ENIC

[DeanoAustin]

We're crap in the league, but going far in the cups. Isn't that the Spurs we were before ENIC, the one they want to go back to?

We're even crapper in the league than we usually were and we haven't won a cup which we used to do every now and again.

But you're pretty much spot on. With some of our fan base, you'd swear we were up to our bollox in Champions Leagues and league titles before ENIC and Sugar.

 

[Lilbaz]

You're right we did need HG, just a shame we couldn't identify better in the case of Johnson (and there are numerous) or negotiate better with Solanke, but as I say Solanke is a little overpriced but theres still a chance with a different coach and better playing system that he can be succesful.

I didn't really want any of them. But it is what it is.

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

We're even crapper in the league than we usually were and we haven't won a cup which we used to do every now and again.

But you're pretty much spot on. With some of our fan base, you'd swear we were up to our bollox in Champions Leagues and league titles before ENIC and Sugar.

When I started supporting Spurs 7 teams won the championship in the first 8 years only Wolves retained it in that period. Same with the FA Cup, I suppose that's why I got use to not winning something every year, something that's expected by a lot of fans now.

 

[glorygloryeze]

When I started supporting Spurs 7 teams won the championship in the first 8 years only Wolves retained it in that period. Same with the FA Cup, I suppose that's why I got use to not winning something every year, something that's expected by a lot of fans now.

That seems another strawman accusation; has @Yiddo hacked your account?

Let's be clear: the accusation by many fans is NOT that they expect Tottenham to win something every year, it's that they want the owners to do all they can to enable us to be able to win trophies every once in a while. Nearly 20 years without a trophy for a club of our 'size' and 'stature' given the investment into the club's infrastructure and 'value' (so much so that we are now appearing in such lists as those produced by Delloite etc) is very poor.

That poor look is not helped by the many acts taken by the owners over the years whereby it looks like trying to be the best we can be ONE THE PITCH is secondary to keeping our place in those Deloitte lists: scrabbling for signings on the last day of transfer windows to save money here and there (at the detriment of quicker squad integration/building), not biting the bullet to take the once-in-lifetime opportunity to build a great squad around a world class striker who fell in our laps, sacking the one coach who could have gone up against Pep days before a cup final etc etc

You might disagree with those who want new owners, but we should stop this nonsense that those who do want new owners are entitled to the point of expecting Spurs to "win trophies every year".
For context, whilst we have grown the infrastructure and 'value' of the club we have fort the first time since the second world war gone a whole decade period without a trophy: Spurs were the only club who won at least one major trophy in all these ten year periods:
- 50-59 (1 trophy)
- 60-69 (5 trophies)
- 70-79 (4 trophies)
- 80-89 (3 trophies)
- 90-99 (2 trophies)
- 2000-2009 (1 trophy)
- 2010-2019 and since - nada

No club has any 'right' to win trophies, but there is/was a reason we were seen as a big club....many (including me) don't believe the current owners actually know how to act like a big club and i think it is that which fuels the wish for new owners - NOT an expectation of winning a trophy every year (once a decade would probably do)

 

[Bishop]

That seems another strawman accusation; has @Yiddo hacked your account?

Let's be clear: the accusation by many fans is NOT that they expect Tottenham to win something every year, it's that they want the owners to do all they can to enable us to be able to win trophies every once in a while. Nearly 20 years without a trophy for a club of our 'size' and 'stature' given the investment into the club's infrastructure and 'value' (so much so that we are now appearing in such lists as those produced by Delloite etc) is very poor.

That poor look is not helped by the many acts taken by the owners over the years whereby it looks like trying to be the best we can be ONE THE PITCH is secondary to keeping our place in those Deloitte lists: scrabbling for signings on the last day of transfer windows to save money here and there (at the detriment of quicker squad integration/building), not biting the bullet to take the once-in-lifetime opportunity to build a great squad around a world class striker who fell in our laps, sacking the one coach who could have gone up against Pep days before a cup final etc etc

You might disagree with those who want new owners, but we should stop this nonsense that those who do want new owners are entitled to the point of expecting Spurs to "win trophies every year".
For context, whilst we have grown the infrastructure and 'value' of the club we have fort the first time since the second world war gone a whole decade period without a trophy: Spurs were the only club who won at least one major trophy in all these ten year periods:
- 50-59 (1 trophy)
- 60-69 (5 trophies)
- 70-79 (4 trophies)
- 80-89 (3 trophies)
- 90-99 (2 trophies)
- 2000-2009 (1 trophy)
- 2010-2019 and since - nada

No club has any 'right' to win trophies, but there is/was a reason we were seen as a big club....many (including me) don't believe the current owners actually know how to act like a big club and i think it is that which fuels the wish for new owners - NOT an expectation of winning a trophy every year (once a decade would probably do)

Beautiful post.

 

[billyiddo]

Unless we were bought by an oligarch instead of ENIC the chances of us doing any better over the same period on the trophy front are quite low as it's generally the richest clubs that hoover up all the trophies.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Unless we were bought by an oligarch instead of ENIC the chances of us doing any better over the same period on the trophy front are quite low as it's generally the richest clubs that hoover up all the trophies.

Countries and oligarchs

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

That seems another strawman accusation; has @Yiddo hacked your account?

Let's be clear: the accusation by many fans is NOT that they expect Tottenham to win something every year, it's that they want the owners to do all they can to enable us to be able to win trophies every once in a while. Nearly 20 years without a trophy for a club of our 'size' and 'stature' given the investment into the club's infrastructure and 'value' (so much so that we are now appearing in such lists as those produced by Delloite etc) is very poor.

That poor look is not helped by the many acts taken by the owners over the years whereby it looks like trying to be the best we can be ONE THE PITCH is secondary to keeping our place in those Deloitte lists: scrabbling for signings on the last day of transfer windows to save money here and there (at the detriment of quicker squad integration/building), not biting the bullet to take the once-in-lifetime opportunity to build a great squad around a world class striker who fell in our laps, sacking the one coach who could have gone up against Pep days before a cup final etc etc

You might disagree with those who want new owners, but we should stop this nonsense that those who do want new owners are entitled to the point of expecting Spurs to "win trophies every year".
For context, whilst we have grown the infrastructure and 'value' of the club we have fort the first time since the second world war gone a whole decade period without a trophy: Spurs were the only club who won at least one major trophy in all these ten year periods:
- 50-59 (1 trophy)
- 60-69 (5 trophies)
- 70-79 (4 trophies)
- 80-89 (3 trophies)
- 90-99 (2 trophies)
- 2000-2009 (1 trophy)
- 2010-2019 and since - nada

No club has any 'right' to win trophies, but there is/was a reason we were seen as a big club....many (including me) don't believe the current owners actually know how to act like a big club and i think it is that which fuels the wish for new owners - NOT an expectation of winning a trophy every year (once a decade would probably do)

I'm not specifically writing about Spurs fans, a lot of clubs have fans who believe they should be winning things every year and the only joy they get from the game is winning.

 

[Bishop]

Unless we were bought by an oligarch instead of ENIC the chances of us doing any better over the same period on the trophy front are quite low as it's generally the richest clubs that hoover up all the trophies.

We've been close a few times, but Levy has always ran in the opposite direction. We don't need billionaires we need efficient and smart operation.

 

[billyiddo]

We've been close a few times, but Levy has always ran in the opposite direction. We don't need billionaires we need efficient and smart operation.

But we got close in the first place - there's a multitude of comparable clubs outside of the richest that didn't even manage that. If it were simple then trophies wouldn't be hoarded by a select few.

 

[Bishop]

But we got close in the first place - there's a multitude of comparable clubs outside of the richest that didn't even manage that. If it were simple then trophies wouldn't be hoarded by a select few.

Who said it was simple? What we are saying is ENIC can't and won't win because they actively sabotage our position whenever we are in that position to take the final steps. Its almost poetic.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Who said it was simple? What we are saying is ENIC can't and won't win because they actively sabotage our position whenever we are in that position to take the final steps. Its almost poetic.

What do they actively do?

 

[billyiddo]

Who said it was simple? What we are saying is ENIC can't and won't win because they actively sabotage our position whenever we are in that position to take the final steps. Its almost poetic.

The inference from the post you quoted is that our declining number of trophies is down to the owners - the counter argument is that the football landscape has changed from the decades we were successful and that trophies are generally won by a small number of rich clubs - eg those who were already established (Utd & Pool) or grew grew exponentially off the back of PL & CL money (Arse) and then Chelsea & City with their state/oligarched backed spending. If you want to level the blame of the lack of trophies at these owners specifically then you would need to show that different owners would have done better - and IMV there is no evidence or reason to suggest that would be the case UNLESS we had state/oligarch owners.


Unless you win there is always going to be things you could have done differently that could have meant a different/better outcome - decisions made at key points in the last 20 years or so if made differently could/would have brought about a better result, 100% not an argument against that - but what about the 00s of decisions that brought us to that point? Why aren't other clubs consistently making all those decisions correctly like we have?

 

[glasgowspur]

Unless we were bought by an oligarch instead of ENIC the chances of us doing any better over the same period on the trophy front are quite low as it's generally the richest clubs that hoover up all the trophies.

How much have Chelsea spent over the last few seasons to win the conference league and maybe sneak 4th.
Lashing out money in the PL is not the answer for anyone other than the city, and that's only because they have so much of it that it doesn't matter.

 

[parklane1]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1915644903591219388

Lol.
"We need to create a better atmosphere in the ground".
"For the second half, some fans are going to the pub to protest and create a party atmosphere."

Another example of the old saying, Empty vessels make the most noise

 

[Bishop]

The inference from the post you quoted is that our declining number of trophies is down to the owners - the counter argument is that the football landscape has changed from the decades we were successful and that trophies are generally won by a small number of rich clubs - eg those who were already established (Utd & Pool) or grew grew exponentially off the back of PL & CL money (Arse) and then Chelsea & City with their state/oligarched backed spending. If you want to level the blame of the lack of trophies at these owners specifically then you would need to show that different owners would have done better - and IMV there is no evidence or reason to suggest that would be the case UNLESS we had state/oligarch owners.


Unless you win there is always going to be things you could have done differently that could have meant a different/better outcome - decisions made at key points in the last 20 years or so if made differently could/would have brought about a better result, 100% not an argument against that - but what about the 00s of decisions that brought us to that point? Why aren't other clubs consistently making all those decisions correctly like we have?

I think you're missing the point, as I said ENIC will get us to a point of contention at which pojt they have routinely then made decisions that have been counter to the purpose of actually winning these competitions. Yes competitions have typically been won by a select group but as is always pointed out there are the teams outside of that cabal that also won, ironically we aren't one of those teams, despite being poised for a decade or so to take advantage of any slip ups. Institutionally we have continually handicapped ourselves in that endeavor so when the opportunity actually arises we are nowhere close.

What do they actively do?

Have a coach (Ramos) finally win you a trophy. Sell his two key starting strikers and playmakers the following summer and one on the last day of the window. Replace with youth team sub loan. Then wonder why said coach is unable to get the team working. Sack him.

Qualify for the CL, with new manager fail to address the most key weakness in the squad the following season. So why bother even qualifying if the intention is to not improve.

Sign over hill has beens in January when we were poised for a title challenge under Harry. Sacked a great manager for us in Harry to go backwards to hire failure AVB.

Let Poch's title challenging squad stagnate through 3 windows of no purchases. Then fire the same manager when he could no longer work magic with his depleted and worn out squad. Replace him with the completely unsuited Mourinho ffs.

Keep Mourinho despite it clearly not working only to sack him the week before a cup final where were massive underdogs, something that Mourinho excels at winning.

As I said there's almost a poetry to the footballing decisions ENIC make.

 

[Raziel]

That seems another strawman accusation; has @Yiddo hacked your account?

Let's be clear: the accusation by many fans is NOT that they expect Tottenham to win something every year, it's that they want the owners to do all they can to enable us to be able to win trophies every once in a while. Nearly 20 years without a trophy for a club of our 'size' and 'stature' given the investment into the club's infrastructure and 'value' (so much so that we are now appearing in such lists as those produced by Delloite etc) is very poor.

That poor look is not helped by the many acts taken by the owners over the years whereby it looks like trying to be the best we can be ONE THE PITCH is secondary to keeping our place in those Deloitte lists: scrabbling for signings on the last day of transfer windows to save money here and there (at the detriment of quicker squad integration/building), not biting the bullet to take the once-in-lifetime opportunity to build a great squad around a world class striker who fell in our laps, sacking the one coach who could have gone up against Pep days before a cup final etc etc

You might disagree with those who want new owners, but we should stop this nonsense that those who do want new owners are entitled to the point of expecting Spurs to "win trophies every year".
For context, whilst we have grown the infrastructure and 'value' of the club we have fort the first time since the second world war gone a whole decade period without a trophy: Spurs were the only club who won at least one major trophy in all these ten year periods:
- 50-59 (1 trophy)
- 60-69 (5 trophies)
- 70-79 (4 trophies)
- 80-89 (3 trophies)
- 90-99 (2 trophies)
- 2000-2009 (1 trophy)
- 2010-2019 and since - nada

No club has any 'right' to win trophies, but there is/was a reason we were seen as a big club....many (including me) don't believe the current owners actually know how to act like a big club and i think it is that which fuels the wish for new owners - NOT an expectation of winning a trophy every year (once a decade would probably do)

Let me start with, do I believe Spurs should have won more under current ownership in last 20 years? yes. However what you painted above is too simplistic a view, lacks nuance and misses out stuff

- Clubs successful periods are cyclic in nature, years/decades of success, followed by years/decades of drought. Forest, Leeds, Everton are easy examples of previously successful teams struggling but still around, you don't need me to go through the Championship and League 1 to point out "big" clubs that are no longer relevant. You starting your trophy view in 1950 is a perfect example of that (in a 40 year period we won more trophies than in the other 100+ years)
- Your view/picture (and this is the extremely frustrating part) looking at that, is basically Spurs were a great club and ENIC fudged it up and it's downhill since purchase, and that is wrong on so many levels it comes across as disingenuous/dishonest

Let me paint a picture slightly different

Trophies
- 1882 - 1950 (2 Trophies in 68 years)
- 1950 - 1989 (12 Trophies in 39 years, ~70% of all Spurs silverware)
- Context - 1980 -82 (2 of the 3 decade trophies pre Scholar purchase)
- 1990 - 2024 (3 trophies in 34 years)

League Positions (Top division only)

• 1900s: Positions 15th, 15th, 12th, 17th, 17th, 20th → Average: 16th
• 1920s: Positions 6th, 2nd, 12th, 15th, 12th, 15th, 13th, 21st → Average: 12th
• 1930s: Positions 3rd, 22nd → Average: 12.5th
• 1950s: Positions 1st, 2nd, 10th, 16th, 16th, 18th, 2nd, 3rd, 18th, 3rd → Average: 9.9th
• 1960s: Positions 1st, 3rd, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 3rd, 7th, 6th, 11th → Average: 5.1st
• 1970s: Positions 3rd, 6th, 8th, 11th, 19th, 9th, 22nd, 11th, 14th → Average: 11.4th
• 1980s: Positions 10th, 4th, 4th, 8th, 3rd, 10th, 3rd, 13th, 6th, 3rd → Average: 6.4th
• 1990s: Positions 10th, 15th, 8th, 15th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 14th, 11th, 10th → Average: 10.8th
• 2000s: Positions 12th, 9th, 10th, 14th, 9th, 5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th → Average: 9.1st
• 2010s: Positions 5th, 4th, 5th, 6th, 5th, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th → Average: 4.8th
• 2020s: Positions 7th, 4th, 8th, 5th → Average: 6th

Context, any of the average league position decades of Spurs under ENIC has only be matched/bettered twice, and the best league position decade ever was under ENIC

List of compelling events not listed above
1984 - Club purchased by Scholar
- Context - in 80's TV rights held by ITV, 5 teams including Spurs got 75% of TV revenue deal
1991 - Sold to Sugar on verge of bankruptcy
1992 - PL formed, CL formed
- Context, Sky takes over TV rights, now 50% of revenue is based on league finishes and number of times on tv
- Two decades follow where Spurs doesn't take advantage of new tv money
1994 - Spurs fined, points deduction imposed based on financial irregularities of the Scholar era
2001 - ENIC purchases Spurs
2003 - Chelsea purchased by RA and proceed to lose £1M/week for next 13 years
2008 - City purchased by Abu Dhabi and proceed to invest in a way that has them facing 115 charges of financial irregularities
- Context - 2008-24, Chelsea and City win 30 of the available trophies (basically they win close to 2 of the trophies available each year between them)
2009 - Spurs applies for approval to build new stadium, approved in 2010 but CPO for the needed properties don't get approved until 2014
2019 - Stadium gets opened
2020 -2021 - Stadium closed to fans due to Covid, matchday revenue dropped from £95M to basically nothing for 2 years.
2021 - Saudi Sportswashing Machine purchased by Saudi group with £320B fund
2022 -Matchday revenue returns, Spurs matchday revenue crosses £106M

All of the above is fact, just data points

Let me give you an interpretation (so yes, this is opinion)
- Spurs wasn't a particularly relevant club pre the 50's
- 60's - 70's are heyday, no co-incidence that skews a lot of older fans perspective of Spurs, even in 70's there are a bunch of bottom half league finishes and relegation
- From the 80's the club is on a downward trajectory (some of that doesn't highlight itself until the 90's)
- In the 90's there are series of unfortunate events, loss of fiscal advantage from ITV deal, the close to bankruptcy, the failure to capitalize on the increased revenue of the PL & CL (that allows United, Arsenal, Liverpool in particular to pull away) that basically puts the club in hole that ENIC will have to dig out of.
- In the 2000's you get the addition of the money doping clubs (Chelsea & City) that creates a pool of 5 clubs we have severe financial & structural disadvantages against. (vs. the 80's where we were part of the "advantaged 5")
- Against that backdrop, the club under ENIC puts in consistently the best league form across the history of the club, while building WC infrastructure that will allow the club to compete.

In summary, my perspective is this view of "well, if ENIC had spent $30M more here or whatever decision you disagree with" is the reason Spurs isn't raking in the trophies is nonsense

- They have probably saved the club from being an Everton or West Ham, and future proofed it.
- Could they have done more? absolutely but this "worse owners ever narrative" just doesn't fly
- Would it be great to have owners who splash cash? sure (with the moral hypocrisy that comes with it)

Too lazy, but I could probably do a cup run view, i.e. the QF/SF/Finals/runner ups in ENICs time (last time I checked in was more than 22 in 24 years IIRC), so we haven't been out of cup contention, we just haven't converted (and that itself is a whole other conversation).

 

[Baleforce]

Let me start with, do I believe Spurs should have won more under current ownership in last 20 years? yes. However what you painted above is too simplistic a view, lack nuance and misses out stuff

- Clubs successful periods are cyclic in nature, years/decades of success, followed by years/decades of drought. Forest, Leeds, Everton are easy examples of previously successful teams struggling but still around, you don't need me to go through the Championship and League 1 to point out "big" clubs that are no longer relevant. You starting your trophy view in 1950 is a perfect example of that (in a 40 year period we won more trophies than in the other 100+ years)
- Your view/picture (and this is the extremely frustrating part) looking at that, is basically Spurs were a great club and ENIC fudged it up and it's downhill since purchase, and that is wrong on so many levels it comes across as disingenuous/dishonest

Let me paint a picture slightly different

Trophies
- 1882 - 1950 (2 Trophies in 68 years)
- 1950 - 1989 (12 Trophies in 39 years, ~70% of all Spurs silverware)
- Context - 1980 -82 (2 of the 3 decade trophies pre Scholar purchase)
- 1990 - 2024 (3 trophies in 34 years)

League Positions (Top division only)

• 1900s: Positions 15th, 15th, 12th, 17th, 17th, 20th → Average: 16th
• 1920s: Positions 6th, 2nd, 12th, 15th, 12th, 15th, 13th, 21st → Average: 12th
• 1930s: Positions 3rd, 22nd → Average: 12.5th
• 1950s: Positions 1st, 2nd, 10th, 16th, 16th, 18th, 2nd, 3rd, 18th, 3rd → Average: 9.9th
• 1960s: Positions 1st, 3rd, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 3rd, 7th, 6th, 11th → Average: 5.1st
• 1970s: Positions 3rd, 6th, 8th, 11th, 19th, 9th, 22nd, 11th, 14th → Average: 11.4th
• 1980s: Positions 10th, 4th, 4th, 8th, 3rd, 10th, 3rd, 13th, 6th, 3rd → Average: 6.4th
• 1990s: Positions 10th, 15th, 8th, 15th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 14th, 11th, 10th → Average: 10.8th
• 2000s: Positions 12th, 9th, 10th, 14th, 9th, 5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th → Average: 9.1st
• 2010s: Positions 5th, 4th, 5th, 6th, 5th, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th → Average: 4.8th
• 2020s: Positions 7th, 4th, 8th, 5th → Average: 6th

Context, any of the average league position decades of Spurs under ENIC has only be matched/bettered twice, and the best league position decade ever was under ENIC

List of compelling events not listed above
1984 - Club purchased by Scholar
- Context - in 80's TV rights held by ITV, 5 teams including Spurs got 75% of TV revenue deal
1991 - Sold to Sugar on verge of bankruptcy
1992 - PL formed, CL formed
- Context, Sky takes over TV rights, now 50% of revenue is based on league finishes and number of times on tv
- Two decades follow where Spurs doesn't take advantage of new tv money
1994 - Spurs fined, points deduction imposed based on financial irregularities of the Scholar era
2001 - ENIC purchases Spurs
2003 - Chelsea purchased by RA and proceed to lose £1M/week for next 13 years
2008 - City purchased by Abu Dhabi and proceed to invest in a way that has them facing 115 charges of financial irregularities
- Context - 2008-24, Chelsea and City win 30 of the available trophies (basically they win close to 2 of the trophies available each year between them)
2009 - Spurs applies for approval to build new stadium, approved in 2010 but CPO for the needed properties don't get approved until 2014
2019 - Stadium gets opened
2020 -2021 - Stadium closed to fans due to Covid, matchday revenue dropped for £95M to basically nothing for 2 years.
2021 - Saudi Sportswashing Machine purchased by Saudi group with £320B fund
2022 -Matchday revenue returns, Spurs matchday revenue crosses £106M

All of the above is fact, just data points

Let me give you an interpretation (so yes, this is opinion)
- Spurs wasn't a particularly relevant club pre the 50's
- 60's - 70's are heyday, no co-incidence that skews a lot of older fans perspective of Spurs, even in 70's there are a bunch of bottom half league finishes and relegation
- From the 80's the club is on a downward trajectory (some of that doesn't highlight itself until the 90's)
- In the 90's there are series of unfortunate events, loss of fiscal advantage from ITV deal, the close to bankruptcy, the failure to capitalize on the increased revenue of the PL & CL (that allows United, Arsenal, Liverpool in particular to pull away) that basically puts the club in hole that ENIC will have to dig out of.
- In the 2000's you get the addition of the money doping clubs (Chelsea & City) that creates a pool of 5 clubs we have severe financial & structural disadvantages against. (vs. the 80's where we were part of the "advantaged 5"
- Against that backdrop, the club under ENIC puts in consistently the best league form across the history of the club, while building WC infrastructure that will allow the club to compete.

In summary, my perspective is this view of "well, if ENIC had spent $30M more here or whatever decision you disagree with" is the reason Spurs isn't raking in the trophies is nonsense

- They have probably saved the club from being an Everton or West Ham, and future proofed it.
- Could they have done more? absolutely but this "worse owners ever narrative" just doesn't fly
- Would it be great to have owners who splash cash? sure (with the moral hypocrisy that comes with it)

Too lazy, but I could probably do a cup run view, i.e. the QF/SF/Finals/runner ups in ENICs time (last time I checked in was more than 22 in 24 years IIRC), so we haven't been out of cup contention, we just haven't converted (and that itself is a whole other conversation).

The greatest post in the history of this forum.

Chapeau.

 

[Baleforce]

I would say @glorygloryeze , rather that quoting your whole post, Enic do,

do all they can to enable us to be able to win trophies every once in a while

they have just added the word "responsibly" to the sentence.

 

[Mikey10]

The greatest post in the history of this forum.

Chapeau.

I’d say the one immediately preceding it is quite a bit better.