Daniel Levy - Chairman

[SpurMeUp]

I don't forget the good things levy and enic have done to progress the club, nor the status the club was at in the 90s and early naughties.

There are however four big issues that I think make it perfectly legitimate to question levy's leadership

1. Stadium development. We were more than a year late and significantly overspent. In my opinion a big factor in this was levys foolhardy decision to proceed without appointing a principal contractor. Major infrastructure projects are incredibly complicated to deliver especially in the tight time frames originally envisaged, and levy and his team did not have the specialist expertise to manage all the subcontractors and maintain the programme. It was only once Mace were brought on board that we got back on track. Mace or someone like them should have been involved from the start.

That is a pretty odd criticism. How many large building projects - that have a principal contractor - also overrun? Can you name a government building project that hasn't? Cross rail etc. Appointing Mace at the get-go may not have made much difference. Odd one to add to your gripes. We get a brand new stadium that will house our kids and their kids, and all you can do is look for fault. Can't see any other clubs who've delivered better. You'd have preferred the scums ground delivered on time to ours?

2. Failure to back pochettinho in the transfer market. Particularly when pochettinho was talking about a rebuild in our cl final season. Poch was easily our best manager in the last 20 years, his approach fitted the resource profile of the club and he wanted to build a dynasty here. Instead levy sacked him off and brought on Mourinho

3. Appointing mourinho without backing him in the transfer market. Mourinho needs lots of money to be successful. Levy inarguably did not provide this backing after appointing him, missing out on key targets like skriniar.

I think the sacking of poch and appointment of jose was wrong, but if you were going to do that at least commit to it fully and back jose fully.

4. Sacking jose just before a cup final and without a plan to replace him. Words fail me on this one, particularly in the way we have floundered around since Jose's departure. And then to try and bring in conte despite there being the exact same issues (not a match for the club in terms of transfer budget demands and preference for expensive experienced players over young bargains and club youth.)

These are the 4 biggest things that make me question levy's stewardship, but there are many earlier examples too, like sacking jol for ramos, or failing to back Redknapp at key points in the transfer market.

I don't see how anyone can consider the above and say that everything that levy and enic has done is perfect and we should all be simply grateful for their existence and never question them, which seems to be the stance of some people on here.

We don't know who chose players under Poch. But the chances are it was Poch. He wanted more control and the manager of the day of course chooses. We didn't have unlimited funds. Why would you think we did? Levy also did back Poch with 100m of singing when the money was there, so is your vitriol fair? Probably not. No one said everything was perfect. Just that overall, we have done okay under Enic. Some definite successes and the foundation he has given the club is quite unique. I can't think of another chairman who has elevated a club quite like Levy has. We are not there yet, but you can see the route map. Sad that fans are increasingly devicive when we've come so far.

 

[DaveT316]

I’d agree with a lot of that, it’s just that poch had been saying for some time that we needed to have a major overhaul and subsequent events have proven him 100% correct. I think if levy had backed him properly in the first place we wouldn’t ever have got to the stage where performances had deteriorated to that extent.

Yes, very much a case of stable door, horse etc. We needed to strengthen consistently, be it selling high and reinvesting or bringing in fresh faces, for the two years prior, not just the trolley dash on GLC, N’Dombele and Sessegnon.

 

[SpurMeUp]

It was only a Matter of time though before someone got their brick together and over took them as we eventually did under Poch. Should have happened earlier had Harry not taken his eye off the ball. But the issues over there were not only Wengers, but more to do with the owners.

So we have better owners?

 

[MKSpur]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...inator-in-tottenhams-endless-managerial-farce

This guy always seems to write snidey articles whenever I read them. Levy’s stock may be low and it feels like we are in limbo but that doesn’t define every single decision he’s ever made and the current situation can’t be fully judged until the new man / hierarchy is in place and our transfers are made in the summer.
Maybe it’s a case if we can criticise Levy as fans but I get defensive when an outsider does.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

Maybe it’s a case if we can criticise Levy as fans but I get defensive when an outsider does.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Given how some people are keen to apply market forces perspective to our ticket prices, have they considered this…if a commercial enterprise, with shareholders, was consistently underperforming against the level of investment, and the chief exec consistently gave himself pay rises regardless of performance there would be a shareholder revolt and the chief exec would be ousted. Of course that doesn’t apply to spurs because reasons….

 

[glorygloryeze]

While I think in hindsight sacking Poch was a mistake, am I the only one that was terrified that a relegation fight might have been on the cards after that horror show at Brighton? I don’t think I’ve seen a performance quite like it, apart from possibly Brighton away under Mourinho!

The point I’m making is a lot of people have said that Poch should’ve been given the season, but for my money, we looked in freefall and I was fearing for what came next before he was sacked, as tragic as that was. The players looked like they had stopped playing for him or were totally bereft of confidence, probably a bit of both.

We indeed were in a downward spirial. The decision to sack Poch was understandable as it looked like he'd lost the players - and if there is a manager out there that works only if there is 'buy-in' from the players it was Poch.

However, the situation came from a multitude of sins beforehand, the pinnacle obviously being the infamous summer of no activity (which i suspect itself was a result of mishaps that took place before that). Remember at the time people saying how 'it didn't matter' that we were the only (big) club across Europe who'd ever gone a whole transfer window without buying anyone, lol. How we were 'so different' and 'niche', 'unique', 'we had a great squad and didn't need to'...Hahaha...

 

[Raziel]

This guy always seems to write snidey articles whenever I read them. Levy’s stock may be low and it feels like we are in limbo but that doesn’t define every single decision he’s ever made and the current situation can’t be fully judged until the new man / hierarchy is in place and our transfers are made in the summer.
Maybe it’s a case if we can criticise Levy as fans but I get defensive when an outsider does.

It's typical brick journalism (and that's giving more credit than he deserves to call him a journalist)

- Take a truth -> we have taken too long to appoint a replacement coach
- Throw in a bunch of flimflam, old narratives and speculation

- Completely dismissed the chance of Conte having any real success before he even joined (the fudging tired x manager will end in 2-3 years, ignoring the fact that almost every fudging manager will be done in 2-3 years)
- Then says us not getting him is an issue (despite point 1), then says Conte will be fine? seriously all these asshats that think this is Spurs last chance or fudging whatever, we will be a top club in 20 years regardless of who's next ..
- Then the flimflam re Oliver Skipp, again only a child would believe 1 simple item (young players, salary, staff, funding) is the "cause" it's more likely some combination of items.
- Then the DNA conversation, how fudging stupid can people be? yes the club had a profile they were looking at, then (opportunistically) one of the best managers in world football became available, should we not talk to him because we said something re DNA?
- Talks about 2 decades on managerial churn without acknowledging that out of the last 14 or so, two appointments were 5 years? (Harry and Poch)
- The DoF appointment is a surprise? to who? isn't this what everyone has been advising?

And then, really fudge him and the "Levy knows nothing about football and is like the bloke who tells you he won something on football manager", what is this asshats qualification/knowledge of football? vs. a guy running/building/managing a football club?

Like @Danishfurniturelover, we can go after him all we want, but this clickbait flimflam can do one ..

 

[billyiddo]

Seems like semantics to me. If you’re saying the only option is support or don’t support then you are de facto saying that levy is beyond criticism.

I thought the context was regarding going to matches and choosing to pay the ticket price - he's clarified more than once that he doesn't think Levy is beyond criticism so it seems strange to ignore that and pluck a single line out of many posts.

Anyway, not a point i want to drag out much further now.

 

[Diamond Lights]

Great read in the Guardian on Tottenham and Levy:

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...inator-in-tottenhams-endless-managerial-farce


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[Finney Is Back]

Given how some people are keen to apply market forces perspective to our ticket prices, have they considered this…if a commercial enterprise, with shareholders, was consistently underperforming against the level of investment, and the chief exec consistently gave himself pay rises regardless of performance there would be a shareholder revolt and the chief exec would be ousted. Of course that doesn’t apply to spurs because reasons….

Interestingly (for me anyway). Daniel Levy's salary is bigger than more than half of the CEO's of companies in the FTSE 100. If we're paying FTSE 100 company rates then surely we'd be better off with an actual FTSE 100 standard CEO? (especially now that it seems we have a DoF coming in to handle the most important part of the business).

 

[Finney Is Back]

It was our worst season for GHod knows how long as well! If you think we have been performing below Arsenal since Wenger left then good luck to you.

To be fair I think it was Arsenal's worst season for a hell of a longer period than it was our worst season....

 

[Finney Is Back]

It was only a Matter of time though before someone got their brick together and over took them as we eventually did under Poch. Should have happened earlier had Harry not taken his eye off the ball. But the issues over there were not only Wengers, but more to do with the owners.

Arsenal's decline started with David Dein leaving them. Wenger was actually making something of a sow's purse out of a pig's ear keeping them in the top 4.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Interestingly (for me anyway). Daniel Levy's salary is bigger than more than half of the CEO's of companies in the FTSE 100. If we're paying FTSE 100 company rates then surely we'd be better off with an actual FTSE 100 standard CEO? (especially now that it seems we have a DoF coming in to handle the most important part of the business).

You talk like you are a shareholder and in control [emoji23] Yes let’s have a board meeting and appoint a new CEO [emoji85]

I actually think a lot of clubs would jump at appointing DL as CEO he’s delivered a lot more than most chairman manage. But this is fantasy. He’s part owner so not sure what hypothetical strand you’re going down.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app

 

[Bedfordspurs]

This guy always seems to write snidey articles whenever I read them. Levy’s stock may be low and it feels like we are in limbo but that doesn’t define every single decision he’s ever made and the current situation can’t be fully judged until the new man / hierarchy is in place and our transfers are made in the summer.
Maybe it’s a case if we can criticise Levy as fans but I get defensive when an outsider does.

I can’t get it to open but is it by Jonathan Liew?

 

[Raziel]

Interestingly (for me anyway). Daniel Levy's salary is bigger than more than half of the CEO's of companies in the FTSE 100. If we're paying FTSE 100 company rates then surely we'd be better off with an actual FTSE 100 standard CEO? (especially now that it seems we have a DoF coming in to handle the most important part of the business).

Mate, find the FTSE CEO's that took a £22M investment and made it a £2.5B asset, then have this conversation.

As a Chairman of a business he's doing fine, he's hitting pretty much every business metric you could think of.

Final success on the field? not so much (close but not there) and that is why despite everyone's speculation, he is not under pressure.

 

[Raziel]

I can’t get it to open but is it by Jonathan Liew?

Yep, a 30-something year old history grad with seemingly not even an amateur level sports background who for the first 10 years of his career covered up to 39 sports.

Bet he can give Levy some real advice on how to run a football club.

 

[Crab.C.Nesbitt]

That is a pretty odd criticism. How many large building projects - that have a principal contractor - also overrun? Can you name a government building project that hasn't? Cross rail etc. Appointing Mace at the get-go may not have made much difference. Odd one to add to your gripes. We get a brand new stadium that will house our kids and their kids, and all you can do is look for fault. Can't see any other clubs who've delivered better. You'd have preferred the scums ground delivered on time to ours?

r.

Agreed that there are always issues on major building projects. A lot of these are down to il defined scope, incomplete design, unrealistic milestones and underestimated costs and resources.

During construction of the stadium there were numerous reports of contractor works being delivered out of sequence leading to rework, and Of contractor performance issues. This is indicative of a failure to properly integrate the subcontractor scope and programmes which would have been the role of the principal contractor. Once mace was appointed the majority of these stories disappeared thereby demonstrating the value of having construction specialists as opposed to Daniel levy and other execs overseeing the project delivery.

while I acknowledge these integration issues could have happened even with a principal contractor they were always much more likely to occur with the club trying to operate some kind of hub and spoke sub contract arrangement without the relevant experience or expertise.

 

[Mikey10]

This guy always seems to write snidey articles whenever I read them. Levy’s stock may be low and it feels like we are in limbo but that doesn’t define every single decision he’s ever made and the current situation can’t be fully judged until the new man / hierarchy is in place and our transfers are made in the summer.
Maybe it’s a case if we can criticise Levy as fans but I get defensive when an outsider does.

He's a journalist. It's his job to pick situations apart and look at them with an outsider's eye.

 

[Finney Is Back]

That is a pretty odd criticism. How many large building projects - that have a principal contractor - also overrun? Can you name a government building project that hasn't? Cross rail etc. Appointing Mace at the get-go may not have made much difference. Odd one to add to your gripes. We get a brand new stadium that will house our kids and their kids, and all you can do is look for fault. Can't see any other clubs who've delivered better. You'd have preferred the scums ground delivered on time to ours?



We don't know who chose players under Poch. But the chances are it was Poch. He wanted more control and the manager of the day of course chooses. We didn't have unlimited funds. Why would you think we did? Levy also did back Poch with 100m of singing when the money was there, so is your vitriol fair? Probably not. No one said everything was perfect. Just that overall, we have done okay under Enic. Some definite successes and the foundation he has given the club is quite unique. I can't think of another chairman who has elevated a club quite like Levy has. We are not there yet, but you can see the route map. Sad that fans are increasingly devicive when we've come so far.

I don't think you should ever use public projects for comparisons when looking at delivery compared to budget.

When you say Levy backed Poch with £100m of signings when the money was there.... that is factually correct but ignores the fact that the chairman then sacked Pochettino before he'd had a chance to use those players due to them arriving late/injured/unfit. Backing a manager (now two in a row) with money for their signings only to sack them a short while afterwards is terrible direction from the top.