Postecoglou & Lange (& Paratici) Watch

Which of Neymar, Di Maria and Mbappe was he going to replace though?

 

I do no such thing. I look to see if Spurs have improved under his leadership. They clearly have. So he gets the credit. I look at which other clubs have improved to the same extent or more. The answer is Chelsea and Man City. So whatever mistakes Levy has made he has made fewer than most. Liverpool have done well over the last few years but they were cemented in the top 4 when ENIC took over and fell below us for quite a while so claiming they have a better model is premature.

It's entirely possible an alternative owner exists who would appoint a Chairman who would do a better job. If you know of one then name them and let's see their track record.

 

Yet again you make the absurd argument that you can maximise the value of a football club by a deliberate policy of not winning trophies. Winning trophies is an outcome that is made more likely as the team improves. It can't be guaranteed though. ENIC have not improved us enough to guarantee trophies. Why do you think they should have?

 

While I agree with the first sentence, the second one doesn't follow. The only model that has worked better over a long period is to have more money, ideally unlimited funds provided by a gangster or a foreign government. The only sane model is to increase income. We need to increase it even more to compete though.

 

That wouldn’t have been of much concern to us because Poch wanted him at PSG so presumably he saw a place for him in some capacity.

 

Liverpool wasted a much higher income than us for season after season though.
I agree about Leicester up to a point but they don't have a sustainable model.

 

I replied to someone who said similar to this a few weeks back. You can’t actually list a chairman/ owner you want like you can with players or managers.

Most owners/ chairman are often first time owners of football clubs and they generally only own one in their lifetime. Some like City and Red Bull own various and they’re a small exception but other than that, when ENIC do sell up, our new owner and its chairman will almost certainly be someone completely new to football ownership.

 

At the risk of repeating ourselves, the amount that Spurs could spend and remain within FFP requirements, shows that we're making plenty of money. The problem is that too much of it's been spent on the overspend on the stadium, leaving the squad severely depleted in terms of real quality due to too many Rodon's and not enough Skriniar's coming in.

Levy can either accept that as a fact that needs rectifying or it will be the end of him at Spurs. If Conte's not backed, like previous managers weren't, he's done.

 

But they’ve done superbly over the last 4 or 5 or so years. They’ve only been at Liverpool since 2010 too, so all in all it’s hard to deny just how great a job they’ve done. A lot of it has stemmed from Michael Edwards as their DoF and Klopp as their manager but ultimately when you hire the right people and give them the backing required it increases chances of success, which they’ve reaped.

 

This is true, barring the likes of Mike Ashley and the crooks at Wet Spam.
I tend to look at what any new owner is likely to be like, instead.

Sportswashing murderous scumbags? Pass.
Americans cashing in? Pass.
Dodgy ****ers taking a punt? Pass.
Energy drink rebranding everything in sight? Pass.

I can't see a preferable alternative to ENIC, even if they're far from perfect.

 

There's better out there...and worse but only ENIC can decide who comes next.

However, ENIC can be pressured into running the football club better and putting more of the club's earnings on the pitch.

All it takes is for the income to start to dry up and the booing to re-start and ENIC will up their game. Whilst fans are prepared to put up with promises of jam tomorrow, that's what ENIC will serve up.

 

I don’t want a Roman or a Bin Salman, I’m not even suggesting for ENIC to leave, at least not yet but I also think that it’s not completely inevitable that we’d get some sportswashing fanatic or someone morally corrupt should they do so. It’s a case of simply not knowing for me, which is exciting and worrying in equal measure I guess.

But for instance, Daniel Ek wants to buy Arsenal (or wanted, made two bids that have been rejected IIRC) and whilst I’m not gonna pretend to say I’ve done too much digging into his past, he simply seems like a normal yet very rich bloke who happens to be an Arsenal fan. Someone along those lines could be great for us. I remember rumours about 5 or so years back of Steve Nash wanting to lead a consortium to take over us, I don’t think many would object to him.

 

please log in to view this image

 

Sounds like Ek's a massive ****, going by a quick browse:
https://www.thesound.co.nz/home/mus...or-asking-musicians-to-make-music-faster.html

Haven't had much of a look yet though, so it's all just standard capitalist ****, so far.

 

Given how he tries not to pay artists on Spotify, I can see one issue with him running a football club...

 

So unless Jesus/Gandhi or someone of that kind of moral compass is willing to takeover we can’t do better than ENIC


Ooook

 

No, but I'd rule out gangsters, murderous dictators and people who are in league with them.
That eliminates far too many current Premier League owners for my liking.
Fit and proper person, my arse.

 

To be fair, Jesus would kick quite a few rival club owners out of our ground...

 

Neymar, what with him out for a bit with an ankle injury...

 

The absurd fee that they manage to extract from Barca for Phillipe Countinho that enabled them to buy Van Dijk and Allison was possibly the greatest business any club has ever done.