The Tottenham Hotspur "Spiral" Watch

Their spending helps out other clubs. His logic is ****ed.

 

One club loses a hundred million in the transfer market per season and another (Spurs ) lose four hundred thousand a season and you give it the " So What" ...shake your head and tell me if you hear anything

 

Correct I don't care. What difference does clubs losing or making money make to YOU? It doesn't.

And why aren't you castigating spurs for not saving the money they spent on their duffers? They'd be in the black if they did. You keep avoiding that one...

 

Duffers , they finished higher the Man City the past few season . Bit of a duffer post . " Correct , I don't care " .... Proves my point about " Big spenders" fans .

 

So as a fan, how do you influence this spend?

 

Exactly.
And like all City and Chelsea fans were supposed to stop supporting their club when they started spending big
Fans can do **** all to influence what is spent and what it is spent on, so this whole argument is ****ing stupid.

What kind of faggot uses the fact that their team has good accounts as banter anyway
What have football fans become!

 

Although Chelsea will always be the club that bought their way to success from relative obscurity, I tend to agree. The landscape is what it is now. If you don't spend the money, then you get left behind. Spurs will find this out when their best players will be lured away to big clubs who pay them the going rate. As for fans, we don't see any of this 'net spend save', we don't get to benefit from it. I watched Arsenal sell our best players and stash £200m in the bank and for what ? To see Chelsea and City overtake us as they splashed the cash.

 

I'm of the opinion that football (EPL) could be played behind closed doors and the transfer fees and salaries would be the same. There is so much money involved these days, the match going fans contribution is irrelevant.

 

As a fan it makes little difference unless the extra money made from the efficient running of the club is used to improve the squad and produce more success.

However, fans would do well to remember that most of the Prem clubs are owned by hard nosed businessmen.

They’re here to make money, not out of any great love of ‘soccer’

 

Yup, the percentage of a clubs income that comes from gate receipts now is miniscule when compared to TV money, Sponsorships and merchandising.

 

Reading between the lines all I can conclude is that Chelsea fans want some love for their bankrolled success. It won't be happening lol

Like I said it could be any club...and why do fans talk about other aspects of their clubs and not just what happens on the pitch? Same reason we have an opinion on a footballer being a dickhead off it, same reason we hate certain players due to their detest full attitude towards the club you choose e.g Wilshere. The same reason we laugh at certain clubs for not selling their tickets etc etc....it all comes from the same root thoughts...you can't pick and choose

And on that note I'm going for a yawny walk in Vienna...Layta.

 

Dont talk bollocks

Like any club got any love regardless of how they won ****.
Everyone hated United in the 90's, and despised Liverpool in the 80's.

 

Count me out.

I had a lot of respect for the Poool empire, both league
and UEFA (Champions) cup. As a Spurs supporter in the
80s, for any team to front up and beat them in the league
was a big deal such was their domination.

My contempt for Man Utd in the 90s was not for their on-pitch
success, but the on-pitch antics of some of their players and
the apologist culture that went with it.

 

Success breeds contempt, always has, and always will.
The "bought the league" bollocks, is just something rival fans use to placate themselves for their own teams failings.
Any team that had lasting success bought it, one way or another.
PSG will win the CL this season for that very same reason.

 

****ing double post.
My Work PC sucks balls.

 

A walk in the cold air?

Freezing breath on a window pane?

..... means nothing to me

 

More like pondering how much better their own clubs
would be if they had won the lottery too


"Any team that had lasting success bought it, one way or another."

There is a difference between "buying" it thru sustained financial
nous + on-pitch success, and a lottery money cash injection.


"PSG will win the CL this season for that very same reason."

Sure.
So I will admire on the on-pitch performance of the squad they
have assembled, but have no respect for the fact it took a
lottery win to assemble that squad.

< YMMV >

 

And that difference is what? And is effected how, by the fans?

 

On the way to winning the title we won 3-1 away at Man City ... it was live on BT sport and they put up the following stats pre-match ....

Cost of the Leicester City team = £26 million
Cost of the Man City team = £226 million

Raheem Sterling alone cost virtually double our whole team

Now don't misunderstand ... even £26 million is not to be sniffed at -

What it did prove, quite refreshingly mind, is that spending the most money doesn't guarantee success ... it does however, make it much more likely