Most of those lads were signed before Poch got here and he turned them into a finely tuned cohesive unit. They’re not even weren’t pulling up trees before he came. Their difference I think is similar to what Newcastle have with Howe. The remarkable turnaround in Joelinton is just off the scale and that’s down to Howe. I think Poch had the same effect.
Those signings that were ‘on Poch’s watch’ even though he didn’t coach them speaks more of Levy’s inability, or unwillingness, to back the manager with the players he wanted. He wanted Fernandes but ended up with Lo Celso (or Ndombele, can’t remember which one). He always had to look at the second or third option down the list because the finances were just too rich for Levy. If you buy cheap, you buy twice, as we saw at right full back time and time again. Going for the cheaper option comes with risk because they might be younger or untested in the league. There’s risk financially with going for the bigger deal but in a footballing sense, they’re not gambles. We’ve gambled too much on hoping cheaper players come good, and like most cheap players, only a few really come off.
Admittedly it was harder to spend back then given the stadium move but let’s not be under any illusions. The duds we signed when we didn’t finally splash out were more to do with Levy not wanting to pull the trigger on the absolute bankers.
The Poch era was simply the best time of my spurs supporting life. We played with a style and identity that personified the values of the club I grew up supporting. The manager, players and fans were unified and it truly was the proudest I have ever been as a fan. Even though ultimately it ended trophyless, it was the living embodiment of that famous quote from Danny blanchflower about aiming so high there is glory in failure. You have to be a moron to think this wasn’t a superb time to be involved with the club.
Levy’s failure to back Poch, 18 months without a single signing, and ultimately sacking him at the first sign of trouble less than 6 months from getting us to a champions league final, something no other manager in our history has achieved, made me realise that Enic have no intention of doing the necessary to get us over the line and ultimately are happy with the money making status quo of fourth place.
I will forever be grateful to Poch and wish he was given the chance he deserved. I’d take him back in a heartbeat over losing 19 games in a season (something Poch didn’t even achieve in four years)
I’d also take him over Iriola ( who I think is way overrated and if he comes here, see you in 18 months for the same old conversations), Frank, who will fall out with Levy and Silva who couldn’t cut it at Everton.
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
"We played with a style and identity that personified the values of the club I grew up supporting. The manager, players and fans were unified......"
There is so much sauce on this. Anyone would think it was golden era lol.
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 44 minutes ago
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re right, but it’s unfair not to give Enic credit for that period in some capacity. The problem has been the complete lack of desire to push on and actually win something. The amount of extra funding in wages and transfer fees required to actually win something is not part of enics plan. They were quite happy just being fourth and getting champions league money. Now they have the new stadium, I wonder if they even have as much desire to get fourth now they gave their ‘diversified revenue streams’. Beyoncé pays the bills nicely.
It’s sad what we have allowed levy to do to us. Charging the highest prices around but not delivering on the field. Talk to me about net spend all you like but if you buy four cra p players for £100 million on cheap wages rather than one superstar in the position you need on big money, then you win nothing as 25 years of Enic has proven
Look at the Tel signing. Another opportunistic purchase, being able to write off money owed rather than spending on a player we actually needed. Tel looks completely unsuited to this team. He can’t seem to play through the middle and it’s not as though we needed another young left sided player. After the shambles of signing Werner again, keeping money Moore out of the team, we go and do it again with Tel.
Enic do not sign what we actually need. They sign players based on if they can get a bargain or if they think there’s a profit.
Gray, Bergvall and odebert may well go in to be great players, but right now they’re in a team that is 14th in the table. We needed proper ready players. But they are just too darn pricey for the 9th richest club in the world.
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 39 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 44 minutes ago
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re right, but it’s unfair not to give Enic credit for that period in some capacity. The problem has been the complete lack of desire to push on and actually win something. The amount of extra funding in wages and transfer fees required to actually win something is not part of enics plan. They were quite happy just being fourth and getting champions league money. Now they have the new stadium, I wonder if they even have as much desire to get fourth now they gave their ‘diversified revenue streams’. Beyoncé pays the bills nicely.
It’s sad what we have allowed levy to do to us. Charging the highest prices around but not delivering on the field. Talk to me about net spend all you like but if you buy four cra p players for £100 million on cheap wages rather than one superstar in the position you need on big money, then you win nothing as 25 years of Enic has proven
Look at the Tel signing. Another opportunistic purchase, being able to write off money owed rather than spending on a player we actually needed. Tel looks completely unsuited to this team. He can’t seem to play through the middle and it’s not as though we needed another young left sided player. After the shambles of signing Werner again, keeping money Moore out of the team, we go and do it again with Tel.
Enic do not sign what we actually need. They sign players based on if they can get a bargain or if they think there’s a profit.
Gray, Bergvall and odebert may well go in to be great players, but right now they’re in a team that is 14th in the table. We needed proper ready players. But they are just too darn pricey for the 9th richest club in the world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep. Agree with all of that
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 39 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 44 minutes ago
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re right, but it’s unfair not to give Enic credit for that period in some capacity. The problem has been the complete lack of desire to push on and actually win something. The amount of extra funding in wages and transfer fees required to actually win something is not part of enics plan. They were quite happy just being fourth and getting champions league money. Now they have the new stadium, I wonder if they even have as much desire to get fourth now they gave their ‘diversified revenue streams’. Beyoncé pays the bills nicely.
It’s sad what we have allowed levy to do to us. Charging the highest prices around but not delivering on the field. Talk to me about net spend all you like but if you buy four cra p players for £100 million on cheap wages rather than one superstar in the position you need on big money, then you win nothing as 25 years of Enic has proven
Look at the Tel signing. Another opportunistic purchase, being able to write off money owed rather than spending on a player we actually needed. Tel looks completely unsuited to this team. He can’t seem to play through the middle and it’s not as though we needed another young left sided player. After the shambles of signing Werner again, keeping money Moore out of the team, we go and do it again with Tel.
Enic do not sign what we actually need. They sign players based on if they can get a bargain or if they think there’s a profit.
Gray, Bergvall and odebert may well go in to be great players, but right now they’re in a team that is 14th in the table. We needed proper ready players. But they are just too darn pricey for the 9th richest club in the world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep. Agree with all of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think its daft to suggest that ENIC are not interested in Spurs making an additional £70-100m from the UCL.
There is also a distinction to be made between ENICS appetite for success and how much is spent.
We know their MO has always been to spend only what we earn. That limited us pre-new stadium. Now the spending power is huge and we spend a lot. There is clearly an appetite to grow our revenues and that is what funds but also keeps our spending PSR compliant.
So an appetite to grow revenues = greater spending power = success (in theory).
So there is the appetite to succed otherwise we would not be growing revenues.
Within our actual spending, whether there is an appetite to spend big on individuals is more of the question. I think in our current phase, which is a rebuild of the squad, these big names havent come because we are making lots of changes to a team.
A decent strategy will have a time line of when the squad is expected to peak and that's likely to be 2 or 3 years, so that would be the time where you add big quality to make the next step....Like Arsenal did with Rice, in Artetas 5th window.
Whether these big signings come, and at a time when they really push us to the next level, we will have to wait and see. I said on another thread i think much of the hard work with the squad is done and it is well placed to add some true quality now, although may be the club isnt well placed to do so after a shiiit season. The EL could change all of that.
The problem is that Levy operates on a model of only spending what he has rather than spending what he might have. All other successful clubs take that leap of faith by spending sums slightly beyond their capabilities, which is essentially a gamble to ultimately become CL regulars, which therefore restores the finances once they do.
Levy deals in absolutes. That's why, despite the fact on one hand he is a perfect owner when it comes to generating revenue outside of success on the pitch, when it comes to truly focusing on football success he drops the ball because there are no certainties tied to any one player's success/failure trajectory. I think he prefers a cheaper gamble because they're on lower wages which mitigates that risk, and the fee itself isn't as rich. The problem with cheaper gambles is that they're less likely to come off, hence out checkered history with successful transfers. Rice represents an absolute banker but a super expensive one.
The problem is that if you go cheap and fail to qualify for Europe, how on earth can you really entice talented, experienced pros. You just can't. At some point you have to gamble. If we only spend what we have, we're not going to achieve or hit the heights Arsenal currently are. It's just not possible.
The model is financial safe and sound but ultimately unambitious and doomed to fail.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 39 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 44 minutes ago
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re right, but it’s unfair not to give Enic credit for that period in some capacity. The problem has been the complete lack of desire to push on and actually win something. The amount of extra funding in wages and transfer fees required to actually win something is not part of enics plan. They were quite happy just being fourth and getting champions league money. Now they have the new stadium, I wonder if they even have as much desire to get fourth now they gave their ‘diversified revenue streams’. Beyoncé pays the bills nicely.
It’s sad what we have allowed levy to do to us. Charging the highest prices around but not delivering on the field. Talk to me about net spend all you like but if you buy four cra p players for £100 million on cheap wages rather than one superstar in the position you need on big money, then you win nothing as 25 years of Enic has proven
Look at the Tel signing. Another opportunistic purchase, being able to write off money owed rather than spending on a player we actually needed. Tel looks completely unsuited to this team. He can’t seem to play through the middle and it’s not as though we needed another young left sided player. After the shambles of signing Werner again, keeping money Moore out of the team, we go and do it again with Tel.
Enic do not sign what we actually need. They sign players based on if they can get a bargain or if they think there’s a profit.
Gray, Bergvall and odebert may well go in to be great players, but right now they’re in a team that is 14th in the table. We needed proper ready players. But they are just too darn pricey for the 9th richest club in the world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep. Agree with all of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think its daft to suggest that ENIC are not interested in Spurs making an additional £70-100m from the UCL.
There is also a distinction to be made between ENICS appetite for success and how much is spent.
We know their MO has always been to spend only what we earn. That limited us pre-new stadium. Now the spending power is huge and we spend a lot. There is clearly an appetite to grow our revenues and that is what funds but also keeps our spending PSR compliant.
So an appetite to grow revenues = greater spending power = success (in theory).
So there is the appetite to succed otherwise we would not be growing revenues.
Within our actual spending, whether there is an appetite to spend big on individuals is more of the question. I think in our current phase, which is a rebuild of the squad, these big names havent come because we are making lots of changes to a team.
A decent strategy will have a time line of when the squad is expected to peak and that's likely to be 2 or 3 years, so that would be the time where you add big quality to make the next step....Like Arsenal did with Rice, in Artetas 5th window.
Whether these big signings come, and at a time when they really push us to the next level, we will have to wait and see. I said on another thread i think much of the hard work with the squad is done and it is well placed to add some true quality now, although may be the club isnt well placed to do so after a shiiit season. The EL could change all of that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s not that their not interested in making that money, it’s just they don’t need it as much as they did, so their interest in investing more than required into the football side is questionable.
We were regular champs league, unbeaten at home champs league finalists when we left our beloved whl.
We have gone as far backwards on the pitch as we have gone forwards off it since moving to this stadium. There is an undeniable and intentional unbalanced and Enic are at the heart of it
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
The problem is that Levy operates on a model of only spending what he has rather than spending what he might have. All other successful clubs take that leap of faith by spending sums slightly beyond their capabilities, which is essentially a gamble to ultimately become CL regulars, which therefore restores the finances once they do.
Levy deals in absolutes. That's why, despite the fact on one hand he is a perfect owner when it comes to generating revenue outside of success on the pitch, when it comes to truly focusing on football success he drops the ball because there are no certainties tied to any one player's success/failure trajectory. I think he prefers a cheaper gamble because they're on lower wages which mitigates that risk, and the fee itself isn't as rich. The problem with cheaper gambles is that they're less likely to come off, hence out checkered history with successful transfers. Rice represents an absolute banker but a super expensive one.
The problem is that if you go cheap and fail to qualify for Europe, how on earth can you really entice talented, experienced pros. You just can't. At some point you have to gamble. If we only spend what we have, we're not going to achieve or hit the heights Arsenal currently are. It's just not possible.
The model is financial safe and sound but ultimately unambitious and doomed to fail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is kinda true but not across the board.
City have dominated because they spent well beyond their means and probably beyond their permitted FFP means. Their domination is built on that doping and this is a different era now.
Liverpool have never pushed that financial risk button. Their spending is pretty conservative and their biggest signings ever were off the back of a £145m sale of Coutinho and that was years ago.
Hard to say what risks Arsenal have taken. Its never really publicised in the way Spurs finances are.
But even with Spurs we dont know how close to the margin we are. Are we keeping stuff back, are we close to the edge, are we just being cautious.
Latest analysis of our figures suggest that for PSR we have loads of headroom. But PSR calculations can ignore a lot of actual costs like stadium interest, spending on academy and womens teams, infrastructure investment, so it doesnt paint a full picture of our actual ins and outs, and may Levy is using PSR to give the impression we need to be cautious when actually we could be more aggressive.
I think its way beyond all our understandings as to what scope Spurs really do have to make aggressive investment in the team. But we probably all do know that Levy is not a risk taker, has had fingers burned in the past so its safe to conclude that we probably could do more, take more risk.
Its not his way and Ive kinda made peace with that over 20 years. Its not as if teh means we have isnt enough to have us doing a lot better than we are. Our finances are as strong as Chelsea and Arsenal, better than Newcatle and Villa, so we really should be in that top 4 conversation, regularly. SO to a degree its a mismanagement of what we have spent rather than not spending enough
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
The problem is that Levy operates on a model of only spending what he has rather than spending what he might have. All other successful clubs take that leap of faith by spending sums slightly beyond their capabilities, which is essentially a gamble to ultimately become CL regulars, which therefore restores the finances once they do.
Levy deals in absolutes. That's why, despite the fact on one hand he is a perfect owner when it comes to generating revenue outside of success on the pitch, when it comes to truly focusing on football success he drops the ball because there are no certainties tied to any one player's success/failure trajectory. I think he prefers a cheaper gamble because they're on lower wages which mitigates that risk, and the fee itself isn't as rich. The problem with cheaper gambles is that they're less likely to come off, hence out checkered history with successful transfers. Rice represents an absolute banker but a super expensive one.
The problem is that if you go cheap and fail to qualify for Europe, how on earth can you really entice talented, experienced pros. You just can't. At some point you have to gamble. If we only spend what we have, we're not going to achieve or hit the heights Arsenal currently are. It's just not possible.
The model is financial safe and sound but ultimately unambitious and doomed to fail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is kinda true but not across the board.
City have dominated because they spent well beyond their means and probably beyond their permitted FFP means. Their domination is built on that doping and this is a different era now.
Liverpool have never pushed that financial risk button. Their spending is pretty conservative and their biggest signings ever were off the back of a £145m sale of Coutinho and that was years ago.
Hard to say what risks Arsenal have taken. Its never really publicised in the way Spurs finances are.
But even with Spurs we dont know how close to the margin we are. Are we keeping stuff back, are we close to the edge, are we just being cautious.
Latest analysis of our figures suggest that for PSR we have loads of headroom. But PSR calculations can ignore a lot of actual costs like stadium interest, spending on academy and womens teams, infrastructure investment, so it doesnt paint a full picture of our actual ins and outs, and may Levy is using PSR to give the impression we need to be cautious when actually we could be more aggressive.
I think its way beyond all our understandings as to what scope Spurs really do have to make aggressive investment in the team. But we probably all do know that Levy is not a risk taker, has had fingers burned in the past so its safe to conclude that we probably could do more, take more risk.
Its not his way and Ive kinda made peace with that over 20 years. Its not as if teh means we have isnt enough to have us doing a lot better than we are. Our finances are as strong as Chelsea and Arsenal, better than Newcatle and Villa, so we really should be in that top 4 conversation, regularly. SO to a degree its a mismanagement of what we have spent rather than not spending enough
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I'd say it's likely both. It's a consequence of mismanagement and bad experiences. In many ways that summer of Lo Celso and Ndombele represents more than just those two gigantic failures and then the inability to offload for the duration of their contract. It was the first time we'd really had a go using those CL finances so had they succeeded, I don't think Levy would be quite so nervous about the prospect of going big now. It's stung us so badly. It's created the new incarnation of Daniel Levy. Ndombele has so much to answer for.
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due diligence was poor there. N’dombele had notable discipline issues at other clubs and los celso just didn’t settle. Perhaps if levy hadn’t of fired his fellow argentine and the manager who wanted them, it could have all been different. Like you say, it’s hard to see how it could have been worse since then. Not even mid table now.
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due diligence was poor there. N’dombele had notable discipline issues at other clubs and los celso just didn’t settle. Perhaps if levy hadn’t of fired his fellow argentine and the manager who wanted them, it could have all been different. Like you say, it’s hard to see how it could have been worse since then. Not even mid table now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tbf you have no idea what DD was done on our buys.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 26 minutes ago
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due diligence was poor there. N’dombele had notable discipline issues at other clubs and los celso just didn’t settle. Perhaps if levy hadn’t of fired his fellow argentine and the manager who wanted them, it could have all been different. Like you say, it’s hard to see how it could have been worse since then. Not even mid table now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tbf you have no idea what DD was done on our buys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets take a wild guess at fack all
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 26 minutes ago
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due diligence was poor there. N’dombele had notable discipline issues at other clubs and los celso just didn’t settle. Perhaps if levy hadn’t of fired his fellow argentine and the manager who wanted them, it could have all been different. Like you say, it’s hard to see how it could have been worse since then. Not even mid table now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tbf you have no idea what DD was done on our buys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets take a wild guess at fack all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah the proof is in the pudding ain't it really. It's either negligent or incompetent
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by Bãleș left boot (U22081)
posted 11 minutes ago
Bit of a pisstake to not include Ndombele, Lo Celso and Aurier in the Poch era. Sanchez as well. More than his entire peak team cost pizzed up the wall
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't say it's a pisstake. Poch hardly got to play Ndombele and Lo Celso before he was sacked. They were signed under him but not really his era.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were absolutely his signings and his era. Poch wasted more money on duds than any manager in Spurs history.
The truth can hurt at times.
I was starting to worry about you Sandy after you stood me up on Sunday
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 12 hours, 34 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by Bãleș left boot (U22081)
posted 11 minutes ago
Bit of a pisstake to not include Ndombele, Lo Celso and Aurier in the Poch era. Sanchez as well. More than his entire peak team cost pizzed up the wall
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't say it's a pisstake. Poch hardly got to play Ndombele and Lo Celso before he was sacked. They were signed under him but not really his era.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were absolutely his signings and his era. Poch wasted more money on duds than any manager in Spurs history.
The truth can hurt at times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were at the end of his era that came when the team were on the slide, as Levy hadn't refreshed with new signings for a whole year.
That is the truth. If you want to blame Poch for those signings not working out then Levy is equally responsible.
Spurtle you do a great job as Poch defence lawyer 👍🏻🤣
comment by Luka "The List" Brasi (U22178)
posted 14 minutes ago
Spurtle you do a great job as Poch defence lawyer 👍🏻🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm just stating what we all knew before. The team was on the slide from the 2016/17 season. We'd sold Walker and didn't do enough to replenish it, including going a whole year without making a signing and losing Dembele.
Yeah imagine being mocked for defending our best ever PL manager by a fellow Spurs fan.
Of course and Poch was totally faultless and did nothing wrong at all. What a legend.
comment by Luka "The List" Brasi (U22178)
posted 2 minutes ago
Of course and Poch was totally faultless and did nothing wrong at all. What a legend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did get some things wrong but they are minor in comparison to the faults of the board around that time.
Ndombele was not a good signing but let's not pretend like Poch had more than his fair share of time with him in that season. Of course Poch deserved more time full stop but you and I are not going to agree on that because you are one of the few who didn't rate what Poch did at Spurs.
Sign in if you want to comment
The Poch Era...
Page 2 of 2
posted on 8/4/25
Most of those lads were signed before Poch got here and he turned them into a finely tuned cohesive unit. They’re not even weren’t pulling up trees before he came. Their difference I think is similar to what Newcastle have with Howe. The remarkable turnaround in Joelinton is just off the scale and that’s down to Howe. I think Poch had the same effect.
Those signings that were ‘on Poch’s watch’ even though he didn’t coach them speaks more of Levy’s inability, or unwillingness, to back the manager with the players he wanted. He wanted Fernandes but ended up with Lo Celso (or Ndombele, can’t remember which one). He always had to look at the second or third option down the list because the finances were just too rich for Levy. If you buy cheap, you buy twice, as we saw at right full back time and time again. Going for the cheaper option comes with risk because they might be younger or untested in the league. There’s risk financially with going for the bigger deal but in a footballing sense, they’re not gambles. We’ve gambled too much on hoping cheaper players come good, and like most cheap players, only a few really come off.
Admittedly it was harder to spend back then given the stadium move but let’s not be under any illusions. The duds we signed when we didn’t finally splash out were more to do with Levy not wanting to pull the trigger on the absolute bankers.
posted on 9/4/25
The Poch era was simply the best time of my spurs supporting life. We played with a style and identity that personified the values of the club I grew up supporting. The manager, players and fans were unified and it truly was the proudest I have ever been as a fan. Even though ultimately it ended trophyless, it was the living embodiment of that famous quote from Danny blanchflower about aiming so high there is glory in failure. You have to be a moron to think this wasn’t a superb time to be involved with the club.
Levy’s failure to back Poch, 18 months without a single signing, and ultimately sacking him at the first sign of trouble less than 6 months from getting us to a champions league final, something no other manager in our history has achieved, made me realise that Enic have no intention of doing the necessary to get us over the line and ultimately are happy with the money making status quo of fourth place.
I will forever be grateful to Poch and wish he was given the chance he deserved. I’d take him back in a heartbeat over losing 19 games in a season (something Poch didn’t even achieve in four years)
I’d also take him over Iriola ( who I think is way overrated and if he comes here, see you in 18 months for the same old conversations), Frank, who will fall out with Levy and Silva who couldn’t cut it at Everton.
posted on 9/4/25
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
posted on 9/4/25
"We played with a style and identity that personified the values of the club I grew up supporting. The manager, players and fans were unified......"
There is so much sauce on this. Anyone would think it was golden era lol.
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 44 minutes ago
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re right, but it’s unfair not to give Enic credit for that period in some capacity. The problem has been the complete lack of desire to push on and actually win something. The amount of extra funding in wages and transfer fees required to actually win something is not part of enics plan. They were quite happy just being fourth and getting champions league money. Now they have the new stadium, I wonder if they even have as much desire to get fourth now they gave their ‘diversified revenue streams’. Beyoncé pays the bills nicely.
It’s sad what we have allowed levy to do to us. Charging the highest prices around but not delivering on the field. Talk to me about net spend all you like but if you buy four cra p players for £100 million on cheap wages rather than one superstar in the position you need on big money, then you win nothing as 25 years of Enic has proven
Look at the Tel signing. Another opportunistic purchase, being able to write off money owed rather than spending on a player we actually needed. Tel looks completely unsuited to this team. He can’t seem to play through the middle and it’s not as though we needed another young left sided player. After the shambles of signing Werner again, keeping money Moore out of the team, we go and do it again with Tel.
Enic do not sign what we actually need. They sign players based on if they can get a bargain or if they think there’s a profit.
Gray, Bergvall and odebert may well go in to be great players, but right now they’re in a team that is 14th in the table. We needed proper ready players. But they are just too darn pricey for the 9th richest club in the world.
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 39 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 44 minutes ago
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re right, but it’s unfair not to give Enic credit for that period in some capacity. The problem has been the complete lack of desire to push on and actually win something. The amount of extra funding in wages and transfer fees required to actually win something is not part of enics plan. They were quite happy just being fourth and getting champions league money. Now they have the new stadium, I wonder if they even have as much desire to get fourth now they gave their ‘diversified revenue streams’. Beyoncé pays the bills nicely.
It’s sad what we have allowed levy to do to us. Charging the highest prices around but not delivering on the field. Talk to me about net spend all you like but if you buy four cra p players for £100 million on cheap wages rather than one superstar in the position you need on big money, then you win nothing as 25 years of Enic has proven
Look at the Tel signing. Another opportunistic purchase, being able to write off money owed rather than spending on a player we actually needed. Tel looks completely unsuited to this team. He can’t seem to play through the middle and it’s not as though we needed another young left sided player. After the shambles of signing Werner again, keeping money Moore out of the team, we go and do it again with Tel.
Enic do not sign what we actually need. They sign players based on if they can get a bargain or if they think there’s a profit.
Gray, Bergvall and odebert may well go in to be great players, but right now they’re in a team that is 14th in the table. We needed proper ready players. But they are just too darn pricey for the 9th richest club in the world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep. Agree with all of that
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 39 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 44 minutes ago
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re right, but it’s unfair not to give Enic credit for that period in some capacity. The problem has been the complete lack of desire to push on and actually win something. The amount of extra funding in wages and transfer fees required to actually win something is not part of enics plan. They were quite happy just being fourth and getting champions league money. Now they have the new stadium, I wonder if they even have as much desire to get fourth now they gave their ‘diversified revenue streams’. Beyoncé pays the bills nicely.
It’s sad what we have allowed levy to do to us. Charging the highest prices around but not delivering on the field. Talk to me about net spend all you like but if you buy four cra p players for £100 million on cheap wages rather than one superstar in the position you need on big money, then you win nothing as 25 years of Enic has proven
Look at the Tel signing. Another opportunistic purchase, being able to write off money owed rather than spending on a player we actually needed. Tel looks completely unsuited to this team. He can’t seem to play through the middle and it’s not as though we needed another young left sided player. After the shambles of signing Werner again, keeping money Moore out of the team, we go and do it again with Tel.
Enic do not sign what we actually need. They sign players based on if they can get a bargain or if they think there’s a profit.
Gray, Bergvall and odebert may well go in to be great players, but right now they’re in a team that is 14th in the table. We needed proper ready players. But they are just too darn pricey for the 9th richest club in the world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep. Agree with all of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think its daft to suggest that ENIC are not interested in Spurs making an additional £70-100m from the UCL.
There is also a distinction to be made between ENICS appetite for success and how much is spent.
We know their MO has always been to spend only what we earn. That limited us pre-new stadium. Now the spending power is huge and we spend a lot. There is clearly an appetite to grow our revenues and that is what funds but also keeps our spending PSR compliant.
So an appetite to grow revenues = greater spending power = success (in theory).
So there is the appetite to succed otherwise we would not be growing revenues.
Within our actual spending, whether there is an appetite to spend big on individuals is more of the question. I think in our current phase, which is a rebuild of the squad, these big names havent come because we are making lots of changes to a team.
A decent strategy will have a time line of when the squad is expected to peak and that's likely to be 2 or 3 years, so that would be the time where you add big quality to make the next step....Like Arsenal did with Rice, in Artetas 5th window.
Whether these big signings come, and at a time when they really push us to the next level, we will have to wait and see. I said on another thread i think much of the hard work with the squad is done and it is well placed to add some true quality now, although may be the club isnt well placed to do so after a shiiit season. The EL could change all of that.
posted on 9/4/25
The problem is that Levy operates on a model of only spending what he has rather than spending what he might have. All other successful clubs take that leap of faith by spending sums slightly beyond their capabilities, which is essentially a gamble to ultimately become CL regulars, which therefore restores the finances once they do.
Levy deals in absolutes. That's why, despite the fact on one hand he is a perfect owner when it comes to generating revenue outside of success on the pitch, when it comes to truly focusing on football success he drops the ball because there are no certainties tied to any one player's success/failure trajectory. I think he prefers a cheaper gamble because they're on lower wages which mitigates that risk, and the fee itself isn't as rich. The problem with cheaper gambles is that they're less likely to come off, hence out checkered history with successful transfers. Rice represents an absolute banker but a super expensive one.
The problem is that if you go cheap and fail to qualify for Europe, how on earth can you really entice talented, experienced pros. You just can't. At some point you have to gamble. If we only spend what we have, we're not going to achieve or hit the heights Arsenal currently are. It's just not possible.
The model is financial safe and sound but ultimately unambitious and doomed to fail.
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 50 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 39 minutes ago
comment by Sir Tottenham of Hotspur (U17379)
posted 44 minutes ago
Enic got lucky with that squad. And with Poch, plus emergence of Kane, all happened at the same time. A rare type of circumstance, then derailed by stadium moves and a total lack of any strengthening of the squad
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re right, but it’s unfair not to give Enic credit for that period in some capacity. The problem has been the complete lack of desire to push on and actually win something. The amount of extra funding in wages and transfer fees required to actually win something is not part of enics plan. They were quite happy just being fourth and getting champions league money. Now they have the new stadium, I wonder if they even have as much desire to get fourth now they gave their ‘diversified revenue streams’. Beyoncé pays the bills nicely.
It’s sad what we have allowed levy to do to us. Charging the highest prices around but not delivering on the field. Talk to me about net spend all you like but if you buy four cra p players for £100 million on cheap wages rather than one superstar in the position you need on big money, then you win nothing as 25 years of Enic has proven
Look at the Tel signing. Another opportunistic purchase, being able to write off money owed rather than spending on a player we actually needed. Tel looks completely unsuited to this team. He can’t seem to play through the middle and it’s not as though we needed another young left sided player. After the shambles of signing Werner again, keeping money Moore out of the team, we go and do it again with Tel.
Enic do not sign what we actually need. They sign players based on if they can get a bargain or if they think there’s a profit.
Gray, Bergvall and odebert may well go in to be great players, but right now they’re in a team that is 14th in the table. We needed proper ready players. But they are just too darn pricey for the 9th richest club in the world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep. Agree with all of that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think its daft to suggest that ENIC are not interested in Spurs making an additional £70-100m from the UCL.
There is also a distinction to be made between ENICS appetite for success and how much is spent.
We know their MO has always been to spend only what we earn. That limited us pre-new stadium. Now the spending power is huge and we spend a lot. There is clearly an appetite to grow our revenues and that is what funds but also keeps our spending PSR compliant.
So an appetite to grow revenues = greater spending power = success (in theory).
So there is the appetite to succed otherwise we would not be growing revenues.
Within our actual spending, whether there is an appetite to spend big on individuals is more of the question. I think in our current phase, which is a rebuild of the squad, these big names havent come because we are making lots of changes to a team.
A decent strategy will have a time line of when the squad is expected to peak and that's likely to be 2 or 3 years, so that would be the time where you add big quality to make the next step....Like Arsenal did with Rice, in Artetas 5th window.
Whether these big signings come, and at a time when they really push us to the next level, we will have to wait and see. I said on another thread i think much of the hard work with the squad is done and it is well placed to add some true quality now, although may be the club isnt well placed to do so after a shiiit season. The EL could change all of that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s not that their not interested in making that money, it’s just they don’t need it as much as they did, so their interest in investing more than required into the football side is questionable.
We were regular champs league, unbeaten at home champs league finalists when we left our beloved whl.
We have gone as far backwards on the pitch as we have gone forwards off it since moving to this stadium. There is an undeniable and intentional unbalanced and Enic are at the heart of it
posted on 9/4/25
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
The problem is that Levy operates on a model of only spending what he has rather than spending what he might have. All other successful clubs take that leap of faith by spending sums slightly beyond their capabilities, which is essentially a gamble to ultimately become CL regulars, which therefore restores the finances once they do.
Levy deals in absolutes. That's why, despite the fact on one hand he is a perfect owner when it comes to generating revenue outside of success on the pitch, when it comes to truly focusing on football success he drops the ball because there are no certainties tied to any one player's success/failure trajectory. I think he prefers a cheaper gamble because they're on lower wages which mitigates that risk, and the fee itself isn't as rich. The problem with cheaper gambles is that they're less likely to come off, hence out checkered history with successful transfers. Rice represents an absolute banker but a super expensive one.
The problem is that if you go cheap and fail to qualify for Europe, how on earth can you really entice talented, experienced pros. You just can't. At some point you have to gamble. If we only spend what we have, we're not going to achieve or hit the heights Arsenal currently are. It's just not possible.
The model is financial safe and sound but ultimately unambitious and doomed to fail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is kinda true but not across the board.
City have dominated because they spent well beyond their means and probably beyond their permitted FFP means. Their domination is built on that doping and this is a different era now.
Liverpool have never pushed that financial risk button. Their spending is pretty conservative and their biggest signings ever were off the back of a £145m sale of Coutinho and that was years ago.
Hard to say what risks Arsenal have taken. Its never really publicised in the way Spurs finances are.
But even with Spurs we dont know how close to the margin we are. Are we keeping stuff back, are we close to the edge, are we just being cautious.
Latest analysis of our figures suggest that for PSR we have loads of headroom. But PSR calculations can ignore a lot of actual costs like stadium interest, spending on academy and womens teams, infrastructure investment, so it doesnt paint a full picture of our actual ins and outs, and may Levy is using PSR to give the impression we need to be cautious when actually we could be more aggressive.
I think its way beyond all our understandings as to what scope Spurs really do have to make aggressive investment in the team. But we probably all do know that Levy is not a risk taker, has had fingers burned in the past so its safe to conclude that we probably could do more, take more risk.
Its not his way and Ive kinda made peace with that over 20 years. Its not as if teh means we have isnt enough to have us doing a lot better than we are. Our finances are as strong as Chelsea and Arsenal, better than Newcatle and Villa, so we really should be in that top 4 conversation, regularly. SO to a degree its a mismanagement of what we have spent rather than not spending enough
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
The problem is that Levy operates on a model of only spending what he has rather than spending what he might have. All other successful clubs take that leap of faith by spending sums slightly beyond their capabilities, which is essentially a gamble to ultimately become CL regulars, which therefore restores the finances once they do.
Levy deals in absolutes. That's why, despite the fact on one hand he is a perfect owner when it comes to generating revenue outside of success on the pitch, when it comes to truly focusing on football success he drops the ball because there are no certainties tied to any one player's success/failure trajectory. I think he prefers a cheaper gamble because they're on lower wages which mitigates that risk, and the fee itself isn't as rich. The problem with cheaper gambles is that they're less likely to come off, hence out checkered history with successful transfers. Rice represents an absolute banker but a super expensive one.
The problem is that if you go cheap and fail to qualify for Europe, how on earth can you really entice talented, experienced pros. You just can't. At some point you have to gamble. If we only spend what we have, we're not going to achieve or hit the heights Arsenal currently are. It's just not possible.
The model is financial safe and sound but ultimately unambitious and doomed to fail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is kinda true but not across the board.
City have dominated because they spent well beyond their means and probably beyond their permitted FFP means. Their domination is built on that doping and this is a different era now.
Liverpool have never pushed that financial risk button. Their spending is pretty conservative and their biggest signings ever were off the back of a £145m sale of Coutinho and that was years ago.
Hard to say what risks Arsenal have taken. Its never really publicised in the way Spurs finances are.
But even with Spurs we dont know how close to the margin we are. Are we keeping stuff back, are we close to the edge, are we just being cautious.
Latest analysis of our figures suggest that for PSR we have loads of headroom. But PSR calculations can ignore a lot of actual costs like stadium interest, spending on academy and womens teams, infrastructure investment, so it doesnt paint a full picture of our actual ins and outs, and may Levy is using PSR to give the impression we need to be cautious when actually we could be more aggressive.
I think its way beyond all our understandings as to what scope Spurs really do have to make aggressive investment in the team. But we probably all do know that Levy is not a risk taker, has had fingers burned in the past so its safe to conclude that we probably could do more, take more risk.
Its not his way and Ive kinda made peace with that over 20 years. Its not as if teh means we have isnt enough to have us doing a lot better than we are. Our finances are as strong as Chelsea and Arsenal, better than Newcatle and Villa, so we really should be in that top 4 conversation, regularly. SO to a degree its a mismanagement of what we have spent rather than not spending enough
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I'd say it's likely both. It's a consequence of mismanagement and bad experiences. In many ways that summer of Lo Celso and Ndombele represents more than just those two gigantic failures and then the inability to offload for the duration of their contract. It was the first time we'd really had a go using those CL finances so had they succeeded, I don't think Levy would be quite so nervous about the prospect of going big now. It's stung us so badly. It's created the new incarnation of Daniel Levy. Ndombele has so much to answer for.
posted on 9/4/25
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due diligence was poor there. N’dombele had notable discipline issues at other clubs and los celso just didn’t settle. Perhaps if levy hadn’t of fired his fellow argentine and the manager who wanted them, it could have all been different. Like you say, it’s hard to see how it could have been worse since then. Not even mid table now.
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due diligence was poor there. N’dombele had notable discipline issues at other clubs and los celso just didn’t settle. Perhaps if levy hadn’t of fired his fellow argentine and the manager who wanted them, it could have all been different. Like you say, it’s hard to see how it could have been worse since then. Not even mid table now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tbf you have no idea what DD was done on our buys.
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 26 minutes ago
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due diligence was poor there. N’dombele had notable discipline issues at other clubs and los celso just didn’t settle. Perhaps if levy hadn’t of fired his fellow argentine and the manager who wanted them, it could have all been different. Like you say, it’s hard to see how it could have been worse since then. Not even mid table now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tbf you have no idea what DD was done on our buys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets take a wild guess at fack all
posted on 9/4/25
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 26 minutes ago
comment by Mack follows change for Tottenham on X (U6574)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 hours, 19 minutes ago
Ndomeble and GLC were such exciting signings at the time. Seemed like we were addressing areas that needed to be addressed with quality players, big money spent, only for both of them to never really perform.
While the previous summer when we spent nothing ultimately cost us, I do think these signings showed an ambition that added quality to an already strong squad, with one eye of replacing Dembele and Eriksen long term. It all made a lot of sense, and may be if Poch had been retained it may have turned out well. It certainly could hardly have gone any worse since
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Due diligence was poor there. N’dombele had notable discipline issues at other clubs and los celso just didn’t settle. Perhaps if levy hadn’t of fired his fellow argentine and the manager who wanted them, it could have all been different. Like you say, it’s hard to see how it could have been worse since then. Not even mid table now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tbf you have no idea what DD was done on our buys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lets take a wild guess at fack all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah the proof is in the pudding ain't it really. It's either negligent or incompetent
posted on 9/4/25
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by Bãleș left boot (U22081)
posted 11 minutes ago
Bit of a pisstake to not include Ndombele, Lo Celso and Aurier in the Poch era. Sanchez as well. More than his entire peak team cost pizzed up the wall
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't say it's a pisstake. Poch hardly got to play Ndombele and Lo Celso before he was sacked. They were signed under him but not really his era.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were absolutely his signings and his era. Poch wasted more money on duds than any manager in Spurs history.
The truth can hurt at times.
posted on 9/4/25
I was starting to worry about you Sandy after you stood me up on Sunday
posted on 10/4/25
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 12 hours, 34 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 day, 4 hours ago
comment by Bãleș left boot (U22081)
posted 11 minutes ago
Bit of a pisstake to not include Ndombele, Lo Celso and Aurier in the Poch era. Sanchez as well. More than his entire peak team cost pizzed up the wall
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't say it's a pisstake. Poch hardly got to play Ndombele and Lo Celso before he was sacked. They were signed under him but not really his era.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were absolutely his signings and his era. Poch wasted more money on duds than any manager in Spurs history.
The truth can hurt at times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were at the end of his era that came when the team were on the slide, as Levy hadn't refreshed with new signings for a whole year.
That is the truth. If you want to blame Poch for those signings not working out then Levy is equally responsible.
posted on 10/4/25
Spurtle you do a great job as Poch defence lawyer 👍🏻🤣
posted on 10/4/25
comment by Luka "The List" Brasi (U22178)
posted 14 minutes ago
Spurtle you do a great job as Poch defence lawyer 👍🏻🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm just stating what we all knew before. The team was on the slide from the 2016/17 season. We'd sold Walker and didn't do enough to replenish it, including going a whole year without making a signing and losing Dembele.
Yeah imagine being mocked for defending our best ever PL manager by a fellow Spurs fan.
posted on 10/4/25
Of course and Poch was totally faultless and did nothing wrong at all. What a legend.
posted on 10/4/25
comment by Luka "The List" Brasi (U22178)
posted 2 minutes ago
Of course and Poch was totally faultless and did nothing wrong at all. What a legend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did get some things wrong but they are minor in comparison to the faults of the board around that time.
Ndombele was not a good signing but let's not pretend like Poch had more than his fair share of time with him in that season. Of course Poch deserved more time full stop but you and I are not going to agree on that because you are one of the few who didn't rate what Poch did at Spurs.
Page 2 of 2