Spurs and Liverpool can't compete financially with Chelsea, City or United but still finish above them and challenge them for the league. Top earners at spurs only earn about £120k - about half less than the top earners at the clubs i mentioned. A combination of academy players and shrewd signings such as Eriksen have enabled this to happen. We can do the same.
I think he didn't like that we were a lot more open at the back when playing 4-2-3-1 so he changed it back to 4-3-3 to strike a better balance, but as he fixed the defence, he lost a lot in the attack. In that way I do think he has changed to be less attacking. Maybe the match against Hull is an indicator that he's looking to find that attacking spark again. We shall see, or not.
Yep. 11 forwards and a "rush" goalie today. Claude and Sparky have struck a deal. Remember, you heard it here first, and I know because I drove through Stoke the other day, and a bloke told me while I was stuck in a traffic jam.
Indeed. I'm saying that the same gulf between us and spurs exists between spurs and the likes of Chelsea/United. Yet they are able of competing with them on the pitch. It just shows it can be done and we need to be ambitious enough to actually believe and want to compete with these sides on the pitch rather than just settle and accept we will never be as good because of money.
Not to weigh in on the whole Puel debate but I think it's funny people think fans discontent has anything to do with his potential sacking. It doesn't, at all. You don't get to be a decision making person at a premier league football club by valuing the opinion of the average football fan on your manager. Obviously if fans started voting with there feet in huge numbers it might have an impact, but even then ticket sales don't make up a major slice of our income. If he gets sacked it will be because the board think it is a good business decision end of. Of course that's not to say people can't complain about fans being negative etc, I just don't think it will have made a blind bit of difference.
So our gap is double? I don't think anyone is saying it's not possible to compete, but realistically it can't be expected. So seasons such as this one are the default based on current resources
It will be interesting to see what happens to Leicester this summer and next season. Spurs have the same style of management as we do so i don't think provide a good comparison. But Leicester are a similar sized club with similar resources but went with the big contract approach to keeping some of their best players last summer. they ended up with a weird season this year but it will be interesting to see if they can improve next season or if they will fade away.
At least someone has said it. The amount of people who are turning this into some sort of fan vendetta, where the board are as weak as they come, and fold under the slightest bit of fan pressure. (By the way, if that was true, then that in itself would be a reason to question the board. Who wants a board that are that weak? Personally though, I give them much more credit than that)
There is a big difference between accepting never being as good (as it now seems I am being labelled as doing) and EXPECTING it. I think my behaviour shows that of someone that can take the good with he bad, where as some fans don't show that. I'm all for reaching to the stars (jeez I've spent 6 years on here being called a happy clapper and too positive) yet I don't expect it or think that's where we should be. I hope for it and can deal with it when it doesn't happen. Too many back and white thinkers around here.
For the record my annoyance at the Board if they sack Puel, will be for not backing the man they selected by not giving him enough time.
So If I've got this right our Television revenue for the club is nearly as good as say Chelsea, Spurs, or City for arguments sake? Our revenue from spectator tickets and numbers though seem to be on average 20/25% lower? So how do the clubs like Bournemouth, West ham, West Brom to name a few survive then? Also can anyone explain how it is then that so called equal size and smaller clubs can equal and better the salary level we offer? Some things do not add up. Errr I suppose it could be my maths............
And in friendly spirit, if/when there is a new manager, us lot who wanted Puel to stay around will still be cheering next season. Thanks but right decision I can accept, the air of celebration (on other social media not here, as almost always), I will just have to ignore.
The top clubs get much more money from merchandising , there's also champions league money, and various owners taking on big piles of debt. We pay more in wages than most of the smaller clubs i think?
Which is an understandable view point. Although I would ask the question as what enough time is? You and I and all other fans have the rest of our lives supporting the club. We have lots of time. But players don't. It only takes one season to get relegated. It only takes a poor three or four months, to write-off the season (even if that is a safe mid-table place). The board had their fingers burnt 12 months ago, by not signing a forward in the summer. Come January, it was fundamentally too late for the season (although if you really want to be pessimistic, you could argue it came just in the nick of time in terms of avoiding relegation). Maybe they have learnt from that. I'm back to my smaller, but annual, point about not waiting until the end of August to sign players; get it done before the opening day. Don't waste those opening two or three or four games. Could this season cost us keeping Romeu, Bertrand, Virgil etc this summer? Maybe. Could a similar (or worse) season next year cost of keeping Cedric, Redmond, Gabbi etc? Maybe. You get my drift, I hope. Yes removing Puel this summer could be harsh or unfair. But I would much rather have a proactive board, than a reactive board. If they remove him, and they honestly think it is for the best, then they have my 100% support. (And by the way, not every sacking is a punishment. I don't think us removing Adkins was punishment - I think we wanted to go to the next level. I don't think Watford removing Flores last summer was punishment - I think they saw a bit of "shock treatment" or refreshment as a great way to survive this season. Yes someone is losing their job, but not necessarily a case of "you've failed, goodbye")
The number of replies to Southamptons messages on Twitter saying "woooo Claude's last game" or "ten men behind the ball, glad we don't have that next season" really makes me wish that if Saints sack Puel later that they could include half our fan base in that as well.
I have said before that we don't have the players in situ to make Puel's way of playing as successful or as entertaining as it was in France. For me, the two players most likely to be at risk of being replaced, should he stay, would be Davis and Prowsey. I like both players, for different reasons, but it is my belief that Puel needs midfielders that are faster and more dynamic, who will drive forward, carrying the ball 30/40/50 metres, drawing defenders out of position thence freeing up space for his front players to do their job. Yes Davis will occasionally do this, but will be overhauled by quicker players chasing back, before an attacking advantage can be gained. Prowsey, just doesn't run with the ball, full stop, which is disappointing as there were indications, pre-season, that he was prepared to do that. Just my opinion.
To answer the question of time, I would say from now to end of October. That is full close season and three months of the new season. That would give us an indication of what he can do. If we were really in dire straights we could change it earlier, but if we get to end of October, not playing well, not pushing into and through the top eight in earnest, then I'd couldn't complain if the board said it was time to go. Once a decision is made either way, the club will get my 100% support as ever.
