• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

ENIC

If I said they were bad decisions at the time and virtually every single one I did, its not hindsight.

I'm not even claiming to be some footballing savant, most of them were bleeding fudging obvious at the time.
Just as most of us can criticise the decisions of many businesses when not under the constraints they are and risking our own .only on it.
 
This is what i was getting at in my post - in 15 seasons, 30 of the available 45 domestic trophies were 'won' by 2 state/oligarch backed clubs. That leaves 15 trophies on the table over 15 years - with a fair portion of that time being pre stadium revenue era, about 10 years? So that's 10 years of competing against a far richer group of Utd Liverpool & Arsenal for effectively one trophy a season. This isn't an ownership caused problem (outside of them not being an oligarch or nation state) - it's caused by the change in football landscape post Sky & CL TV money

Yes, true, and there is also a 'but'... we had several opportunities to potentially make relatively low risk moves to support a manager who had us knocking hard on a door at a few specific moments. Despite all the dominance of a few pointed out, there we were, regular top 4, most points in the Prem across two seasons, so so close yet we
refused to see the moment to speculate. It was possible to break that cycle IMO, we were right there. We've discussed it many times. If you want to go back to '92, it's well worth asking how one of the architects of the Premier League TV age managed to fudge it up for us so much.
 
Yes, true, and there is also a 'but'... we had several opportunities to potentially make relatively low risk moves to support a manager who had us knocking hard on a door at a few specific moments. Despite all the dominance of a few pointed out, there we were, regular top 4, most points in the Prem across two seasons, so so close yet we
refused to see the moment to speculate. It was possible to break that cycle IMO, we were right there. We've discussed it many times. If you want to go back to '92, it's well worth asking how one of the architects of the Premier League TV age managed to fudge it up for us so much.

I think the successful clubs we are trying to compete with have all likely had points at which similar mistakes made at higher levels of club decision making have cost them success too - the difference between them and us is that their financial advantage has allowed them to come back again and again until it they got it right - we don't/didn't have that luxury.
 
Last edited:
I think the successful clubs we are trying to compete with have all likely had points at which similar mistakes made at higher levels have cost them success - the difference between them and us is that their financial advantage has allowed them to come back again and again until it they got it right - we don't/didn't have that luxury.

I agree with this. I'm hoping we are that club now. Match day revenues, NFL, F1 karting, pop concerts, business conventions etc all add up to the new formula that we should be that club that don't go into crisis just because we spent £60m on Tanguy and it didn't work out.

Saying that, I'd be shocked if we have any more than £50m net spending this summer if we don't win the EL.
 
I think the successful clubs we are trying to compete with have all likely had points at which similar mistakes made at higher levels of club decision making have cost them success too - the difference between them and us is that their financial advantage has allowed them to come back again and again until it they got it right - we don't/didn't have that luxury.
Liverpool were on that place with Andy Carroll for example.
They got lucky and clever with the Countinho sale
 
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).

Appreciate the detail and effort you went to in replying.

But my perspective is really quite simple: in the same way that this ownership really try and go for 'max spec' wrt to the stadium and related commercial/infrastructure ventures (NFL facilities, training ground, hotel, Skywalk attraction etc), do you think they put the same effort for the football team to be the best that we can be?

When was the last time you saw them make a footballing decision and you thought "wow, what great leadership, they are really wanting us to push for the very top"?

You mention the likes of the "traditional top 4" as a handicap for us: IIRC didn't Liverpool nearly go bust after the Hicks and Gillett nonsense in 2010? After that period in the early 2010s year on year we were hijacking players they were going for because we were in a better place. How have they come back and usurped us: is that because they are simply Liverpool and had all that history? Was them losing a lot of money in nearly going bankrupt not relevant to all the supposed money and cache they'd built up over us prior to that? Were we financially still behind them at that point or near bankruptcy?
Or did they came back and overtake us because their ownership identified a top manager who was available to rebuild them AND then backed said manager? Football ambition AND foresight: when was the last time you looked at our owners and they made you think they had that? Also, remember Liverpool's owners sacked Dalglish after he won the league cup (their first trophy in 6 years) because he didn't also make the champions league (and that they finished a pitiful 8th place) and all the money that offers.
When Liverpool saved themselves from bankruptcy they dusted themselves down and strived to get back to the top. We still seem to list our near bankruptcy as an excuse for not looking at our owners lack of ambition.

Ok, let's look at Arsenal, another 'traditional top 4' club: do you remember how low they got when Wenger left and then Arteta joined? Yes, they won an FA Cup but league-wise they were awful (obviously not as bad as we are atm, but still nowhere near CL or title-challenging levels).
What has happened that they are now constantly top 2 in the league and leave us to choke on their dust, league-wise?
Is it by luck? Is Arteta just a genius?
Or have their owners identified a manager they wanted AND backed him? Remember that great evening in May 2022 when we beat them 3-0 after Rob Holding's great turn hat led to them fumbling top 4 when we snatched it from them? If you looked at the two squads then how is it they now have a squad depth and quality that vastly exceeds ours when at most we were at similar levels then, plus they'd been out of the CL for all the times we had been regularly in it pre-Covid? Bear in mind that this was after hat period when covid shut down our finances after the new stadium (and covid shut down everyone's finances anyway, but still).
Arsenal in 2022 finished 5th behind us: look at who they bought in the summer after that happened: Gabriel Jesus and Zinchenko amongst some others; compare that to last summer when we had just finished 5th and had narrowly missed out on 4th...chalk and cheese.
Again, is it just a case of their owners having more nous AND ambition?
When they secured top 4 they went out and paid top dollar for Declan Rice; when was the last time we did the equivalent of that?
That smelt of ambition. Our owners don't seem to ever show the same.
 
Appreciate the detail and effort you went to in replying.

But my perspective is really quite simple: in the same way that this ownership really try and go for 'max spec' wrt to the stadium and related commercial/infrastructure ventures (NFL facilities, training ground, hotel, Skywalk attraction etc), do you think they put the same effort for the football team to be the best that we can be?

When was the last time you saw them make a footballing decision and you thought "wow, what great leadership, they are really wanting us to push for the very top"?

You mention the likes of the "traditional top 4" as a handicap for us: IIRC didn't Liverpool nearly go bust after the Hicks and Gillett nonsense in 2010? After that period in the early 2010s year on year we were hijacking players they were going for because we were in a better place. How have they come back and usurped us: is that because they are simply Liverpool and had all that history? Was them losing a lot of money in nearly going bankrupt not relevant to all the supposed money and cache they'd built up over us prior to that? Were we financially still behind them at that point or near bankruptcy?
Or did they came back and overtake us because their ownership identified a top manager who was available to rebuild them AND then backed said manager? Football ambition AND foresight: when was the last time you looked at our owners and they made you think they had that? Also, remember Liverpool's owners sacked Dalglish after he won the league cup (their first trophy in 6 years) because he didn't also make the champions league (and that they finished a pitiful 8th place) and all the money that offers.
When Liverpool saved themselves from bankruptcy they dusted themselves down and strived to get back to the top. We still seem to list our near bankruptcy as an excuse for not looking at our owners lack of ambition.

Ok, let's look at Arsenal, another 'traditional top 4' club: do you remember how low they got when Wenger left and then Arteta joined? Yes, they won an FA Cup but league-wise they were awful (obviously not as bad as we are atm, but still nowhere near CL or title-challenging levels).
What has happened that they are now constantly top 2 in the league and leave us to choke on their dust, league-wise?
Is it by luck? Is Arteta just a genius?
Or have their owners identified a manager they wanted AND backed him? Remember that great evening in May 2022 when we beat them 3-0 after Rob Holding's great turn hat led to them fumbling top 4 when we snatched it from them? If you looked at the two squads then how is it they now have a squad depth and quality that vastly exceeds ours when at most we were at similar levels then, plus they'd been out of the CL for all the times we had been regularly in it pre-Covid? Bear in mind that this was after hat period when covid shut down our finances after the new stadium (and covid shut down everyone's finances anyway, but still).
Arsenal in 2022 finished 5th behind us: look at who they bought in the summer after that happened: Gabriel Jesus and Zinchenko amongst some others; compare that to last summer when we had just finished 5th and had narrowly missed out on 4th...chalk and cheese.
Again, is it just a case of their owners having more nous AND ambition?
When they secured top 4 they went out and paid top dollar for Declan Rice; when was the last time we did the equivalent of that?
That smelt of ambition. Our owners don't seem to ever show the same.

Liverpool. Hicks and gillet missed a payment. This was during the financial crash. The banks needed money. So seized the club and sold it forc what they were owed.
The new owners got it at a bargain price allowing them to invest.
They then struck gold selling coutinho and getting klopp as their manager.
 
Liverpool. Hicks and gillet missed a payment. This was during the financial crash. The banks needed money. So seized the club and sold it forcehat they were owed.
The new owners got it at a bargain price allowing them to invest.
They then struck gold selling coutinho and getting klopp as their manager.
They spent the money wisely and backed a manager with pedigree.
 
Arsenal didn't sign Rice after securing top 4 they did it after their first 2nd place finish. If you want to compare to Arsenal have a look at the calibre of player they were buying before they got back in to the CL.



We have a similar revenue to them these days and so I expect to see us operating similarly to them in the market - but you need to compare like for like not us during a rebuild to them when adding the finishing touches to a side already challenging for the title.


Not something that hasn't been explained multiple times before so I don't expect any of the above to register.


***Edit***

Seems they did go reasonably big in the summer they finished 5th - some reason i had it in my mind that had a year finishing 4th before going on to finishing 2nd.
 
Last edited:
I think the John Henry Pool story is a good one actually. Very experienced exec of clubs like Red Sox and brought all that expertise to the PL environment. Built out an extensive and competent leadership group to get behind Klopp. They even started with a transatlantic exec whose job was to represent LFC at the FSG group level. They also focused on the Anfield regeneration along the journey.

I do think Levy eventually looked at clubs like Pool and saw that he was being left behind. I also think we need to be very careful when we start slating these new leaders that join our club. In my opinion, they are what is required. We just need to find our Klopp next.
 
Arsenal didn't sign Rice after securing top 4 they did it after their first 2nd place finish. If you want to compare to Arsenal have a look at the calibre of player they were buying before they got back in to the CL.


There you go, knock yourself out.

We have a similar revenue to them these days and so I expect to see us operating similarly to them in the market - but you need to compare like for like not us during a rebuild to them when adding the finishing touches to a side already challenging for the title.


Not something that hasn't been explained multiple times before so I don't expect any of the above to register.
arsenal rebuilt was due to vinny v who works for levy now
would you be against fabregas replacing ange ?
 
Back