We are very likely to be sold in the next year or two so these things can change dramatically so there is no reason why we shouldn't be aiming for the stars. We have one of the best stadiums in world football and over the next few years we will be generating a huge amount of money from that (we already are starting to see this happen). Everything is in place off the pitch for Spurs to become a really big club and if we were to get new owners in with huge resources behind them then we are probably well ahead of most of those clubs you mentioned in terms of infrastructure. I'm not saying it will happen but I am saying that this is what we are aiming for as a club.
FAO Tottenham Hotspur | Fighting Cock Goes Into Meltdown | Glast...gone
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Spurs need an exorcism. A new manager and bunch of new players isn’t going to make things better. They need to accept they’re not a top 4 team anymore and start a rebuild while identifying who their next Pochettino like manager is.
150m? I dont think that is achievable. I cant see Son leaving spurs, not many teams are looking for a LC/Cf.
It’s doable to Chelsea, but I doubt anyone else would for that money.
Does having 'the best stadium' correlate with a club's prospects/standing improving, historically speaking? Genuine question, not on a wind-up. I can't think of many examples of a club's fortunes improving measurably after changing stadiums.
As you say, IF you get new owners WITH huge resources (AND football expertise) then you could become the next Man City in theory, but the same would surely be true of any other of the PL's top 10 clubs.
As a club they still lack an elite mentality. When Mourinho first came to Chelsea it was the very first thing he changed.
I can see this happening. They're in a world class city that should attract top players, have probably the best stadium in Europe which generates a shit ton of money off match day revenue, have solidified themselves as a "big six" team when 15/20 years ago they were practically Everton, I can see them being sold to some rich middle eastern before I see a Liverpool or even a United considering the Glazers asking price, plus lets not forget it's going to be a lot easier for more english sides to have more than four sides in the Champions league. They should be very lucrative in the market considering the potential, infastructure and the cost.
Chelsea have enough players who prefer to play in that position though, and can't see Son wanting to go to a team who won't even make the Conference League unless they do their spawny Champions League win trick again.
I'd be amused if spurs could become better than arsenal over a long period, but not better than United.
My aims for spurs is that they eventually become the team who keep Liverpool and arsenal out of the top 4 and regularly get 3rd or 4th while United win the title every season. A man can dream can't he?
My aims for spurs is that they eventually become the team who keep Liverpool and arsenal out of the top 4 and regularly get 3rd or 4th while United win the title every season. A man can dream can't he?
One of the problems is that Spurs sign players that the next manager won't be able to use. Buying all those wingbacks who in my opinion at the moment can't play as fullbacks in the PL might come back to hurt them if the next boss uses four at the back.
Can you imagine the knock to morale for him too? Goes to the World Cup, scores some ridiculous goals and has a moment in the spotlight. Goes back to Spurs, and is a nothing player getting spotty playing time and treated like an afterthought.
Terrible handling and management of the player. Why even buy him in the first place?
Seriously mate, you've won like 1 League Cup in, what, 60 years. What ambition?
A club the size of Spurs should have a similar record to Arsenal over that period. Discounting the Wenger years, a smattering of cups, maybe the odd League or 2, perhaps.
No, nothing.
I simply don't understand why Spurs has so many fans, even West Ham have a better record than Spurs and they're shite.
Totally agree. I can only assume there’s something fishy going on with transfers and that he’s not a Conte signing.
You don’t spend 60m on a back up forward when you have Dier and Sanchez at the back and a midfield with the creativity of Sean Dyches Burnley.
It does if it becomes a money making machine. We are aiming to get the first UK based NFL franchise, we have concerts already bringing in tens of millions each year and we likely be looking to get 500 million+ naming rights deal at some point. Ok we have a ton of debt but the club has huge potential to make money and we also own a lot of real estate around the area.
On average we make over 800k per home match from food and drink alone because we make our own beer. To put that in context City make around 150k. Stuff like that does all add up.
Last edited:
How much does the cheese room bring in?
They're close to being sold to some Iranian guy I believe, and he doesn't look like a sugar daddy owner, probably more of the same. But I agree with everything you have said otherwise. Spurs should be a bigger club than those wannabes at chelsea, that's for sure.
It definitely means you'll be bringing in great revenue streams. Beyond that, there's really no historical precedent that suggests that building a new stadium will make a tangible positive difference to a club's standing or ability to win trophies, and doing so will rely heavily on the management behind the scenes - in that regard, there are far too many unknowns until you have a new owner and their ability to run a football club can be assessed, and until then you're pretty much in the same boat as any other decently-sized PL club. All imo of course.
No he won’t. The guy is hardly in the box and arrives too late most of the time. He is part of the problem. Even in games they have played well, the opposition CBs don’t get much pressure on them.
A clubs ability to win trophies is linked to how much money that club has to spend improving the squad. It's not much to do with 'history'. It's cold hard cash most of the time whether we like that or not.
About tree fiddy
No, you're over simplifying and also bringing 'history' into the discussion which is bizarre as I never sadi anything about that.
Bigger wallet only helps alongside the other factors I mentioned. Saying "ability to win trophies is linked to money" is so facile it doesn't really say anything of use, tbh.
There’s no such thing as a ‘Top 4 team’ in the premier league anymore. It’s going to be even more unpredictable when Qatar buy us, Newcastle invest again, Brighton look the real deal and will probably get better, Arsenal are purring, City and Liverpool you can’t ever write off, Chelsea look to be improving…
Its why everyone watches the Premier League now.
@balaks has got a chip on his shoulder because he was proven wrong on Count Conte. We did warn him but he wouldn’t have it. Was always gonna end in tears when you’ve got Enic and Evil Levy running the show.
Of course it's linked to money. The amount of cash spent by a club is one of the biggest determining factors in that club's success. It's not the only thing obviously but it's a pretty big part of it.
I disagree. PSG and Utd are good examples of this. You can spend a fortune on players and still not achieve success (Ligue 1 doesn’t count as it’s a farmer’s league).
The right coaching departments, culture around the club, manager, scouts etc are obviously what determines how a club is successful.
And speaking of culture - there isn’t a winning aura around Spurs. It’s a club which hasn’t won a serious trophy since…?
Read what some players write in their autobiographies when they retire. They write about how different it feels to sign for a club like Utd compared to how it feels for Spurs.
You have got the cheese room though I guess.
Psg and Utd are your examples? Really? Psg win their league almost every year and Utd have just won a trophy and have a huge history of success in a time when they generally outspent most of their rivals. They have only struggled in more recent years because the likes of Chelsea and City can compete financially. Money talks and to suggest it doesn't is very silly. It's not the only thing obviously as I have said but it's most of it.
again, you’re oversimplifying. Loads of clubs have loads of money these days but very few actually win trophies consistently.
Look at the clubs that do win consistently, then take a look at the money they have to spend on transfer fees and wages Vs those clubs that don't win regularly. Then come back to me. I'm not over simplifying it because it really is that simple.
yeah. But also his anti football…back 5. Defensive mindset. Zero creative freedom. Not a set up for son to thrive in
Balaks right, wage bill tracks closely with results most of the time. Transfer fees on the other hand don't mean much
Look beyond the result and look how they play. Disaster waiting to happen. The players look unmotivated
Wow really?!
I mean the shit football is arguably one of the main issues. No progression or clear philosophy. You can’t see what they are trying to do and it’s very much like United have been in recent seasons.
And crashing out of Europe at home by failing to even score a goal or really trouble the away team in the slightest, especially with the likes of Kane and Son, is pretty appalling. Again, it’s happened to United (not the failing to score but crashing out at OT) and I’m sure you’d be saying it’s a disaster.
I don’t see Spurs as a team who chuck it in.They have the highest running stats in the league. Their problem this season has been quality. And poor quality players in a number of positions on the pitch. Sons form has also dropped off a cliff and Conte shows no diversity in his tactics. They’re basically on auto pilot but I wouldn’t say the don’t look motivated, a serious lack of quality yes.
Come on now, you can’t compare what’s expected at United to what’s expected at Spurs. You say no progression or philosophy but this wasn’t the consensus at Spurs as early as last May when they ended the season really strongly and looked a proper team in terms of results and performances.
Sure at the minute their football is atrocious but Spurs will not be coming above 4th or beyond the last 16 in the CL anytime soon regardless. They just simply cannot match what bigger clubs in this league are doing financially. And other than Chelsea at the minute every big club has its house pretty much in order or is on the right path.
Not saying Spurs should know their place and not try to be better but to me this isn’t a “disastrous” season or time at Spurs which is what I was initially responding to.
People are writing them off for 4th but if you look at them through the season their results are stable and have a pattern. They have only really lost to the better teams. The’ve lost nine games this season and six came against the top six. It’s not like they’re losing games to the shit. And that’s with a manager who seems disinterested. They’ve got players like Dier, Lenglet, Davies, Royal, Skipp, Sessegnon and Perisic regularly playing games for them, it would be a miracle if they came 3rd or 4th reading that line up of players.
I mean you’ve got spurs fans in this thread saying they are aiming to be one of the best in the league. They’ve just gone in to debt to get a new best in class stadium and paid big money to get Conte in, a serial winner. Of course they are aspiring to do much better than what they are producing and the main issue is there’s no steady progression or even obvious philosophy or style. When Conte goes it will be millions more spent and again no further a long.
Given they don’t have money to throw about then that is a disaster in itself. They’ve been wasting money for a long time and even with the new ‘tried and tested’ recruitment set up they dropped 60m on Richarlison only to sit him on the bench, have bought Danjuma in January only to give him 45 minutes of football, and from all the players you listed as not being a good enough standard Royal, Perisic, Lenglet and Sessignon have all been signed by the current regime and are new players at the club (Sessignon possibly just before but the point still stands).
Yeah of course Spurs fans will be ambitious and want more (wouldn’t begrudge them that) but the way their owner behaves and the players they have at their disposal as well as bigger and better clubs being around, I’m afraid that’s just not going to happen.
If at the start of the season you said Spurs will be 4th above Liverpool and Chelsea with 13 games left and got knocked out the last 16 of the CL by the Serie A champions by a single goal I don’t think anybody will have fallen out their chair in shock. I can acknowledge that the shit football has a significant impact of that perception but we are still ultimately in the results business.
I agree that their recruitment has been a disaster but that’s a different issue to being 4th. They don’t have the finance to rectify mistakes in the market like others can.
The problem with their recruitment and their spending is that Daniel Levy is a massive idiot. You don’t hire Antonio Conte and then decide what players he has and signs .
He literally fell out with two clubs for the exact same thing. They bought Richarlison for 60 million and Spence for 20 million and Conte never plays them indicating quite clearly he had no interest in either.
I just don’t think Spurs have a good enough team to do anything other than fight for 4th at this moment in time and I think there’s a bit of hyperbole around them at the minute about how bad it is.
This is confusing. You seem to agree it’s a mess but not quite a disaster?
It’s not confusing at all to be honest. I’ve said their season isnt a disaster as they are 4th and qualified for the knockouts of the CL. That was clear in the post I initially responded to.
I’m then saying however that their recruitment this season has been disaster. It is possible for both to be true. I mean it happened to United in the 2020/2021 season…
I've made this argument before and obviously there are mitigating factors in some of the appointments, but Levy is not an especially good judge of a manager. His record of managerial hires is really sketchy, notwithstanding this narrative around him that he's one of the canniest operators around. Since he was appointed, they've hired:
Hoddle (01-03)
Santini (04-04)
Jol (04-07)
Juande Ramos (07-08)
Redknapp (08-12)
AVB (12-13)
Sherwood (13-14)
Pochettino (14-19)
Mourinho (19-21)
Mason (21)
Nuno Espirito Santo (21)
Conte (21 - ?)
He seems to get it wrong far more often than he gets it right. He'll go back to Poch now and hope like hell he doesn't have to have another swing at it.
Hoddle (01-03)
Santini (04-04)
Jol (04-07)
Juande Ramos (07-08)
Redknapp (08-12)
AVB (12-13)
Sherwood (13-14)
Pochettino (14-19)
Mourinho (19-21)
Mason (21)
Nuno Espirito Santo (21)
Conte (21 - ?)
He seems to get it wrong far more often than he gets it right. He'll go back to Poch now and hope like hell he doesn't have to have another swing at it.