Spurs are lowest net spenders in the EPL

[StartingPrice]

...somehow pin all this blame on Levy and Lewis because OF COURSE it's our very rights as Spurs fans that they continually put their own money in their pockets in a futile attempt at competing with Middle Eastern and Russian oil money.

I agree with most everything you say

But this sentence kinda confused me. Surely putting their money in their own pockets is exactly what the naysayers are accusing Levy/Lewis of.

Perhaps you meant putting their hand in their pocket? :?

 

[sloth]

ENIC bought Spurs in 2001, at that time we'd famously never finished in the top 6. That season, Villa, Newcastle, Chelsea, Liverpool and Leeds finished above us, as well as few others besides. His task was to first out perform our direct rivals, clubs of the same size as us, and then try to overhaul one of the bigger clubs.

In recent years we've regularly out-performed the Villas and Newcastles of this world, this season, if you take the new money out of the equation and rewind to the level playing field pre the billionaires then the only traditionally bigger clubs (modern era) which finished above us were Utd and Arsenal.

The point is that back then finishing in the top six was a much easier task, finishing in the top four was much easier too. Unfortunately two additional clubs can now blow us out of the water financially. So while we finished 5th under Jol, and finished 5th last season too, it was harder to do it last season given the competition. In other words because of the new money in the league moving forwards looks like standing still.

What can we do? Not a lot, knuckle down and get with on it.

 

[Xeeleeyid]

I agree with most everything you say

But this sentence kinda confused me. Surely putting their money in their own pockets is exactly what the naysayers are accusing Levy/Lewis of.

Perhaps you meant putting their hand in their pocket? :?

Ha, that's exactly what I meant.

 

[Norwegian Spurs fan]

Spurs bore you? What wouldn't bore you? Supporting Man City or Chelsea? What about Real Madrid? You know, being a Real Madrid fan would bore me. Every season you don't win the quadruple results in your manager being sacked a massive inquest into your monumental failure. Now, THAT's boring.

What brilliant fans. Can't accept that we're not top of the food chain and somehow pin all this blame on Levy and Lewis because OF COURSE it's our very rights as Spurs fans that they continually put their own money in their pockets in a futile attempt at competing with Middle Eastern and Russian oil money.

We're a well run club. Very well run. You know what the evidence of that is, it's the very fact that we're the lowest net spenders, yet have finished outside the top 5 on what, 2 or 3 occasions in the last 10 years?

Why do we continually get irresistable bids for our top players as well? It's because we're good at developing players. We develop superstars here. Again, we're well run. We identify emerging talent, we invest in them at relatively modest levels and develop them to the point we receive offers we can't refuse.

Yet this is a source of CRITICISM??????????

I think you missed my points here mate. http://zapsportz.com/glenn-hoddle-w...-from-former-club-spurs/?#VlTiWAZKXohYqG1l.97

 

[Norwegian Spurs fan]

 

[Xeeleeyid]

No your point was that you find Spurs boring as we have occasionally in the last few years had to sell our best players to the biggest and richest two clubs in world football and we don't win all the time. Wasn't that your point? Or am I mistaking your post, seems pretty plain to me. You are bored of supporting a club that isn't top of the food chain and doesn't compete for the title every season.

 

[Khilari]

I'm not sure how I feel about this headline.

On the one hand, it makes me quite proud that we are despite being incredibly frugal, still up there. On the other hand, given we are not that far off pushing the top teams, perhaps we wouldn't fall at the final few hurdles had we pushed the boat out a little in the transfer windows in terms of wages on offer and transfer fees to get in players of proven quality who we allegedly missed out on.

I guess it makes sense that a new stadium is not going to be bankrolled by local government money and therefore in order to progress as a club, it has to be a priority but I worry slightly that despite a shiny new stadium, we face several more years of "frugality/THFC austerity" whilst paying it off. Which would be depressing.

 

[MattyP]

Agree with some of what Glenn says and whilst there is an argument that can and has been made (ad infinitum) about wasting the Bale money, saying it's because of not signing anyone with Premier League experience is complete bullshit.

Liverpool spent their £75m Suarez money on Lambert, Lallana, Lovren and Ballotelli who all had premier league experience and still went massively backwards.

 

[Xeeleeyid]

I'm not sure how I feel about this headline.

On the one hand, it makes me quite proud that we are despite being incredibly frugal, still up there. On the other hand, given we are not that far off pushing the top teams, perhaps we wouldn't fall at the final few hurdles had we pushed the boat out a little in the transfer windows in terms of wages on offer and transfer fees to get in players of proven quality who we allegedly missed out on.

I guess it makes sense that a new stadium is not going to be bankrolled by local government money and therefore in order to progress as a club, it has to be a priority but I worry slightly that despite a shiny new stadium, we face several more years of "frugality/THFC austerity" whilst paying it off. Which would be depressing.

Actually you've hit on a big reason WHY we have ended up with a zero net spend.

Also why we chose to invest the Bale money in seven relatively unproven players rather than spend it all on one or two superstars.

Wages.

We can't pay the wages of a footballer that is going to command a £50m fee. So there's no point spending £30-50m on anyone.

Modric got sold for around £30m, a ready made replacement just wasn't going to fit into our wage structure even if we threw the £30m fee at his club, we bought Dembele instead for £15m- that's your negative net spend already.

All the players we bought with the Bale money needed to be relatively modest earners, hence why we bought 4 young prospects, 2 midfielders from the Brazilian and French leagues and a striker that was at a cash strapped, debt ridden Valencia.

Wages hold us back and actually stop us reinvesting any windfalls in ready-made replacements. If we sold Lloris for £20m, we won't be able to buy another Lloris, we will have to spend £8-10m on a Begovic instead. Because a goalkeeper worth spending £20m on will want £150-200k a week easily.

Until we increase our revenues with the stadium, our wage bill is severely restricted. FFP rules now mean that organic growth vis the stadium is the only way we can increase this as even if we got taken over by an oil baron he can only pump in a small uplift, the majority of wages have to be met by income from THFC, not our owners.

 

[Norwegian Spurs fan]

No your point was that you find Spurs boring as we have occasionally in the last few years had to sell our best players to the biggest and richest two clubs in world football and we don't win all the time. Wasn't that your point? Or am I mistaking your post, seems pretty plain to me. You are bored of supporting a club that isn't top of the food chain and doesn't compete for the title every season.

I have been a Spurs fanatic since early 70 and I have never expected Spurs to compete for the tittle every season. I am bored of Spurs as a selling club, but having said that I am also bored about the way football in general has developed. But I would never ever support a club like cheatski or shitty that not my cup of tea.

 

[mpickard2087]

I'm not sure how I feel about this headline.

On the one hand, it makes me quite proud that we are despite being incredibly frugal, still up there. On the other hand, given we are not that far off pushing the top teams, perhaps we wouldn't fall at the final few hurdles had we pushed the boat out a little in the transfer windows in terms of wages on offer and transfer fees to get in players of proven quality who we allegedly missed out on.

I guess it makes sense that a new stadium is not going to be bankrolled by local government money and therefore in order to progress as a club, it has to be a priority but I worry slightly that despite a shiny new stadium, we face several more years of "frugality/THFC austerity" whilst paying it off. Which would be depressing.

Someone posted a table the other day and it showed wages as a % of turnover, ours was 56% iirc. Exactly the same as Liverpool and Arsenal with Chelsea and City only a very few % higher. It's easy to say offer more wages, but really we are spending right up to what we can afford in terms of being a well run club/business.

In fact, here is the table: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...y-with-Premier-Leagues-highest-wage-bill.html

Also what has happened is that in the last 5 years there has been a bit of a change in how we do things. Previously we paid lower wages, which meant we could net spend by about £10m or so. Wages have risen since 2010, but that's impacted on the net spend as ultimately the money all comes out of the same pot. It's a balancing act, particularly when we now throw in the stadium.

 

[mpickard2087]

I have been a Spurs fanatic since early 70 and I have never expected Spurs to compete for the tittle every season. I am bored of Spurs as a selling club, but having said that I am also bored about the way football in general has developed. But I would never ever support a club like cheatski or shitty that not my cup of tea.

Well the footballing food chain isn't likely to go away any time soon. Money talks, and players also have ambitions and lifestyle/culture preferences which aren't going to magically disappear. And are we really a selling club? You can count on one hand the number of teams that don't have these problems. In the last 9/10 years who have we really lost... Carrick, Berbatov, Keane, Bale, Modric. Five, Lloris would make six. Lets look at others in that time. Liverpool have lost Suarez, Mascherano, Alonso, Torres and soon probably Sterling. Arsenal have lost countless players to bigger clubs, nearly a whole teams worth. Even Man Utd, so often the richest club in the world, find it happens to them on occasion with Ronaldo and maybe soon De Gea.

This is just how things are, we really aren't any worse than others. 99.99% of clubs share the problems of trying to keep their best players.

 

[Mullers]

I think we've already gone past the crossroads, the time to really invest and build the team was when we got champions league football. I reckon we can keep Kane for now but if we always going to change manager and fail to win anything then in a couple of years time he will be off.

 

[Xeeleeyid]

I think we've already gone past the crossroads, the time to really invest and build the team was when we got champions league football. I reckon we can keep Kane for now but if we always going to change manager and fail to win anything then in a couple of years time he will be off.

No the time to invest and build the team was when we got £86m from selling Bale, far, far in excess of what we got from playing in the Champions League, the majority of which was apparently eaten-up in player bonuses for qualifying for it.

The legacy from that investment is yet to really be proven. Soldado, Paulinho, Capoue and Chiriches likely to be disgarded after 2 seasons. Eriksen, Chadli proving to be good signings. Lamela I still think has a very high potential ceiling and showed significant progress towards the end of last season.

 

[Mullers]

No the time to invest and build the team was when we got £86m from selling Bale, far, far in excess of what we got from playing in the Champions League, the majority of which was apparently eaten-up in player bonuses for qualifying for it.

The legacy from that investment is yet to really be proven. Soldado, Paulinho, Capoue and Chiriches likely to be disgarded after 2 seasons. Eriksen, Chadli proving to be good signings. Lamela I still think has a very high potential ceiling and showed significant progress towards the end of last season.

We did invest but we just didn't invest it very well.
So are you don't think we should have invested more when we got Champions League football?

 

[Norse]

Our academy only produced one of those, Livermore, and he's in the championship now.

I think you can include in developement the improvements the first team players make as well.

 

[Graysonti]

We're going forwards.

A massive, top stadium with (hopefully) a NFL deal securing a top naming rights deal meaning we will be able to plough more into the playing squad earlier.

Fact is, we're ploughing millions into capex projects (stadium and training ground)- it had to happen and we have the right people to take us through this period,

As long as we can remain competitive towards top of table, a cup run or win and and keep our top players from direct rivals (feck off Utd) during this period, I'm happy.

Seeing that huge stadium rising from the left makes me think our future is rosy.

 

[Norse]

Looking at the numbers from Swiss ramble, it is clear that our commercial revenues are growing slower than those of our rivals. I blame AVB and hos legacy. We need to become fun to watch again.