Whilst this is true, you also have to account the fact that Poch came after Spurs got the Bale money and spent 110m pounds the year before.
During that Summer they got Eriksen (their second best player), Lamela - still playing for them. And during Poch they sold Capoue, Chadli, Chiriches, Soldado and Paulinho - recouping most of their money there.
You are comparing them with the nearest rivals, but since then Spurs won diddle squat compared to:
Man City - PL, 3 LC
Chelsea - 2 PL, 1 FA, 1 LC
Man Utd - 1 EL, 1 FA, 1 LC
Liverpool - CL final
Everton - Nothing
Arsenal - 2 FA cup
Spurs - 1 LC final
Leicester - with next to nothing indeed - 1 PL
In other words whilst being solid top four during his stint he also has nothing to show for in terms of trophies. All those teams that spend more than him actually won something and the only team that outspent him and did less was Everton.
Right but that doesn't really alter my point though does it?, Spurs still had to sell to buy players which reflect favorably on the manager whether it was players from a previous tenure is hardly here nor there, it's not Poch's fault that Spurs had spent that much money on those players, either way my point still stands, he only got to use that money because they had to effectively weaken the squad whilst selling those players, it's relative.
And I'm comparing Spurs to their nearest rivals spend wise not trophies, although I mentioned earlier in the thread the very fact that Spurs are competing amongst the top 4 consistently now and being judged on trophies says more about his management. Throughout my time Spurs were never taken this seriously as a club (supported them since 1990), now they are seen as a club who should be winning trophies year in year out just tells you the kind of work he's put in at Spurs. Don't get me wrong we ought to have won something by now under his tenure but the lack of trophies won't define him as a manager just yet considering the kind of financial constraints he's been put under thus far.
You're actually solidifying my point about spend/money, the fact that you've brought up trophies goes hand in hand with my point. Had Spurs actually spent money anywhere akin to what their rivals had spent then we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.
My point is that this keeps brought up that Poch spent nothing and got Spurs where they are and he has done some kind of an awesome job.
But where they are exactly? Spurs were top 4 contender before he joined and got top finish in 2 of the last 5 years before he joined. Sure he got 4 out of 5 during his tenure, but to claim he has punched above their weight is not accurate. You can use that for Simeone or Ranieri, but Poch who won nothing is a bit too much.
Your investment and return of investment is spot on to what you actually got during that time. For example United prioritized EL in 16/17 instead of top 4 and it showed in the final standings.
It's easier to come up with top four finish compared to some of the rivals when you are out of all other competitions come April.
Okay a couple of things with this:
Would you not agree that taking a team who have the 6th least best resources compared to their immediate rivals for a top four spot and improving them so they are consistently qualifying for a top 4 place is a good job, all with the spend of £29m during his tenure?
Spurs were a top 4 contender but had only finished in the top 4 twice under Redknapp, first time as Man City weren't an established top team as they are now and 2nd time is because we took advantage of an unusual Chelsea drop off that season, Liverpool weren't as good as they are now either and thus there was no established top 6. Poch has managed to finish in the top 4 3 times out of 4 and will probably be 4 out of 5 where there are now 6 very good teams constantly breaking spending records vying for 4 spots, whatever way you spin it, that's an astounding job.
I'm afraid Spurs punching above their weight is entirely accurate, how else are you meant to measure a club's 'weight' other than finances and resources? Everything else is subjective player ability/mentality/history/manager ability etc...There's a consistent correlation in Sports that shows that teams with more money are more successful and they tend to finish high up in the league and vice versa for teams with small resources save the odd anomolie like Leicester for example. Spurs have the 6th highest resources and wage bill compared to their rivals, they cannot and do not have the luxury of stupidly spending £350k or £500k a week on wages for players nor can they just merely risk dropping £50m on a player and moving him on for a loss if he doesn't work out, Levy needs to manage the finances particularly whilst he has a stadium project to manage and Poch needs to manage the players - if they were able to then you wouldn't see the likes of Foyth and Davies coming off the bench in a CL Semi final in order to gain a foothold in the match for example, so yes Spurs are punching well above their weight.
I really don't understand your last sentence, surely using that logic then it's difficult to maintain competing for a top four place during the season then seeing as you're likely to be in 3/4 competitions, also I'm not sure who or what season you are referring to?, Spurs have been in latter competitions whilst trying to finish in the top four...I think you need to explain that one cause you've lost me.
That being said the ciriticism that he hasn't won a trophy is fair, as I mentioned earlier it's disappointing that he hasn't delivered one yet but the man has far too much credit in his locker for that to be an issue for me or the club right now, he needs to be backed and I suspect he will be in the summer.
