comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 49 minutes ago
I think it's time to accept we're no longer part of the top six. Traditionally we've always been the 5th best in terms of history, wages, transfers etc. Now, with so much depending on money and the power of history no longer holding much sway, our position in the hierarchy is now dictated by ambition alone. Compared to many modern day clubs, we don't really have any. Above us are...
United
Liverpool
City
Chelsea
Arsenal
Newcastle
Villa
and arguably, Forest
Then comes the back just behind...
Brighton
Brentford
Spurs
West Ham
and then the rest.
People might scoff at the idea of Forest but if we're talking owner ambition, they're more willing to go for it than Levy is. That means that we're now strictly a mid-table outfit and unless something changes, we're now in that pack of clubs hunting for bargains like Brentford and Brighton. Let that sink in. A club that charges the most in the PL fishing in the smallest of ponds.
We've all been hoodwinked. This club isn't going anywhere until the ownership departs. We're going backwards fast and if we get more ambitious owners in the league, we'll just drift further back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a feckin word with yourself!
Spurs' achievements in the last 1 - 20 years surpass anything that the Villa Newcastle Forest have achieved, by a mile! and not to mention we have the financial power to outspend them all.
Sure we may not be knocking at the door of the regular big boys but to suggest we are top 7 at best is the sort of wum BS I expect from opposition fans, not Spurs fans
Spurs have already spent £60m this window, compared to Newcastle and Villa doing nothing.
Did you know Villa still have Coutinho on their books on £135k a week, another year left on his deal
Why anyone is prepared to blow smoke up the arrse of how Villa have run their club is beyond me.
They are in a financial mess and have achieved 1 top 4 finish but on the strength of that some Spurs fans think Villa are one of the Big 6 clubs
did you know Villa still have Coutinho on their books on £135k a week, another year left on his deal?
for real?? wow where has he been playing last forever then
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 49 minutes ago
I think it's time to accept we're no longer part of the top six. Traditionally we've always been the 5th best in terms of history, wages, transfers etc. Now, with so much depending on money and the power of history no longer holding much sway, our position in the hierarchy is now dictated by ambition alone. Compared to many modern day clubs, we don't really have any. Above us are...
United
Liverpool
City
Chelsea
Arsenal
Newcastle
Villa
and arguably, Forest
Then comes the back just behind...
Brighton
Brentford
Spurs
West Ham
and then the rest.
People might scoff at the idea of Forest but if we're talking owner ambition, they're more willing to go for it than Levy is. That means that we're now strictly a mid-table outfit and unless something changes, we're now in that pack of clubs hunting for bargains like Brentford and Brighton. Let that sink in. A club that charges the most in the PL fishing in the smallest of ponds.
We've all been hoodwinked. This club isn't going anywhere until the ownership departs. We're going backwards fast and if we get more ambitious owners in the league, we'll just drift further back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a feckin word with yourself!
Spurs' achievements in the last 1 - 20 years surpass anything that the Villa Newcastle Forest have achieved, by a mile! and not to mention we have the financial power to outspend them all.
Sure we may not be knocking at the door of the regular big boys but to suggest we are top 7 at best is the sort of wum BS I expect from opposition fans, not Spurs fans
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is that the achievements of the last 20 years are kind of irrelevant. It's increasingly about how much money you're willing to put into the club (or admittedly, generate). 20 years ago, we had some serious pull. We paid wages that far outstripped those below us. That's narrowed more recently. Put it this way - the gap between us and the rest of the top six financially has grown, yet the gap between us and those below has shrunk. I'm just not sure there's a great deal of difference between us and the rest of the chasing pack now. Villa and Newcastle will get there eventually because their owners have a thirst for it. You might scoff at their methods in the same you might of Todd Boehly but however crackpot they may appear, you can't deny their want for it. I don't think our owners actually want it. If they do, it's very much secondary. All the time there are financial loopholes other clubs can seemingly exploit, there is little point in even taking PSR seriously. Basically Levy has revised and revised and revised and achieved a C and the other lot have cheated for an A and got away with it. Completely pointless. It's like getting a gold star from a teacher no one respects.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
Spurs have already spent £60m this window, compared to Newcastle and Villa doing nothing.
Did you know Villa still have Coutinho on their books on £135k a week, another year left on his deal
Why anyone is prepared to blow smoke up the arrse of how Villa have run their club is beyond me.
They are in a financial mess and have achieved 1 top 4 finish but on the strength of that some Spurs fans think Villa are one of the Big 6 clubs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know if anyone is looking at Villa like they are one of the big 6 but they've been closer to where we actually want to be in terms of league consistency. They're kind of where we were at under Redknapp I guess and we know they have a top manager.
Spurs may have spent £60m but most of that was on players who were already here.
The big 6 are not Newcastle or Villa (although that may change in the near future) but they are the other clubs who are actually doing things in the window so far, and putting us to shame doing it.
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 3 minutes ago
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are perfectly able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, but our owners choose not to.
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 3 minutes ago
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are perfectly able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, but our owners choose not to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the point. Our revenue should put us far, far clear of both Newcastle and Villa but it doesn't because both of those clubs truly WILL put every last penny into the club and even inject their own. ENIC put mall profits into the 'club' as Levy puts it, which fortunately for them, is an umbrella term that covers all business ventures covered under the name Tottenham Hotspur, including investments in hospitality. In other words, profits go into developing more profits and only a small portion of that actually gets spent on the team.
The sooner everyone realises this the better. Fans should be more annoyed with the ownership than they have been.
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 49 minutes ago
I think it's time to accept we're no longer part of the top six. Traditionally we've always been the 5th best in terms of history, wages, transfers etc. Now, with so much depending on money and the power of history no longer holding much sway, our position in the hierarchy is now dictated by ambition alone. Compared to many modern day clubs, we don't really have any. Above us are...
United
Liverpool
City
Chelsea
Arsenal
Newcastle
Villa
and arguably, Forest
Then comes the back just behind...
Brighton
Brentford
Spurs
West Ham
and then the rest.
People might scoff at the idea of Forest but if we're talking owner ambition, they're more willing to go for it than Levy is. That means that we're now strictly a mid-table outfit and unless something changes, we're now in that pack of clubs hunting for bargains like Brentford and Brighton. Let that sink in. A club that charges the most in the PL fishing in the smallest of ponds.
We've all been hoodwinked. This club isn't going anywhere until the ownership departs. We're going backwards fast and if we get more ambitious owners in the league, we'll just drift further back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a feckin word with yourself!
Spurs' achievements in the last 1 - 20 years surpass anything that the Villa Newcastle Forest have achieved, by a mile! and not to mention we have the financial power to outspend them all.
Sure we may not be knocking at the door of the regular big boys but to suggest we are top 7 at best is the sort of wum BS I expect from opposition fans, not Spurs fans
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is that the achievements of the last 20 years are kind of irrelevant. It's increasingly about how much money you're willing to put into the club (or admittedly, generate). 20 years ago, we had some serious pull. We paid wages that far outstripped those below us. That's narrowed more recently. Put it this way - the gap between us and the rest of the top six financially has grown, yet the gap between us and those below has shrunk. I'm just not sure there's a great deal of difference between us and the rest of the chasing pack now. Villa and Newcastle will get there eventually because their owners have a thirst for it. You might scoff at their methods in the same you might of Todd Boehly but however crackpot they may appear, you can't deny their want for it. I don't think our owners actually want it. If they do, it's very much secondary. All the time there are financial loopholes other clubs can seemingly exploit, there is little point in even taking PSR seriously. Basically Levy has revised and revised and revised and achieved a C and the other lot have cheated for an A and got away with it. Completely pointless. It's like getting a gold star from a teacher no one respects.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Villa and Newcastle in the very short term have done ok. Between them, 1 league cup, UCL once for Villa, twice now for Newcastle in 3 years.
Those achievements and the spending required to do it has meant their owners have invested between them about £850m into these clubs (£500m Villa, £350m NUFC).
Their revenues remain way below Spurs. They are able to spend on transfers (less than Spurs) and wages (about the same) because their owners are pumping in 100s of millions.
You are looking at this the wrong way. Instead of lauding 'owner investment' as the means of closing the gap, you should be lauding brilliant commercial success that has generated massive revenues.
Of the chasing pack, Spurs are head and shoulders above the rest financially and if we can become a consistent top 4 team that puts us on revenue levels with Arsenal and Liverpool and in excess of Chelsea.
These owners will not pump money in indefinitely. They are not your Abramovich types. They will want to see a return on investment and while that may translate into an increased value of a club, that is only really achieved through growth of revenues and to achieve that the likes of Villa and Newcastle will have to do something amazing (massive new stadium, win the league, UCL etc), and they are far off from doing that.
Spurs need to spend wisely this summer, on quality. We are a bit unknown with Frankl but the expectation is that we are a lot better than 17th and may be with a couple quality First XI players we can be in serious contention for top 4 or 5.
We do not have owners who will speculate to accumulate, so their spending will not be a splurge because we got UCL, or a gamble that we'll make UCL next season, but it will be more than it otherwise would have been (and our usual spend has been pretty high in recent years).
My note of caution is that if Villa had an injury crisis like Spurs did, if their form went down the toilet and they ended bottom half, losing 10s of millions of PL money, they would be in a serious mess and their ability to spend their way out of it would be very limited. It could set them back years. They've rolled the dice and it may not work for them. Even now their ability to invest further looks limited, more talk of selling than buying.
Be careful for what you wish for because our owners have chosen to boost our revenues to make us competitive rather than underpin our spending, and one of those approaches is far superior to the others
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 3 minutes ago
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are perfectly able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, but our owners choose not to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the point. Our revenue should put us far, far clear of both Newcastle and Villa but it doesn't because both of those clubs truly WILL put every last penny into the club and even inject their own. ENIC put mall profits into the 'club' as Levy puts it, which fortunately for them, is an umbrella term that covers all business ventures covered under the name Tottenham Hotspur, including investments in hospitality. In other words, profits go into developing more profits and only a small portion of that actually gets spent on the team.
The sooner everyone realises this the better. Fans should be more annoyed with the ownership than they have been.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing is there has at least been a willingness to spend money. I think we are one of the biggest spenders in the last 5 or so years and have shown we can spend rather big if needs be. But it's marked with inconsistency in terms of the willingness to spend on the right profile of player or in spending in the right positions that is going to properly strengthen the squad.
Basically it looks like the recruitment and Frank are going to have to go the extra mile this season to have us competing at a level we want to be at.
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 3 minutes ago
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are perfectly able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, but our owners choose not to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the point. Our revenue should put us far, far clear of both Newcastle and Villa but it doesn't because both of those clubs truly WILL put every last penny into the club and even inject their own. ENIC put mall profits into the 'club' as Levy puts it, which fortunately for them, is an umbrella term that covers all business ventures covered under the name Tottenham Hotspur, including investments in hospitality. In other words, profits go into developing more profits and only a small portion of that actually gets spent on the team.
The sooner everyone realises this the better. Fans should be more annoyed with the ownership than they have been.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing is there has at least been a willingness to spend money. I think we are one of the biggest spenders in the last 5 or so years and have shown we can spend rather big if needs be. But it's marked with inconsistency in terms of the willingness to spend on the right profile of player or in spending in the right positions that is going to properly strengthen the squad.
Basically it looks like the recruitment and Frank are going to have to go the extra mile this season to have us competing at a level we want to be at.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
thats fair.
We spend big. The last 2 years has seen more of a rebuild so it has been a mix of youth and experience, and also getting numbers in.
In the context of an extensive rebuild of the squad I think our profile of player has been right, we have a decent balance although it is quite a young squad but that is with a view to developing a squad over a few seasons, not instant impact.
But that balance now needs more quality, players that will have an instant impact.
I have no issues with most of our transfer dealings since we got the likes or Romero in 4 years ago. Theres been the odd dud. But we are well placed now to add that quality and spend on the right profile to improve us now.
That needs to be players in the category of Kudos/Eze/MBuemo - oven-ready PL proven players or quality internationals. Same goes for whoever we target for CM to replace Biss.
Perhaps we can be a bit more 'one eye on the future' for a Richarlison replacement.
It should be our MO from now on. A couple quality signings each summer to keep the quality improving and the squad refreshed while older players or under performers get move on. The building phase is over!
Chelsea have offered West ham 2-3 players for #Tottenham target Mohammed Kudus, but West ham want straight money.
{@ExWHUEmployee via @insideforeword}
2-3 of their 100 forwards have your pick
Can only think they pay top dollar to agents to get them all to sign
Apparently 6 other big clubs also in for Kudus and there’s absolutely not a chance in hell Levy pays the premium that’s inevitable in a bidding war.
If we don’t get Eze or Kudus there’ll be a mutiny. I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up with Rashford on loan, which I actually wouldn’t be against to be fair. If there are 6 clubs in for Kudus though, won’t he just go to the club offering the most in wages?
won’t he just go to the club offering the most in wages?
---
He's already turned down Saudi
Two bids put in for Kudus already and both rejected. The first at £50m, the second at £50m + £5m add ons.
Are we to infer from this that we are more interested in signing Kudus than others like Eze?
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 minute ago
Two bids put in for Kudus already and both rejected. The first at £50m, the second at £50m + £5m add ons.
Are we to infer from this that we are more interested in signing Kudus than others like Eze?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. Probably because Eze is a gooner at heart and he would rather play for them.
My heart goes out to my Tottenham brothers who begged him to come to us 💀💙
comment by Luka "The List" Brasi (U22178)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 minute ago
Two bids put in for Kudus already and both rejected. The first at £50m, the second at £50m + £5m add ons.
Are we to infer from this that we are more interested in signing Kudus than others like Eze?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. Probably because Eze is a gooner at heart and he would rather play for them.
My heart goes out to my Tottenham brothers who begged him to come to us 💀💙
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Eze is a better player IMO, so disappointing to see we have our eyes more on Kudus after initially showing an interest in Eze. But you could be right about the Arsenal link. Or I dare say the fact he would have cost more could also have had something to do with it.
From a squad POV Kudas makes more sense, as we don't have anyone with a left foot who is fast, powerful and can take a man on. Kulu is two of those.
I'm totally fine on missing out on Eze. Injury prone. Doubt he could manage 3 games a week and we are well stocked in that area. Agreed we have no one with his quality but we should be ok.
Big IF we get Kudas. The longer it draws on the less chance we have.
Eze at 27 you'd pay more for a player at his peak, albeit he may only have 3 or 4 good seasons left in him.
Kudus @ 24, he clearly has quality but has not peaked. I think a deal structured at less than Eze but with add-ons to take it close is worth it
Cunha went for a straight £62.5m. At 26, he has 27 goals and 13 assists in his last 2 seasons.
Kudus has 13 goals and 9 assists.
Cunha's worst season is comfortably better than Kudus' best
For me if you are valuing these players, give this sort of bench value, then Eze and MBuemo are worth a bit more and Kudus is worth a bit less, may be with bigger add-ons to reflect the fact he's younger, has a high ceiling but there's no guarantee he will hit that ceiling.
£55m + add-ons looks realistic to me & WHU need the money to reinvest
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted about an hour ago
Two bids put in for Kudus already and both rejected. The first at £50m, the second at £50m + £5m add ons.
Are we to infer from this that we are more interested in signing Kudus than others like Eze?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kudas has release clause of £85m so I reckon £70m all in should do it. Still alot!
They apparently want 65. We offered 50 then 55. I reckon 60
Sign in if you want to comment
Tottenham Match & Transfer thread
Page 13063 of 13294
13064 | 13065 | 13066 | 13067 | 13068
posted on 2/7/25
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 49 minutes ago
I think it's time to accept we're no longer part of the top six. Traditionally we've always been the 5th best in terms of history, wages, transfers etc. Now, with so much depending on money and the power of history no longer holding much sway, our position in the hierarchy is now dictated by ambition alone. Compared to many modern day clubs, we don't really have any. Above us are...
United
Liverpool
City
Chelsea
Arsenal
Newcastle
Villa
and arguably, Forest
Then comes the back just behind...
Brighton
Brentford
Spurs
West Ham
and then the rest.
People might scoff at the idea of Forest but if we're talking owner ambition, they're more willing to go for it than Levy is. That means that we're now strictly a mid-table outfit and unless something changes, we're now in that pack of clubs hunting for bargains like Brentford and Brighton. Let that sink in. A club that charges the most in the PL fishing in the smallest of ponds.
We've all been hoodwinked. This club isn't going anywhere until the ownership departs. We're going backwards fast and if we get more ambitious owners in the league, we'll just drift further back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a feckin word with yourself!
Spurs' achievements in the last 1 - 20 years surpass anything that the Villa Newcastle Forest have achieved, by a mile! and not to mention we have the financial power to outspend them all.
Sure we may not be knocking at the door of the regular big boys but to suggest we are top 7 at best is the sort of wum BS I expect from opposition fans, not Spurs fans
posted on 2/7/25
Spurs have already spent £60m this window, compared to Newcastle and Villa doing nothing.
Did you know Villa still have Coutinho on their books on £135k a week, another year left on his deal
Why anyone is prepared to blow smoke up the arrse of how Villa have run their club is beyond me.
They are in a financial mess and have achieved 1 top 4 finish but on the strength of that some Spurs fans think Villa are one of the Big 6 clubs
posted on 2/7/25
did you know Villa still have Coutinho on their books on £135k a week, another year left on his deal?
for real?? wow where has he been playing last forever then
posted on 2/7/25
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 49 minutes ago
I think it's time to accept we're no longer part of the top six. Traditionally we've always been the 5th best in terms of history, wages, transfers etc. Now, with so much depending on money and the power of history no longer holding much sway, our position in the hierarchy is now dictated by ambition alone. Compared to many modern day clubs, we don't really have any. Above us are...
United
Liverpool
City
Chelsea
Arsenal
Newcastle
Villa
and arguably, Forest
Then comes the back just behind...
Brighton
Brentford
Spurs
West Ham
and then the rest.
People might scoff at the idea of Forest but if we're talking owner ambition, they're more willing to go for it than Levy is. That means that we're now strictly a mid-table outfit and unless something changes, we're now in that pack of clubs hunting for bargains like Brentford and Brighton. Let that sink in. A club that charges the most in the PL fishing in the smallest of ponds.
We've all been hoodwinked. This club isn't going anywhere until the ownership departs. We're going backwards fast and if we get more ambitious owners in the league, we'll just drift further back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a feckin word with yourself!
Spurs' achievements in the last 1 - 20 years surpass anything that the Villa Newcastle Forest have achieved, by a mile! and not to mention we have the financial power to outspend them all.
Sure we may not be knocking at the door of the regular big boys but to suggest we are top 7 at best is the sort of wum BS I expect from opposition fans, not Spurs fans
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is that the achievements of the last 20 years are kind of irrelevant. It's increasingly about how much money you're willing to put into the club (or admittedly, generate). 20 years ago, we had some serious pull. We paid wages that far outstripped those below us. That's narrowed more recently. Put it this way - the gap between us and the rest of the top six financially has grown, yet the gap between us and those below has shrunk. I'm just not sure there's a great deal of difference between us and the rest of the chasing pack now. Villa and Newcastle will get there eventually because their owners have a thirst for it. You might scoff at their methods in the same you might of Todd Boehly but however crackpot they may appear, you can't deny their want for it. I don't think our owners actually want it. If they do, it's very much secondary. All the time there are financial loopholes other clubs can seemingly exploit, there is little point in even taking PSR seriously. Basically Levy has revised and revised and revised and achieved a C and the other lot have cheated for an A and got away with it. Completely pointless. It's like getting a gold star from a teacher no one respects.
posted on 2/7/25
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
Spurs have already spent £60m this window, compared to Newcastle and Villa doing nothing.
Did you know Villa still have Coutinho on their books on £135k a week, another year left on his deal
Why anyone is prepared to blow smoke up the arrse of how Villa have run their club is beyond me.
They are in a financial mess and have achieved 1 top 4 finish but on the strength of that some Spurs fans think Villa are one of the Big 6 clubs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know if anyone is looking at Villa like they are one of the big 6 but they've been closer to where we actually want to be in terms of league consistency. They're kind of where we were at under Redknapp I guess and we know they have a top manager.
Spurs may have spent £60m but most of that was on players who were already here.
The big 6 are not Newcastle or Villa (although that may change in the near future) but they are the other clubs who are actually doing things in the window so far, and putting us to shame doing it.
posted on 2/7/25
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
posted on 2/7/25
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 3 minutes ago
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are perfectly able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, but our owners choose not to.
posted on 2/7/25
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 3 minutes ago
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are perfectly able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, but our owners choose not to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the point. Our revenue should put us far, far clear of both Newcastle and Villa but it doesn't because both of those clubs truly WILL put every last penny into the club and even inject their own. ENIC put mall profits into the 'club' as Levy puts it, which fortunately for them, is an umbrella term that covers all business ventures covered under the name Tottenham Hotspur, including investments in hospitality. In other words, profits go into developing more profits and only a small portion of that actually gets spent on the team.
The sooner everyone realises this the better. Fans should be more annoyed with the ownership than they have been.
posted on 2/7/25
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 49 minutes ago
I think it's time to accept we're no longer part of the top six. Traditionally we've always been the 5th best in terms of history, wages, transfers etc. Now, with so much depending on money and the power of history no longer holding much sway, our position in the hierarchy is now dictated by ambition alone. Compared to many modern day clubs, we don't really have any. Above us are...
United
Liverpool
City
Chelsea
Arsenal
Newcastle
Villa
and arguably, Forest
Then comes the back just behind...
Brighton
Brentford
Spurs
West Ham
and then the rest.
People might scoff at the idea of Forest but if we're talking owner ambition, they're more willing to go for it than Levy is. That means that we're now strictly a mid-table outfit and unless something changes, we're now in that pack of clubs hunting for bargains like Brentford and Brighton. Let that sink in. A club that charges the most in the PL fishing in the smallest of ponds.
We've all been hoodwinked. This club isn't going anywhere until the ownership departs. We're going backwards fast and if we get more ambitious owners in the league, we'll just drift further back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a feckin word with yourself!
Spurs' achievements in the last 1 - 20 years surpass anything that the Villa Newcastle Forest have achieved, by a mile! and not to mention we have the financial power to outspend them all.
Sure we may not be knocking at the door of the regular big boys but to suggest we are top 7 at best is the sort of wum BS I expect from opposition fans, not Spurs fans
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My point is that the achievements of the last 20 years are kind of irrelevant. It's increasingly about how much money you're willing to put into the club (or admittedly, generate). 20 years ago, we had some serious pull. We paid wages that far outstripped those below us. That's narrowed more recently. Put it this way - the gap between us and the rest of the top six financially has grown, yet the gap between us and those below has shrunk. I'm just not sure there's a great deal of difference between us and the rest of the chasing pack now. Villa and Newcastle will get there eventually because their owners have a thirst for it. You might scoff at their methods in the same you might of Todd Boehly but however crackpot they may appear, you can't deny their want for it. I don't think our owners actually want it. If they do, it's very much secondary. All the time there are financial loopholes other clubs can seemingly exploit, there is little point in even taking PSR seriously. Basically Levy has revised and revised and revised and achieved a C and the other lot have cheated for an A and got away with it. Completely pointless. It's like getting a gold star from a teacher no one respects.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Villa and Newcastle in the very short term have done ok. Between them, 1 league cup, UCL once for Villa, twice now for Newcastle in 3 years.
Those achievements and the spending required to do it has meant their owners have invested between them about £850m into these clubs (£500m Villa, £350m NUFC).
Their revenues remain way below Spurs. They are able to spend on transfers (less than Spurs) and wages (about the same) because their owners are pumping in 100s of millions.
You are looking at this the wrong way. Instead of lauding 'owner investment' as the means of closing the gap, you should be lauding brilliant commercial success that has generated massive revenues.
Of the chasing pack, Spurs are head and shoulders above the rest financially and if we can become a consistent top 4 team that puts us on revenue levels with Arsenal and Liverpool and in excess of Chelsea.
These owners will not pump money in indefinitely. They are not your Abramovich types. They will want to see a return on investment and while that may translate into an increased value of a club, that is only really achieved through growth of revenues and to achieve that the likes of Villa and Newcastle will have to do something amazing (massive new stadium, win the league, UCL etc), and they are far off from doing that.
Spurs need to spend wisely this summer, on quality. We are a bit unknown with Frankl but the expectation is that we are a lot better than 17th and may be with a couple quality First XI players we can be in serious contention for top 4 or 5.
We do not have owners who will speculate to accumulate, so their spending will not be a splurge because we got UCL, or a gamble that we'll make UCL next season, but it will be more than it otherwise would have been (and our usual spend has been pretty high in recent years).
My note of caution is that if Villa had an injury crisis like Spurs did, if their form went down the toilet and they ended bottom half, losing 10s of millions of PL money, they would be in a serious mess and their ability to spend their way out of it would be very limited. It could set them back years. They've rolled the dice and it may not work for them. Even now their ability to invest further looks limited, more talk of selling than buying.
Be careful for what you wish for because our owners have chosen to boost our revenues to make us competitive rather than underpin our spending, and one of those approaches is far superior to the others
posted on 2/7/25
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 3 minutes ago
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are perfectly able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, but our owners choose not to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the point. Our revenue should put us far, far clear of both Newcastle and Villa but it doesn't because both of those clubs truly WILL put every last penny into the club and even inject their own. ENIC put mall profits into the 'club' as Levy puts it, which fortunately for them, is an umbrella term that covers all business ventures covered under the name Tottenham Hotspur, including investments in hospitality. In other words, profits go into developing more profits and only a small portion of that actually gets spent on the team.
The sooner everyone realises this the better. Fans should be more annoyed with the ownership than they have been.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing is there has at least been a willingness to spend money. I think we are one of the biggest spenders in the last 5 or so years and have shown we can spend rather big if needs be. But it's marked with inconsistency in terms of the willingness to spend on the right profile of player or in spending in the right positions that is going to properly strengthen the squad.
Basically it looks like the recruitment and Frank are going to have to go the extra mile this season to have us competing at a level we want to be at.
posted on 2/7/25
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 3 minutes ago
Spurs have never been able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, that’s nothing new
We did have a gap to the rest of the league tho, which Newcastle and villa have now closed. They’re our competition now when it comes to signings
Forest aren’t on that level after one season. Players are picking us over them 10 times out of 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We are perfectly able to compete with the other big 6 clubs on transfers and wages, but our owners choose not to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the point. Our revenue should put us far, far clear of both Newcastle and Villa but it doesn't because both of those clubs truly WILL put every last penny into the club and even inject their own. ENIC put mall profits into the 'club' as Levy puts it, which fortunately for them, is an umbrella term that covers all business ventures covered under the name Tottenham Hotspur, including investments in hospitality. In other words, profits go into developing more profits and only a small portion of that actually gets spent on the team.
The sooner everyone realises this the better. Fans should be more annoyed with the ownership than they have been.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing is there has at least been a willingness to spend money. I think we are one of the biggest spenders in the last 5 or so years and have shown we can spend rather big if needs be. But it's marked with inconsistency in terms of the willingness to spend on the right profile of player or in spending in the right positions that is going to properly strengthen the squad.
Basically it looks like the recruitment and Frank are going to have to go the extra mile this season to have us competing at a level we want to be at.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
thats fair.
We spend big. The last 2 years has seen more of a rebuild so it has been a mix of youth and experience, and also getting numbers in.
In the context of an extensive rebuild of the squad I think our profile of player has been right, we have a decent balance although it is quite a young squad but that is with a view to developing a squad over a few seasons, not instant impact.
But that balance now needs more quality, players that will have an instant impact.
I have no issues with most of our transfer dealings since we got the likes or Romero in 4 years ago. Theres been the odd dud. But we are well placed now to add that quality and spend on the right profile to improve us now.
That needs to be players in the category of Kudos/Eze/MBuemo - oven-ready PL proven players or quality internationals. Same goes for whoever we target for CM to replace Biss.
Perhaps we can be a bit more 'one eye on the future' for a Richarlison replacement.
It should be our MO from now on. A couple quality signings each summer to keep the quality improving and the squad refreshed while older players or under performers get move on. The building phase is over!
posted on 2/7/25
Chelsea have offered West ham 2-3 players for #Tottenham target Mohammed Kudus, but West ham want straight money.
{@ExWHUEmployee via @insideforeword}
posted on 2/7/25
2-3 of their 100 forwards have your pick
posted on 2/7/25
Can only think they pay top dollar to agents to get them all to sign
posted on 2/7/25
Apparently 6 other big clubs also in for Kudus and there’s absolutely not a chance in hell Levy pays the premium that’s inevitable in a bidding war.
If we don’t get Eze or Kudus there’ll be a mutiny. I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up with Rashford on loan, which I actually wouldn’t be against to be fair. If there are 6 clubs in for Kudus though, won’t he just go to the club offering the most in wages?
posted on 3/7/25
won’t he just go to the club offering the most in wages?
---
He's already turned down Saudi
posted on 3/7/25
Two bids put in for Kudus already and both rejected. The first at £50m, the second at £50m + £5m add ons.
Are we to infer from this that we are more interested in signing Kudus than others like Eze?
posted on 3/7/25
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 minute ago
Two bids put in for Kudus already and both rejected. The first at £50m, the second at £50m + £5m add ons.
Are we to infer from this that we are more interested in signing Kudus than others like Eze?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. Probably because Eze is a gooner at heart and he would rather play for them.
My heart goes out to my Tottenham brothers who begged him to come to us 💀💙
posted on 3/7/25
comment by Luka "The List" Brasi (U22178)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 minute ago
Two bids put in for Kudus already and both rejected. The first at £50m, the second at £50m + £5m add ons.
Are we to infer from this that we are more interested in signing Kudus than others like Eze?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. Probably because Eze is a gooner at heart and he would rather play for them.
My heart goes out to my Tottenham brothers who begged him to come to us 💀💙
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Eze is a better player IMO, so disappointing to see we have our eyes more on Kudus after initially showing an interest in Eze. But you could be right about the Arsenal link. Or I dare say the fact he would have cost more could also have had something to do with it.
posted on 3/7/25
From a squad POV Kudas makes more sense, as we don't have anyone with a left foot who is fast, powerful and can take a man on. Kulu is two of those.
I'm totally fine on missing out on Eze. Injury prone. Doubt he could manage 3 games a week and we are well stocked in that area. Agreed we have no one with his quality but we should be ok.
Big IF we get Kudas. The longer it draws on the less chance we have.
posted on 3/7/25
Eze at 27 you'd pay more for a player at his peak, albeit he may only have 3 or 4 good seasons left in him.
Kudus @ 24, he clearly has quality but has not peaked. I think a deal structured at less than Eze but with add-ons to take it close is worth it
Cunha went for a straight £62.5m. At 26, he has 27 goals and 13 assists in his last 2 seasons.
Kudus has 13 goals and 9 assists.
Cunha's worst season is comfortably better than Kudus' best
For me if you are valuing these players, give this sort of bench value, then Eze and MBuemo are worth a bit more and Kudus is worth a bit less, may be with bigger add-ons to reflect the fact he's younger, has a high ceiling but there's no guarantee he will hit that ceiling.
£55m + add-ons looks realistic to me & WHU need the money to reinvest
posted on 3/7/25
Different positions init
posted on 3/7/25
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted about an hour ago
Two bids put in for Kudus already and both rejected. The first at £50m, the second at £50m + £5m add ons.
Are we to infer from this that we are more interested in signing Kudus than others like Eze?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 3/7/25
Kudas has release clause of £85m so I reckon £70m all in should do it. Still alot!
posted on 3/7/25
They apparently want 65. We offered 50 then 55. I reckon 60
Page 13063 of 13294
13064 | 13065 | 13066 | 13067 | 13068