The reality check is that only two teams have won the PL in the last 7 years and one of those did it 6 times. In that period, few have challenged for the title to the end. Utd have never realistically challenged since SAF left in 2013 despite a couple of 2nd places. Chelsea haven't been at races for a while. 90+ points is usually required and only City and Liverpool have proved capable of that in recent times. The Big Six is no more than a reference to the 6 clubs with the largest income. Sky like to promote the idea of competition - but in real terms, City have had little competition in the PL for ages.
"Anomaly" 1x CL final 2x Premier League title pushes 2x FA Cup semi final 1x Season Killer Cup final For a club with "no appetite to win", they sure seemed to be trying to win things in that period
We’re the only ones so far to have broken the top 4 glass ceiling under our own steam, too. Hasn’t translated to trophies though which obviously is ****.
Where did City get all that money to buy the best of UEFA? I'm a long way away so we don't get to hear too much.......!?
Winning trophies only happens if you have one of the best teams or a lot of luck and sometimes you need both. You can only have one of the best teams if you have lots of money or you get really lucky with recruitment. The strategy the club are following is to overtake the others on wealth and then better players and trophies will follow. There is only one short cut to this which is to accept dodgy money. The reason we don't quite manage to win things is that we come up against richer clubs with better players when we get to semi finals and finals. It's nothing to do with attitude or DNA or anything else.
There's also the variable of the monied clubs and/or old money clubs either having an off season or being in the early stages of a transitional period The 2015-16 season is the most obvious example of this, as the sheer volume of those clubs ****ting the bed at once was a freak anomaly, because while one or possibly two dropping a clanger in a season is something which clubs can prepare for, the entire Sky Four dropping more bollocks simultaneously than a clumsy vet on the way to the medical waste incinerator is not
On the subject of testicles and earth's gravitational pull, Man Utd paid £52m for Leny Yoro (while trebling his Lille wages, just to say they "beat" Los Ladrones) and he broke his foot after 80 minutes of pre-season Across two games...
Since the inception of the PL ... League champions / FA cup winners / League cup winners : 7 / 9 / 11 The figures for the non "Sky 4" clubs : 3 / 5 / 7 The "Sky 4" got financially fat off PL broadcast + CL money for nigh on two decades, to the competitive detriment of the English leagues as a whole. The only way to break that hegemony was to become a Sugga Daddy FC. Two such clubs arose, one of whom was already "Sky 4" .
Unfortunately the Manc clubs have dominated the premier league era winning 65% of the titles between them (Utd 13 City 8). Of the 7 winners 3 have won it once and only 1 of those is a top 6 regular, the other 2 both played championship football last season!
Whilst finances are undoubtedly a huge factor, you can’t ignore the impact of SAF and Pep either. I suspect there would have been a more even distribution had they not been managers. Teams can have financial and other advantages, but not always take them. But when you have those advantages and the best manager too, the outcome is inevitable.
You don`t have to accept dodgy money at all, why not accept some "clean money" and get rid of the main reason we win fack all in the process, ENIC. This club has a losers mentality, created over many years by Levy and ENIC, there is no pressure for our players to win silverware. The reason we win nothing is down to our clueless chairman, who makes bad decision after bad decision, he employs the wrong people, signs the wrong players, wastes money on the wrong players and cuts off his nose to spite his face like night follows day. Every decision Levy takes is a business decision rather than a sporting one, that`s no good for building a football team that wins silverware.
Wrong on every count. Increasing income is the only way of building a club that regularly wins trophies. There are no counter examples anywhere. Luck can win one or two trophies. Money wins the others.
We moved to a new stadium to compete for 5/6th spot should have stayed at the Lane and carried on competing for 2nd spot
Are you living in the past? Have you noticed who wins the FA Cup these days? Have you noticed who wins the league? It's one of 3 or 4 clubs, two of whom have received huge amounts of dogey money and the other two have had larger incomes than Spurs. In terms of league performance this is arguably the most successful period in Spurs history. We were never as consitent in finishing top 6 before ENIC. We won cups, yes we did and were known as a cup team. In those days the FA Cup was won almost by a different team every year. That's all changed with the creation of the PL. Levy has kept us up there in the league and his decisions have increased our income and put us in contention to win cups and the league. Compare Spurs over the last 20 years with our real former equals. Everton, Villa, Newcastle, Leeds. Then you will see the true worth of how we have done. I think with Ange we could be on the verge of making the breakthrough into league and cup success but without the new stadium and the increase in turnover worldwide we would stand very little chance. Ask Leeds, Sunderland, Portsmouth, Everton, Birmingham, Blackpool, Nottm Forest, Wolves. All these clubs have success in their past their prospects are difficult, only Everton have made moves to change their situation by earning MORE MONEY and sadly that's what it's all about now. If you're a Spurs fan you should enjoy what you have and be happy that we have not sunk into League 1 like a number of our former competitors have.
