Did that make sense in your head?
The Spurs thread | 2017-18 season | Serious thread - wummers/derailers will be threadbanned
- Thread starter Damien
- 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.
- Status
People getting baited by Glaston's sophistry.
It doesnt frustrate me at all, whatever gave you that idea? I hope he is with you next season, It was merely an observation and my opinion that he will move on from Spurs, if not this summer transfer window then the next.
Carry on with the Glaston debate.
It doesnt frustrate me at all, whatever gave you that idea? I hope he is with you next season, It was merely an observation and my opinion that he will move on from Spurs, if not this summer transfer window then the next.
Carry on with the Glaston debate.
You are coming across as a bit sad really. You have no idea what the future holds, but the fact is Spurs have risen from mediocrity and are now establishing themselves as a consistent big boy and we've done it without having a rich sugar daddy. You really should wind in your patronising arrogant attitude, you don't come across as a very nice bloke at all.
You are way off, Eriksen will likely sign a new contract this summer, and he certainly isn't leaving.
Fecking Spurs fans on the Caf and their Napoleon complex.
It takes a fair bit of spin to suggest that us earning 216m more than you in 2013 but 275m more than you now is you catching us up
What Glaston debate?
I’m glad I’m not the only one that sees it.
There will be plenty of interest surrounding Eriksen this summer, whether it amounts to anything involving a move is another matter. Personally I'd love to see Eriksen in a midfield 3 consisting of Matic, Pogba and himself. Bring in Bale to shore up the right flank and we have a league title winning outfit in the makings.
-------Matic---------
---Erisken Pogba----
Bale---------Sanchez
------Lukaku------
Mmm
We went out in the same round. of course it's better to go out with your dick in your hand rather than struggling with your zipper... but it's the same round.
The mental gymnastics you go through at times is nuts.
- Trends can be a year. Or five. Or arbitrarily spaced to suit.
- Words can be taken literally, or not, as necessary.
- Simple math, ie one number being bigger than another, is sometimes not proper as percentages can sometimes make things look different. If needed.
- 'Top players' is only a term that applies when a player is at the club. When they leave, it's the managers plan.
- A new stadium is an unfamiliar impediment (if it's Wembley). But an unfamiliar benefit if it's an entirely new one.
It's nutty. You can't honestly believe that Spurs haven't got to continue pulling Rabbits out of hats just to keep Pace with United, financially. Nor that financial spending power is not directly linked to success?
The income gap "shrinking" as you're spinning it is almost exclusively down to the Premier League and Champions League having an equitable TV deal whereby the hundreds of millions that United bring to the competitions more than they receive gets distributed to clubs like Spurs.
If the TV deal reflected the revenue brought to those companies by the clubs then the disparity would have gotten immeasurably worse.
So you can thank United (and similar clubs) for Spurs' growth.
I was thinking through Glaston's logic, where he's focused on percentages (apparently shrinking), instead of money involved (we're pulling further away), in terms of wages.
I wonder if any of their players would be satisfied with a "well you were on 40% of their top earners, now you're on 50%"
I know the mental gymnastics involved are hilarious.
Especially when you consider if you ranked teams solely by the % gap that they'd closed between themselves and United... The clubs at the top of that list would be the Leicesters, Watfords and Brightons of this world.
Do Spurs really want to be in the company of Brighton boasting "well we used to have 5% of your turnover, now we have 15%... We're re grow 3x as fast"
In % terms of course going from small to medium is a lot easier than to go from massive to even bigger.
Last edited:
This is arrogant bollocks. Spurs will soon be in the top 10 globally in terms of income - not some minnow club that's being subsidised by United.
And our new stadium will boost this income further ... but perhaps you'd like to claim credit on United's behalf for this as well?
It's not arrogance to call a spade a spade. No need to get antsy because you dislike the presented facts of the argument.
The truth is that Spurs, even with a substantial increase to their income in the future, will never be able to compete with financial behemoths such as City, United or Chelsea. You admited this yourself, so how do you expect to win a league title before United do?
Just laugh it off. Its like when he argued with me how City were to beat Utd and Spurs would beat City last month. It never happens so its time to argue a different topic based on the future scenarios judged on goalposts that he sets.
Its just tv deals, Utds growth outside of that can't possibilily keep up with the millions tv brings in. Even that seems to have evened out.
Thats it.
But this is the thing, when ENIC choose to sell, and they will, it will certainly be a US owner of considerable wealth. Who knows who and what their ententions will be.
US owners are probably the worst of them all, pretty much all of them buy a club as a cash cow.
If Spurs want a sugar daddy then they'll probably need a European or middle eastern buyer.
If Spurs want a sugar daddy then they'll probably need a European or middle eastern buyer.
Spurs have got a cracking group of players, but when they come out with rubbish like “finishing top four is better than winning a trophy” you know the mentality is wrong. At some point Kane will be off, and he’s a once in a generation player for them - and clearly they don’t want to spend the sort of money needed to replace him.
Spurs seem more than content in finishing near the top of the league without actually challenging, which is pretty sad.
Spurs see their season as a success, whilst Utd see their’s as a failure (no matter what the result today), that’s the difference.
Spurs seem more than content in finishing near the top of the league without actually challenging, which is pretty sad.
Spurs see their season as a success, whilst Utd see their’s as a failure (no matter what the result today), that’s the difference.
Actually I said that Spurs' income will approach that of Chelsea (and Liverpool), which was only just over £60m more than that of Spurs as of around 10 months ago. This will happen soon, by the end of the coming season perhaps.
And when we talk about club finances, there is too much focus just on income, ignoring expenditure ... hence a balanced view of both income and expenditure explains why Spurs have been more or less the most profitable club in the Prem over a period covering the last several years.
Nor have I said that I "expect to win a league title before United do". I've merely said that I don't regard United as being any more likely than Spurs to next win a league title.
As for competing with "financial behemoths", I think we've already shown that we can do that on the pitch.
Last edited:
Didnt bother reading it all, something about how many percent Spurs have gained on United over the last 5 years from a fiscal perspective and something about average league finishes.. I try not to get involved, safer that way.
Possibly, but any number of football clubs across Europe are patiently waiting in hope that some billionaire sugar daddy takes over their club.
Football truly is all about money now. Very sad.
They'll be bought as an investment.
Has there ever been an American sugar daddy in any sport?
They're all out to make money.
Ah ... the "mass exodus from Spurs because of wages" narrative, a story that never ends because its key plot point never actually arrives.
Do you at least acknowledge that the argument you ran regarding shrinking % gaps in income is the same argument the likes of Brighton could argue to an even greater degree than Spurs?
A simple yes or no answer would neatfully tie up this debate if you would oblige.
It's not rubbish when you have the construction of a new stadium complex to fund ... but then United wouldn't know about such things.
It's not comparable, because Brighton are new to the Prem - and the jump from Championship-level income is huge.
There are no guarantees that the transition to your new stadium will run smoothly without incident. I recall Arsenal fans shared similar confidence to yourself when they moved to the Emirates. They ended up having to sell a portion of their first team squad to various rivals across Europe (including RVP to us) in order to balance the books. With the loan repayments being an issue (initially at least) in combination with circumstances being somewhat unpredictable after moving to a new stadium, how do Spurs expect to compete in the transfer market with clubs of similar ambition?
So you freely admit that United are clearly in the stronger position with regards to which of our clubs is more likely to win the league before the other?
Spurs have competed admirably with the richer clubs whilst shopping on a restricted budget, to their credit, but you have to assume that over time those richer clubs will eventually pull away. Whether you care to admit it or not, in modern football the club that spends the most in the transfer market tends to be the most likely to find success.
I don't especially think you'll see the exodus, I'm simply showing your previous argument to be flawed.
You cannot wisely argue that you're getting closer to United in income, when the difference in pounds is getting further away each year.
I don't think the likes of Kane will ever actually leave, because why would he? He's in "his" club (Arsenal kit and previous watching them thing ignored) , on megastar wages as it is, and probably doesn't quite have the sheer will to win of trophies to risk things being harder elsewhere. Not every player has to have ferocious ambition, just like not every one of us would leave our town and good life for a potential risk elsewhere.
The whole of the current Premier league will be right up there.
It's a league thing.
It's why quite soon the powers that be will find some sort of way to stuff English clubs up. But it was ok when it was Italian and Spanish clubs leading the way.
I think it’s to early to speculate who it will be or even how much investment they will put in.
I agree there will be no exodus, it will be a player here and there that if they are good enough to make that step up to the RM/Barca type clubs of the world, will leave. The only ones atm that I think are on that level, are Eriksen and Alderweireld. Outside Kane of course, who as you mentioned, probably wont ever leave.
Maybe in 5 years time if Alli or Sanchez develop into superstars they may look to move on. But id imagine both are committed to the long term atm, thus the long contracts and I think it is a wise decision by the players to stick with Spurs. First team football, CL football, and a coach that believes in young players vs bench warming at some mega club. No brainer for me why they should stick with Spurs.
Southampton, Everton, West Ham, Leicester and Spurs are 5 of the teams that make up 10-20 of the richest clubs in the world
Never let it be said that you aren't relentless @GlastonSpur
You know where your argument falls flat, though? The fact that you're placing all of your assurances on something so unpredictable such as a move to a new stadium. How can you say, without any measure of doubt, that the move will go ahead without issue? I guarantee your owners aren't nearly as confident as you, in fact it's safe to assume that they have a number of contingency plans in place in preperation for those unforeseen circumstances.
Of course there will be teething problems - it's to be expected with such massive and complex project, especially when no other football club in Europe has ever built such a multi-purpose, multi-use stadium.
But beyond this, I'm not sure what "unforeseen circumstances" you have in mind.
Leicester then?
Leicester have only been in the Prem 4 years. Why don't you pick a club that's been there since the Prem's inception?
You have a bad habit of narrowing every argument to suit your own set of rules buddy.
- Status