Then how would you have funded your stadium and 'world class' training ground?
The Spurs thread
- Thread starter GlastonSpur
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Did United "specifically choose" to agree to sell de gea or Ronaldo ... or did they effectively have little choice? And how many star players have Spurs sold when they would have preferred to keep them? The answer is just four - the last one to a Prem rival being many years ago. So come off your high horse as if United are some special case, exempt from it all, because you're not.
Nor have I been talking about low net spend as if it's a good thing in itself. Instead I've explained the context: funding of a new training centre and ongoing construction of the new stadium complex.
You say: "Maintaining a good net spend on transfers for Tottenham is either dependant on selling your best players or not spending much. Neither of those scenarios are something to aim for or be happy with." Quite so, which is one reason why we're building a new stadium complex - a project that will significantly increased our income when completed, and a project partly enabled by our low net spend over the last 5 years ... though this essential point seems to have entirely escaped you.
Moreover, a low net spend does not have to mean squad deterioration, as Spurs have shown. A good youth development system and a good scouting and transfer negotiation system can compensate for much.
Probably through (a) increased participation in the CL and (b) borrowing more money than we otherwise will have to.
PS. You put 'world class' in quote marks, as if isn't. You should check it out - and see that's it's widely acknowledged as being so, which is why the England squad now train there.
Last edited:
I never said we were exempt from anything. Just that Spurs have been more likely to sell their best players than Utd have. That's an indisputable fact. If anyone needs clamouring down of a high horse it's you. Ronaldo is about the only real example. If there were more you'd be giving us names. De Gea is still here after all. Who are these four? In the last 20 years Utd alone have taken three from you. Did Spurs really want to sell Robbie Keane for example?
All super stuff and it could pay big dividends for you. But given you're one for continually going on about demise of complacent folk you seem to be ignoring the possibility that Spurs may not be able to continue scouting players like Dele Alli. What exactly has the good youth development produced so far? Only one player from your academy makes your strongest 11.
a) would be possibly and b) would not be a particularly good idea
I don't know a lot about training grounds round the world to compare and contrast. I guess you don't either. I searched your training ground and world class and the only results were Tottenhams website. Where it talks about trees, ponds and energy efficiency. Cutting edge stuff.
As did the Bale sale for Spurs. That was part of my point, net spend over a specific 5 year period means nothing if a) the squad gets progressively worse; b) if the couple of years before or after that period you've spent heavily meaning you don't need investment; or c) if no real achievement has come from it.
You are of course correct about United not needing to be as successful in the transfer market, which is inertia we've used to the maximum in recent times. However the truth is when Spurs were given this inertia (Bale money), they realised how difficult it is buying talent when people know you have a huge amount to spend, which is something net spend doesn't account for.
You're top four finishes are the result of one of those clubs (or multiple) totally screwing up, rather than any accomplishment by Spurs.
Also "challenged for the title" is very, very generous. It's like saying Arsenal challenged for the title these last two years.
On the whole though Spurs are doing well. They are taking advantage of richer clubs poor form when they can, which is all you'd expect. They are doing this in order to build a better and more financially sound club for the future, good on them.
However let's not act like they're a model of one of the most fantastically run clubs in the world. That would be United these past 25 years (as well as half a dozen clubs abroad and the likes of Leicester and arguably West Ham/So'ton right now), winning dozens of trophies and increasing there revenue to allow them a few mistakes as we've seen these last few years, without so much as a dent in the bumper.
You talk about United with disdain, when in truth everything Spurs are sacrificing for at the moment is the chance to have the inertia United currently enjoy, which we will.
You missed the point. Beck fell out with SAF. SAF technically ended his United career or Beck would do a Scholes / Gary Neville / Giggs. Ronaldo was always rumored to prefer Spain even before he became a world class player. Back in 2006, he was rumored to never return to play for United after the WC incident. Even De Gea case. Del Bosque pretty much biased toward Casillas and didn't bother go to England to see De Gea. Plus his girlfriend pressured De Gea to move to back to Spain. It's not a case that United failed to provide/match other team's wage / financial offer, that led to players unsatisfied financially and left.
You talked about Spurs' shrewd salary wage bill, but failed to realize Bale Modric had significant improved wage moving away from Spurs. Until this day, Spurs doesn't look like they can offer this kind of wage for any player in their squad. In this day, good luck with holding on to top players with shrewd wage while they see their inferior fellow at national team pocketing significant more. Modric was heavily linked with Chelsea before being forced to move to Real. Spurs does not have the financial power to keep these kind of players for long term. Spurs need to balance the book and can't compete in wage offer with the buying clubs. And that was not accounted for football reason yet for the player to want to move.
Last edited:
Actually it's two (Rose was in our academy before he made it into the first team squad and then into our first XI). And in any case it's also about the wider squad, not just the best XI, a squad that contains several more of our ex-academy players.
De Gea is with you only due to a technicality, but the point is the sale was agreed, just like it was for Ronaldo, Beckham and RvN ... all of them to Real Madrid, for whom United is clearly a feeder club.
Sure, we might not be able to continue scouting players like Alli, but the odds are that we will - not least because Spurs are one of the most attractive clubs for a young player to join.
If you are seeing your season as a title challenge when you finished 11 points behind Leicester, We may call ourselves as title contenders as well...
When a wealthy club drops out of the top 4 you excuse this as a "screw up" - when actually it's because another team was just better than them, just like Spurs have been better than both United and Chelski this season, and just like Leicester City have been better than everyone. But for you, it seems, the league table lies when it comes to moneybags club who don't make the cut.
And no, it not "very, very generous" to say that Spurs challenged for the title. We dropped away badly in the end, but prior to that it was widely seen as a two-horse race.
You mention United during the past 25 years - what about the last 3 years and counting? Are you still a "fantastically run club". I'd say not - you're about to have your 4th different manager in as many years, have spent an absolute fortune only to finish outside the top 4 twice, have wasted time and energy chasing players that were never going to sign for you and then engaged in last minute panic buys, would have lost your best player (de Gea) if not for a technicality etc etc. I'd say you've suffered a fair few "dents in the bumper".
And now you've thrown in with the Mourinho circus. Maybe it'll work, or maybe it won't. But it hasn't got off to the greatest of starts, what with his classless, unpleasant and unnecessary leaking of the news of his replacing LvG just as the FA Cup was won.
Focusing on the last few games and final outcome does not erase the period before that.
Well, as they say the table never lies. You have to take every game into account....
Its like saying we were Top of the table in October, so we were contenders....
Edit: Would you say, Arsenal and City were contenders this season??
Ermm....Spurs finished third.
Is the "trend" 3 years or 5 years??? Make up your mind....
Made up media bollocks..
Last minute panic buys?. Lol !!! We had our full squad for preseason last year except for Martial. And if you are calling Martial a panic buy...I would love us to do a panic buy every transfer window....
Which every media has been saying since December and suddenly its a leak now... It was the worst kept secret in football....
Last edited:
You provide a series of explanations as to why the players concerned all left or wanted to leave - but the fact is that the same club (Real Madrid) was involved in all cases, and we can add RvN to the list also. I don't think that's mere coincidence - United are not exempt from being a feeder club from time to time, just as Spurs have not been exempt.
I don't think I've ever mentioned Spurs "shrewd salary wage bill", so I'm not sure why you bring this up. Nor have I "failed to realize Bale Modric had significant improved wage moving away from Spurs".
If you're saying that Spurs can't currently match the wages offered by several other clubs then obviously that's true, which is one reason why we're building a new stadium complex - to boost our income. But there are other factors besides just wages - such as opportunities for first team football, the quality of coaching received, the training facilities, a club's location and so on. Money is not everything, as Leicester City have just shown.
RVN and Heinz if you want to add all being hauled off by SAF. LVG didn't rate DDG highly and was the key that delayed DDG contract renewal. Can spin thing around and say that Real is the backyard where United dumped their fall out stars except Ronaldo (could've happened also after WC2006).
Fair enough on the last paragraph. Still financial prowess plays huge role on long term success. Look at Italian league. They are historically powerhouse, but losing financial war in recent time seeing their teams being less competitive as a whole. An outlier doesn't usually define a trend.
Anyways, too busy at the moment follow the managerial change to have discussion with you. See ya later.
The fact we finished 3rd doesn't change the fact that it was widely seen as a two-horse race in the period prior to the last few games.
Made-up media bollocks? So you weren't after Thiago (for example) before he opted for Bayern?
I wasn't referring to Martial. I was referring to, for example, Fellaini, whom you could have bought earlier in the window concerned for less money.
It may have been the worst kept secret in football, but that's no excuse for Mourinho making it more or less official at the time he did - a timing purpose-designed to spoil LvG's moment of triumph. It was classless, unpleasant and unnecessary.
Who says it came from Mourinho? Looks unlikely given his demeanour in that attempted SSN interview last night.
I do find this funny, coming from the guy who gave us a 3 year Spurs trend versus a 6 year United trend.
Maybe just by the deluded spurs fans who though they had a chance... Leicester were always going to win it, seeing as they were chased by the two biggest bottlers in the league...
No. Even if we were and didnt get him, doesnt mean anything. You will never be able to get all your transfer targets in any window...
again, one buy and you just make a generalization as all of ours a panic buys.
Its interesting that you have sure knowledge of a club which you don't even support.
You signed him at 17. I'm not sure your academy can take credit for a player who took 7 years to fully break into your team. The other academy players you have are who? Mason and Carroll? Forgive me if I don't worry too much about your great academy and world class hedges.
Van Nistelrooy and Beckham were players Utd willingly let go. And Utd continued to be more successful than the club they went to join. Could you break down the maths behind your odds please? Also remind me who those four players were?
Spurs do have some talents coming through from the academy but it probably will take another year or two for them to break into the first team regularly - Onomah will continue to get minutes and looks decent - Winks seems ok but probably needs a top-level loan before he is ready. The big hope for the academy is Marcus Edwards but he is probably 2 years off from getting anywhere near the first team and may well be poached before then.
The ones who have come through over the past few years, bar Kane obviously have been decent but no more than that - Mason has done ok but has been held back by injuries and Carroll isn't good enough. Rose,Walker, etc. I do not view as our academy players as they spent much of their youth with other clubs.
When a club like United or Chelsea randomly attain a points tally 10 - 15 below their 10 to 15 year average you have to assume something has gone spectacularly wrong. Spurs were better, but better than terrible doesn't necessarily mean good or great. Spurs took advantage of terrible so all credit to them, but when West Ham & So'ton are 3-4 points away from a CL position you know several teams have severely underperformed.
I mention the last 25 years because it's a period of time where you can't be selective. It's not like your 3 year average which show Spurs better than United. It's not your 5 year average that show Spurs as net spend gurus (despite Arsenal and United having much more successful 5 year periods with a similar net spend).
In that time United have built a club that has allowed them 3 years of chaos without it denting the bumper. It's allowed us to look at the £35m CL money and say "meh", because our kit deal is £40m higher than our nearest rival. It's allowed us to look at the £200m net we've spent over the past 3 years under two poor managers and think: if it's gotten us Martial, Blind and Shaw, as well as players who are bound to either improve or have resale value in Fellaini, Depay, Mata, Herrera & Schneiderlin, who cares?
That's what a very well run club looks like: the ability to make several bad decisions and it not make a dent, because of the hundreds of good decisions made previously.
Spurs are in their first 5 years of a 25 year period where they need to make consistently good decisions to become a top team and have the aforementioned inertia. Good luck though as Spurs history shows us that for every 5 years of minor "success", there's a decade of sacking managers, poor signings and general disarray.
Last edited:
Funny given that inflation would therefore work both ways. If incomings are higher then so are outgoings.
I agree with these points you have made - I am a Spurs fan and have been for around 30 years. Spurs are nowhere near the club that Manchester United are but then 99% of the clubs in England are in exactly the same position. Having said that Spurs are showing some signs of progress and you are 100% correct when you say that having 5 years of relative success is meaningless if you have 10 years of mediocrity (which sadly I have experienced for most of my life as a Spurs fan). We are in the early stages of hopefully turning our club into a top European club and it will take 10+ years of continual improvement and investment to get us there if we have a chance to do it. It's nice to think that we have a chance of doing it now though but time will tell if we can manage it. I know I'm much more positive now than I probably ever have been in all my time supporting the club.
A
I'd be positive in Spurs' position also. They have had a really solid 5 years in terms of investment in infrastructure whilst also improving their team. It could have been better in terms of how you spent the Bale money, but it could have been a hell of a lot worse if you made the wrong managerial appointment after AVB.
I'm hopeful Spurs stick with Pochettino irrespective of whether they finish in the top 4 next season, as he's got you playing good football on a small budget.
The difficult work starts now though as Arsenal found out, financing the stadium will take a decade and during that period you are likely to see Kane/Alli leave, but if the money is spent wisely you'll be on rock solid foundations.
I'd be positive in Spurs' position also. They have had a really solid 5 years in terms of investment in infrastructure whilst also improving their team. It could have been better in terms of how you spent the Bale money, but it could have been a hell of a lot worse if you made the wrong managerial appointment after AVB.
I'm hopeful Spurs stick with Pochettino irrespective of whether they finish in the top 4 next season, as he's got you playing good football on a small budget.
The difficult work starts now though as Arsenal found out, financing the stadium will take a decade and during that period you are likely to see Kane/Alli leave, but if the money is spent wisely you'll be on rock solid foundations.
It's not random in United's case - it's 3 years running. So your vague "something" that's gone spectacularly wrong should be corrected to a plurality of "somethings", perhaps including that the United squad simply isn't that good .... or is this notion to be rejected in favour of lumping all the blame on your last two managers?
As for the last 25 years, this bears little relevance to the recent past and, more importantly still, the here-and-now. Looking backwards so far will not help you fix the present.
If you prefer to live in some cosy fantasy world in which United have not been "dented", then that's up to you. Meanwhile, back in the real world, the Mourinho circus is hitting town, which will most likely mean:
* Yet another summer of squad upheaval, with many ins and outs, which means an extended process of gelling and cohesion will be needed and the chances of hitting the ground running will be reduced.
* Yet another new playing style to be learnt by the players, with the same consequences as described above.
* Youth players demoted down the pecking order and facing reduced chances to progress.
* God knows what in terms of the negative results arising from Mourinho's abrasive manner and narcisstic personality.
Sure, you'll throw another bucket-load of money around, but that's what you've done for the last 3 years and it won't guarantee you a top 4 finish.
We got 70 points last season which is only a few points less than what we'd expect as an absolute minimum (coincidentally the same as Spurs this season). So in terms of massively different it's 2 seasons out of the last 20 or so.
With a proven winner who's already won titles in this Country I'd say the chances are that those 2 seasons are behind us.
You mention several "hallmarks" of Mourinho, but fail to look at the context. Every Chelsea (and Madrid) manager since Abramovich has failed to play youth players, because they are aware that they they won't see the fruits of their labour as they sack their manager every year.
Likewise we're used to an abrasive and narcissistic personality - we had the best manager ever who shared these qualities for over 25 years.
In terms of "new style of play", if you can let me know a single club he's been at that hasn't picked up his style of play almost instantly? His relentless early success suggests it isn't a 5 year "process" ala LVG.
With full control of transfers and personnel I fully expect him to be backed ahead of any bad apples that try to undermine him, unlike his times at Chelsea and Madrid.
Spurs seem to forget they only got 70 points this season. They won nothing and at no point looked like winning anything. There was no title charge for Spurs irregardless of what anyone thinks.
With Conte, Pep, Wenger and possibly Jose being in the league with big money next season I'll be surprised if they can manage another "title challenge" with a manager who has never actually won anything.
If they keep their best players though they might do alright.
With Conte, Pep, Wenger and possibly Jose being in the league with big money next season I'll be surprised if they can manage another "title challenge" with a manager who has never actually won anything.
If they keep their best players though they might do alright.
You joke about it, but in truth I do feel a sence of pride in this acomplishment. And yes it is an acomplishment, particularly when you consider that in the modern game of the sugar daddies, oil barons, the Russian mafia and goverment funded football clubs (opening a can of worms here!) are threatening to monopolize the entire footballing industry. I would have thought an Arsenal fan could at the very least relate to that.
Why is that so hard to believe may I ask? Are you forgetting the likes of Teddy, Berba and Carrick, all of whom left Spurs for United for no other reason than the United brand, to deny that fact would be just plain lunacy. The "United appeal" will always be a strong pull - particularly for British players - regardless of the current state of the club.
All banter aside, don't be surprised if Harry Kane ends up a United player come the end of the summer. He is a massive talent, proven in the Prem, taken to International football like a duck to water, the guy just ticks all boxes. A top talent that any manager worth his salt would have taken a keen interest in, Jose will most definitely be on the prowl.
Where do I start? For starters Levy established a new policy after the Berbatov saga: no sales of star players to Prem rivals - that's why both Modric and Bale were sold abroad, despite intense interest from the Prem moneybags clubs.
Second, Kane strongly identifies with Spurs - he's happy here. Even if he wanted to leave - and with CL football on offer next season and Pochettino having just signed a new 5 year contract that'd be most unlikely - he wouldn't kick up a fuss if forced to stay. Besides, his wage levels have shot up recently and will no doubt go up further.
Third, there would be total uproar from Spurs fans were Kane to be sold - especially to a Prem rival. Levy is not an idiot.
Fourth, Pochettino might well resign if Kane were sold. There's no doubt he would have been given certain assurances before signing the new contract, including the retention of star players.
Fifth: although more money is always handy, Spurs don't need it. The club's finances are sound, as the publicly available balance sheets show.
Sixth: Spurs have ambitions of their own, both in the league and CL next season. They aren't going to begin by selling their star player.
Oh my God, have we finally got a pleasant Spurs fan on the board? We should sack Van Gaal every day.
When I picture you, I see a guy in a dark, dank, windowless room, sitting at his computer with a ridiculously large sheet of paper in his left hand containing every possible retort/response to any given scenario with regards to the well being of Spurs football club. Either that or you're just good, haven't quite made up my mind yet.
If Spurs manage to retain the services of the likes of Kane, Dier, Alli, Rose ect for another season, what with all the attention they will receive from 2 new managers with a point to prove and the funds to support them, I'll eat not only my hat, but yours too! It's gonna be an interesting summer
Time will tell.
I'm a healthy skeptic towards Mourinho, and how we'll do with him at the helm. But one thing I'm very much looking forward to is the certainty of finishing above Spurs again next season.
Much like a few of our resident Spurs fans, my friends who support Spurs have gotten just a tad bit too cocksure after their amazing third place trophy this season, so it'll be great to have the natural order of things restored again.
Much like a few of our resident Spurs fans, my friends who support Spurs have gotten just a tad bit too cocksure after their amazing third place trophy this season, so it'll be great to have the natural order of things restored again.
Of course Spurs have their own ambitions, that goes without saying, but have you truly considered the ambitions of Harry Kane? Is he going to be happy to remain at mid-level football club when his ability dictates more? The guy could end up playing for any club on the planet, he is just that good.
Last edited:
I'm not going to reply to all bold-text comments you've made - I responded to your earlier request as to "why" I've said Kane-to-United this summer is a total non-starter, but that's all I'm prepared to do because the notion is so ridiculous it's not worth further effort.
I'd would point out, however, that Kane signed a new contract - running for 5.5 years - only 3 months ago, at which point he said: "You look at players like Ledley King, Ryan Giggs and Steven Gerrard. To stay at one club at the top level the way they have shows how good they have been. It’s great for them and great for the game. It’s fantastic for the fans to have players who have been there for so many years.
Tottenham are a great club on the rise. I hope we get better and I’d love to stay here for as long as possible. If I’m still here in 10 years, I’d be over the moon. A lot of players today,when they do well, they end up going to another club or moving abroad. It depends on the situation at the time but at the moment, I’m looking to be a Tottenham player for many years."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/hotshot-harry-kane-wants-stay-5115316
Take it or leave it, I don't mind which, but Kane-to-United this summer is total pie in the sky - you've more chance of signing Messi.
Last edited:
Just going to leave this here...
The feck is that?
It appears to be a bunch of morons. They are actually very dangerous in large groups but easily avoided if alone.
Apparently, Zlatan rejected Spurs and is considering United. (Well, I guess even LVG did the same, but Zlatan is Zlatan)