Levy werent our chairman back then...he was our chairman from April 2001 We have pretty much balanced the books with our transfers under his reign...we have spent a lot but we have sold a lot too And in some ways picking on transfers while ignoring wages is missing the point...cos wages influence massively where players go and we are no where near the top payers in the prem
Sorry yes, Levy joined later. Even since his reign began though, you're still up there with Utd and Liverpool on transfer spending, only City and Chelsea have spent significantly more.
Tottenham fans remember the dark days in the late 80's, early 90's under Scholar where we were almost insolvent for a while. Loathe though I am to admit it, Sugar saved the club (with Venables), but Levy and Joe Lewis put us on an even keel. That is why we forgive him the strange managerial decisions (sacking Jol, employing Ramos for example) because we don't fear going bust any more.
I can understand that it looks like a better landscape than it was, but being honest are you really satisfied with the way that Levy runs your club ? You've been through eleven managers since Wenger was appointed and notwithstanding the fact that Levy manages to balance the books, he has still spent huge amounts in the transfer market with very little to show for it. The £110m spent last summer was a case in mind- an incredible amount of money, for any club. Even for the likes of Real, Barcelona, City and Chelsea it would still be an eye watering amount. But to finish off worse than the season before would be unforgivable in my eyes. I find it quite staggering that you lot afford him so much leeway. If that happened at Arsenal, there would be a riot. It's almost like you're in an abusive relationship, but it's less abusive than before, so you put up with it and try to tell people that you're better off now. Stockholm syndrome.
Very sensible. However deluded I may be, it's clear that no one really knows how the seven players we bought are going to fare. It is fair to say that preliminary indications are not good, on balance, but one year is certainly too soon to be certain what will happen with either them or Ozil, and even three or four years may not be enough. What really would have seemed deluded is for someone to have said that Bale would be bought for 100 million when he was in his Jonah phase. Yet that actually happened. We simply do not know what the future holds. My guess is that the players will end up being worth about what we paid for them, though I wouldn't be surprised if they were worth somewhat less or more. Even if we play better football, and get more points, both of which I'm cautiously hopeful will happen, it's going to be very hard to catch any of the teams that finished above us with the arguable exception of Everton, and I'll be surprised if we finish above Man U again. The rich keep getting richer. You had to have been the fourth place team with the most points in the PL era, or very close to it. Chelsea, Man U and yourselves have strengthened significantly (Sanchez is a fantastic signing at a good pice, IMO), while Man City and Everton are no worse. Only Liverpool looks a bit weaker, and there's still time left in the transfer window. There are those who try to make their point using facts and reasoning, and those who use critical adjectives: deluded, embarrassing, etc. I'm not much of a fan of the latter. I don't think it makes for much of a conversation or debate. But to each his own.
Trying to hedge your bets there ? They'll be worth the same, or less or more And when you call a player like Ozil 'No Zeal' then you shouldn't be surprised with the pejorative adjectives that come your way. Just sayin'
this was how i started the thread and it has borne fruit - it is full of Spuds giving it as best as they can that Lame La etc will be world beaters and aren't a complete waste of money. Spuds please read this article http://metro.co.uk/2014/08/03/totte...in-until-they-get-rid-of-daniel-levy-4819967/ my favourite quote is - fortunes squandered on some absolute dross as new managers come and go attempting to build a squad capable of challenging for the major honours. A solitary League Cup win in the last decade has been won with a huge turnover of players, it has all become far too easy to spot a Spurs fan these days, they are the ones with the constant frowns and self-pity, Tottenham Hotspur have become by-words for failure. and the last bit is so funny - Levy really needs to stop throwing money at this project, if they are ever to become a force again Tottenham Hotspur require an absolute overhaul of their football operations from top to bottom and there is currently one man out there readily available who would crawl over broken glass to assist in the rebuilding of this once revered institution. His name is Glenn Hoddle. - was this piece written by HIAG
this hasn't been filled with spurs fans saying we have a team of world beaters...just saying as for the article ... it was discussed this morning from post 58 onwards... was an interesting discussion
This isn't even close to true. Show me where a single poster, Spurs fan or otherwise, gave it as best he could that Lamela or anyone else would be a world beater. I think I came closest, with a statement that I wouldn't take 37 million for Eriksen. But that still doesn't qualify (it was a statement of fact of how highly I value Eriksen, not an attempt to prove his value), and even if it did, it falls far short of filling the thread.
Quite right, since the Premier league began Chelsea Net £656,824,000 / average per year £28,557,565 City Net £589,427,000 / average per year £25,627,261 United Net £342,810,000 / average per year £14,904,783 Liverpool Net £301,835,000 / average per year £13,123,261 Spurs Net £153,232,500 / average per year £6,662,283 Arsenal Net £119,591,000 / average per year £5,199,609 So Spurs spending is a little more than Arsenal but nowhere near the top four.
Oh dear Diego, you have made a mistake there, net figures are not allowed, it doesnt matter how much money you get back in! All that matters in any discussion about spending on here is gross transfer fees please get it wright!
Except nobody is saying that. The thread was about whether the players spurs bought last summer are worth £110m and whether they would have to 'right' off any of that money.
As the figures quoted by Diego show we have made massive progress under Levy while spending about the same amount on transfers as Arsenal and much less on wages than the five clubs we are trying to compete with. The fact that we were able to 'spend' £110m last year is a sign of Levy's success since his strategy generated all the money. As a consequence, despite having much less income than Arsenal we have a squad which is not far short of their's and has a chance to compete for a top 4 place. Whether or not the squad is worth the money paid will be proven in 3 or 4 years time and any view on that now is a matter of opinion.
In reality though, Levy lucked out with the Bale money, so a significant amount of that £110m came from one player sale. Fair enough he extracted the most he could from Real, but the point here is how that money has been invested and the evidence so far is that it has been poor. Also looking at the long term picture, you've spent more than Arsenal on transfers, both on actual money spent and overall net spend - and achieved significantly less so I don't think it bodes well for you to be comparing yourself to us. Spurs have also benefited from the falling away of teams like Villa and Newcastle who have been spending similar amounts but performing even worse than Spurs, when they should have been improving. The real success story here out of the tier of teams that Spurs sit within is Everton. They have spent around half of what Spurs have and look like the only team out of that group who could realistically challenge for a top four spot.
I could similarly say that Arsenal got lucky in appointing Wenger. If you are going to remove someone's best outcome from their track record then it won't look so good and the better that decision was the more removing it will make a difference. The outcome of the slight extra spend on transfers Spurs have over Arsenal under Levy is that we know finish close behind you rather than miles behind. Given your wages are out of sight more than ours for many years I think that is a quite good return for the expenditure. Aston Villla and Newcastle are very good examples of what average chairmen with the same resources achieve compared to Levy. And Everton used to finish just below us pre-Levy and have been behind us in almost every year recently so I'm not sure why that is a bigger success story. So in summary Levy runs the club with stability and we've gradually improved over the time he has been in charge. That can't be said of any other current club chairman as far as I can see.
