increase in ROI for a net spend of zero?"

If a manufacturer via its dealings bought in new equipment that manufactures
cheaper or faster than before, but the net cost of that new equipment is
zero, then you get ROI for a net spend of zero.

Substitute player for equipment, and you have the football equivalent.
 
Theo Net-Breaker said:
Arsenal have spent a net of 30 million (we really mgged off Roma), a bit less if you factor in the loan payments we received for all the players we loaned out. Not sure about your figure for spurs either, thought you spent close to 110 million? Anyway, you probably know better.
But if you look at it like that, surely you have to consider the wages of the players? Bringing in 7? Internationals will have added at least 350k a week (probably a lot more) to your wage budget, while the likes of us have trimmed around 200k off it.
Regardless, that isn't the teal point here, the fact is that you really screwed real Madrid, in such a way that will never come about again, and that if your 110 mill spend doesn't amount to anything, it will be a complete and utter failure, as you'll never have as good an opportunity as this to finally bridge the gap (although I still believe one season of the spuds finishing ahead does not mean the gap is closed)
Plus, how in the name of holy hell will you pay all these wages without champions league football, a big stadium, or the massive sponsorship that comes with being perceived as an elite club?
Click to expand...

In terms of net spending we haven't spent a penny, in fact we're about £2m in profit after the sales of Bale, Dempsey, Hudd, Parker and Caulker.

As for wages you're not the only ones that have trimmed yours, with the exception of Soldado and maybe Paulinho, no one will be earning over £70k out of the new lads. Chiriches is reportedly on £19k, with Lamela on £66k and none of Capoue, Chadli or Eriksen will earn more than Lamela. Taking into account that Bale - £90k, Bentley - £60k, Gallas - £60k, Caulker - £25k, Hudd - £35k-£40k, Dempsey - £55k and Parker - £60k are all off the wage bill, there's a good chance that we're probably paying less in wages.

As for how we pay these without CL money or a big stadium.
A) We're a well run club.
B) Levy gets fantastic sponsorship deals.
C) Europa League does pay out a bit, admittedly pennies compared to CL but it all counts.
D) We always have a packed house at WHL in the league and even in Europe and Cups we're at about 85%-90% capacity (more if it's games against the likes of Inter/ Lyon etc).
E) Up until the last year or two, we've had a strict wage cap in which only Bale and Adebayor (and now Soldado and possibly Paulinho) have broken.
F) In most transfer windows, like this one, we tend to end up with a profit after dealings so that money could be used to help cover wages if we've gone over budget on them - which I doubt would happen anyway to be honest.

And finally, there's no team in the Prem called "Spuds" <ok>
 
The RDBD said:
"How can you expect an increase in ROI for a net spend of zero?"

If a manufacturer via its dealings bought in new equipment that manufactures
cheaper or faster than before, but the net cost of that new equipment is
zero, then you get ROI for a net spend of zero.

Substitute player for equipment, and you have the football equivalent.
Click to expand...

that boils down to how well run we are though. Eg, sell one player above value and attempt to buy in for the same price with more success.
The problem is that only works in a level playing field. If all the clubs had a clone of Levy and Baldini but the top 4 have bigger transfer and wage budgets then you can't expect to get an increase in ROI based on a net spend of zero.
Similarly if all the clubs had an identical budget but were run differently then you could expect a higher ROI with a net spend of zero.
 
Spurm :

If THFC was in the business of "making" PL points, the players were
equipment, and GD / goals conceded are measures of productivity and
waste in the PL points making process, then with this new sexy
equipment purchased this summer for zero net spend :

How many extra PL points were made this year compared to last.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back