• 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

The Times article by Tom Allnutt really paints a picture of total chaos behind the scenes.

Some of it is absolutely insane stuff - like Dier, now of AS Monaco, taking it upon himself to lecture Spence on timeliness and attitude, only for Lange to wander past and, self-satisfied, remark 'at last! If only we had more of that!'. Like it wasn't *his job* to bring in players to do that.

There's also a lot of anonymous bitching and briefing by ENIC against Levy, and Levy loyalists against ENIC. It's all darkly hilarious.

But hidden in there are two paragraphs that sum up why we are, where we are.

"Levy and the Lewis family had overseen a period of drift beyond league positions too. The hierarchy prioritised pop concerts, Amazon documentaries, go-karting tracks and lucrative pre-season tours, which put football “further and further from the centre of things”, one present official said, and irritated the players, like Pierre-Emile Hojbjerg, who was fined two weeks’ wages for refusing to play in a post-season friendly in Melbourne in 2024. Morale among staff was low, with many fed up with the top-down way of working."

"Football departments cut during the pandemic were also never fully restored. Scouting was trimmed back, nominally in favour of a more centralised, data-led approach overseen by Lange and the brief chief football officer Scott Munn, but which resulted in fewer eyes on fewer players. The academy, which has yielded only 26 Premier League minutes this season, was neglected, “one of the lights turned off during Covid that never got turned back on”.

Apparently COVID resulted in a scythe being taken to backroom operations, which explains so much of why things have started breaking. Even in the marketing team, where...

"Even in non-football areas like marketing, staff describe the club as completely ignorant about the Tottenham fan base, in a way that would be deemed unthinkable in other industries."

Remember those cheery 'It's CLASSIC Tottenham!' billboards flogging sweatshirts, flashing across the stadium as we conceded yet another stupid goal?

Yeah, this tracks 100%.
Tom Allnut is the guy De Zebri just called out for being too negative. Not going to just swallow what he has to say....
 
I know many on here disagree with me but I think the first step was getting rid of Levy and his cronies in the exec team. We can now press ahead with getting a proper professional structure in place and gearing everything up to making THFC the most successful football club possible on the pitch as opposed to just as 'valuable an asset' as possible.

Of course only time will tell whether the owners and new set of execs will make things any better but I'm happy to at least give them a few years to show that (or not). The oil tanker will take a bit of time to turn.

No, and that's been proven to be potentially one of the worst decisions ever made by anyone in the club's history.

The first step should have been ensuring you had an adequate replacement structure in place. Honestly ENIC behaved like some people on this board, "just change everything", no strategy, no plan, just fudging hope, somehow, magically, it will get better and it almost destroyed the club (not hyperbole, dropping into championship would have been a disaster that we might never have really recovered from).

And if we don't already have brick locked up re Paratici's replacement, re how to either replace Vinai and Lange or minimize limit their decision scope moving forward, we have already fudged up again.

And there still is the real question, who runs this club? I don't see Vinai taking that role, so is it Charrington? is it one of the family? You can highlight Levy fudge ups as much as you want, but you knew who made most decisions and who would take the flack for it. Why the fudge did Vinai not do the end of season letter? it comes across as cowardice and someone who is unable/unwilling to take control.

In some big corporate roles, you have responsibility without specifically stated authority, it's one of the toughest things to deal with as an executive, but it's also a measure of you. Sometimes you need to, you are expected to, take that authority without anyone "blessing" it. Vinai has failed miserably at stepping in, taking authority, making decisions, even the end of season letter is something he should have said "let me take it, I was part of the problem, I have to own some of this"
 
I see Mr Allnut in his article refers to "lucrative pre season tours" as though it was something that only the clubs current owners have done and no other clubs do, he has obviously forgotten about the 1908 pre season tour by Spurs to Argentina & Uruguay.
 
I see Mr Allnut in his article refers to "lucrative pre season tours" as though it was something that only the clubs current owners have done and no other clubs do, he has obviously forgotten about the 1908 pre season tour by Spurs to Argentina & Uruguay.
Yeh there is loads of rubbish that all big clubs do that's thrown in to over egg it IMO. If he just stuck with the genuine issues and not trying to over play it, it would be a much better article.
 
No, and that's been proven to be potentially one of the worst decisions ever made by anyone in the club's history.

The first step should have been ensuring you had an adequate replacement structure in place. Honestly ENIC behaved like some people on this board, "just change everything", no strategy, no plan, just fudging hope, somehow, magically, it will get better and it almost destroyed the club (not hyperbole, dropping into championship would have been a disaster that we might never have really recovered from).

And if we don't already have brick locked up re Paratici's replacement, re how to either replace Vinai and Lange or minimize limit their decision scope moving forward, we have already fudged up again.

And there still is the real question, who runs this club? I don't see Vinai taking that role, so is it Charrington? is it one of the family? You can highlight Levy fudge ups as much as you want, but you knew who made most decisions and who would take the flack for it. Why the fudge did Vinai not do the end of season letter? it comes across as cowardice and someone who is unable/unwilling to take control.

In some big corporate roles, you have responsibility without specifically stated authority, it's one of the toughest things to deal with as an executive, but it's also a measure of you. Sometimes you need to, you are expected to, take that authority without anyone "blessing" it. Vinai has failed miserably at stepping in, taking authority, making decisions, even the end of season letter is something he should have said "let me take it, I was part of the problem, I have to own some of this"

I agree completely about the ownership — there’s been a clear lack of direction and no coherent long-term football plan for years.

I’m fully onboard with getting rid of VV and Lange as well.

What I can’t understand, though, is why some people suddenly want Levy back. You don’t gradually decline from genuine title contenders, to simply fighting for top four, to regularly missing out on Europe, and then end up finishing 17th twice in a few seasons if the club is being run properly on the football side.

Levy sanctioned many of the transfers, backed a number of poor managerial appointments, and repeatedly oversaw rebuilds that either lacked a clear identity or were abandoned halfway through. Were all the bad decisions solely his fault? Of course not. But when one person has been the constant throughout the entire decline, it’s impossible to separate him from the overall trajectory of the club.

The biggest issue for me is that Spurs have spent years operating without a consistent football philosophy. Managers with completely different styles were hired one after another — Pochettino, Mourinho, Nuno, Conte, Ange — with squads constantly being rebuilt for conflicting approaches. That’s not bad luck; that’s poor leadership from the top.

People also point to the stadium and commercial growth as proof of success, and financially the club is in a strong position. But ultimately football clubs are judged on what happens on the pitch, and Spurs have regressed badly over the last 5–6 years despite having world-class infrastructure and resources most clubs would dream of.

Levy deserves credit for modernising the club commercially, but football-wise the project has clearly stalled. At some point you have to judge ownership on results, and the results have been a steady decline for a long time now.

Hopefully the next step is the owners eventually selling the club and Spurs finally getting fresh leadership with a proper football vision.
 
And what do you suspect we should have done in January? Apart from City no one really had a great window. I get the late timing of sacking Thomas and appointing Tudor. However in saying that for balance RDZ wasn’t apparently wanting the job until we flashed the gash.

I expected them to do their jobs well and they didn't. I'm not sure what you are arguing but I doubt you do either lol.
 
Well my point was that they probably promoted him with the intention of him having the full role knowing Paratichi would likely take the first job offer that came his way after having his role here halved.


I'd imagine Lange will be Vinai's first fall-guy and given the boot in the summer.

Considering that we are interviewing for another DoF to go alongside, I don’t think they expected Paratici to be unhappy. And I don’t thinking they expected Lange to be the long term sole DoF. But definitely issues have stemmed from the fact that Lange was put in a position he shouldn’t have been in and trusted on things that he shouldn’t have been, which to me comes back to doing all of this transition at once.
 
No, and that's been proven to be potentially one of the worst decisions ever made by anyone in the club's history.

The first step should have been ensuring you had an adequate replacement structure in place. Honestly ENIC behaved like some people on this board, "just change everything", no strategy, no plan, just fudging hope, somehow, magically, it will get better and it almost destroyed the club (not hyperbole, dropping into championship would have been a disaster that we might never have really recovered from).

And if we don't already have brick locked up re Paratici's replacement, re how to either replace Vinai and Lange or minimize limit their decision scope moving forward, we have already fudged up again.

And there still is the real question, who runs this club? I don't see Vinai taking that role, so is it Charrington? is it one of the family? You can highlight Levy fudge ups as much as you want, but you knew who made most decisions and who would take the flack for it. Why the fudge did Vinai not do the end of season letter? it comes across as cowardice and someone who is unable/unwilling to take control.

In some big corporate roles, you have responsibility without specifically stated authority, it's one of the toughest things to deal with as an executive, but it's also a measure of you. Sometimes you need to, you are expected to, take that authority without anyone "blessing" it. Vinai has failed miserably at stepping in, taking authority, making decisions, even the end of season letter is something he should have said "let me take it, I was part of the problem, I have to own some of this"

Yeah, I think the real story of this season is about corporate structure, and the lesson that came from trying to replace everything that Levy did, and represented in terms of being the key decision maker, and trying to do it all too quickly.

From that, stems almost everything else. The decision to keep sticking with Frank. Having Lange in too much of a position of power, having the players questioning the board, it all comes from trying to do too much too quickly.

There is an original sin of this season in appointing Frank in the first place, which comes before the Levy removal. And all of the individual players involved could have made better decisions and not had us in such deep trouble for so long. But chaos reigning at the top is what has driven the lack of unity and the indecision.

Other issues like the ridiculous injury situation and the flux of the medical department are hangovers from the constant chopping and changing and not being able to commit to a clear path. As is a squad made for 4-5 different managers. But to very nearly be relegated only happens when something seismic happens at the top, and that’s what happened at our club.

With all of that said, I am open to the idea that with Levy out and a more modern structure, we will eventually get to the level that our infrastructure suggests we deserve to be. Looser wage structure. Competing for top players. More decisive in the market. These are all the right things. But we can’t skip the steps. We can’t start trying to act like a top club with Lange as the most senior football director. We can’t sign players like Xavi Simons and expect Brentford’s manager to get the best out of him. I even hope that going forward, we aren’t afraid of showing patience again. But it’s got to be patience to the right person, with the right plan, and something we know we can stick to.
 
1. Agreed. Really poor choice for Spurs manager.
2. Disagree, he is responsible for a lot of what is wrong on the football side of things at Spurs.
3. I think it is reasonably rare for owners to connect with the fans. There should be more connect from the CEO though I think. I suspect that will come from this summer onwards.
4. Not sure what this means. I do think they deserve credit for appointing De Zerbi when they did. They had to admit they had got the Tudor decision wrong and fix it quite quickly- which they did.
5. Don't know what you mean here?
6. I don't get at all angry when I see Venkatesham. I think he could be a very good CEO for Spurs. One thing I know is that it takes a lot longer than just a few months to make big changes to an organisation. Lange I think is a decent spotter of young talent. I'm not sure he is good/senior enough to be a DoF however. I hope that the CEO goes out and appoints a proper DoF this summer.

The timing of the Levy removal was awful and utterly destabilizing. It paid little attention to the human side of football/need for fluid calmer transition as opposed to majot upheaval.
When I speak about fan connection I mean as a club, not specific depts or areas. I agreed with Gary Neville when he said he thought the 'together always' signs were a bit like those awful motivational posters some offices used to put up. We need some people in there that both love and understand this club deeply. Yes, credit for De Zerbi but their previous errors made that the bare, bare minimum. They need to stand up and do some serious self-reflection on all the things they got wrong. Judging by Charrington's statement, they might do on the football/transfer side, which again is the bare, bare minimum. The rest? Well it will all be Levy's fault, and whilst I agree he is responsible for much of the football side, he was an operator for the family too, and as such they are also somewhat responsible. I have heard some nasty rumours regarding trigger reasons why it happened so fast; those are best left well alone. I willl be interested to see if this whole thing gets uglier. But in short, IMO, they need to be honest with themselves too and not use the convenient excuse. My issue with Venkatesham is that he should've advised the Lewis Family harder not to throw us into turmoil they way they did (again my opinion). One poster here suggested that Lange looks like he'll be shunted back into youth talent spotting in a glorified role. That would be the bare minimum. He cannot remain as our Dof IMO.
 
And what do you suspect we should have done in January? Apart from City no one really had a great window. I get the late timing of sacking Thomas and appointing Tudor. However in saying that for balance RDZ wasn’t apparently wanting the job until we flashed the gash.

We needed experience and we needed short-term bodies. Bringing back loanees if possible, a couple of veteran loans. They said they sat off because they expected our injured players to be returning.
 
The Times article by Tom Allnutt really paints a picture of total chaos behind the scenes.

Some of it is absolutely insane stuff - like Dier, now of AS Monaco, taking it upon himself to lecture Spence on timeliness and attitude, only for Lange to wander past and, self-satisfied, remark 'at last! If only we had more of that!'. Like it wasn't *his job* to bring in players to do that.

There's also a lot of anonymous bitching and briefing by ENIC against Levy, and Levy loyalists against ENIC. It's all darkly hilarious.

But hidden in there are two paragraphs that sum up why we are, where we are.

"Levy and the Lewis family had overseen a period of drift beyond league positions too. The hierarchy prioritised pop concerts, Amazon documentaries, go-karting tracks and lucrative pre-season tours, which put football “further and further from the centre of things”, one present official said, and irritated the players, like Pierre-Emile Hojbjerg, who was fined two weeks’ wages for refusing to play in a post-season friendly in Melbourne in 2024. Morale among staff was low, with many fed up with the top-down way of working."

"Football departments cut during the pandemic were also never fully restored. Scouting was trimmed back, nominally in favour of a more centralised, data-led approach overseen by Lange and the brief chief football officer Scott Munn, but which resulted in fewer eyes on fewer players. The academy, which has yielded only 26 Premier League minutes this season, was neglected, “one of the lights turned off during Covid that never got turned back on”.

Apparently COVID resulted in a scythe being taken to backroom operations, which explains so much of why things have started breaking. Even in the marketing team, where...

"Even in non-football areas like marketing, staff describe the club as completely ignorant about the Tottenham fan base, in a way that would be deemed unthinkable in other industries."

Remember those cheery 'It's CLASSIC Tottenham!' billboards flogging sweatshirts, flashing across the stadium as we conceded yet another stupid goal?

Yeah, this tracks 100%.
Behind a paywall, and I canceled my subscription to them a while back. Help?
 
We needed experience and we needed short-term bodies. Bringing back loanees if possible, a couple of veteran loans. They said they sat off because they expected our injured players to be returning.
I think in an ideal world perhaps, but what players that you talk of would have been available and made a difference?
 
Charrington statement that club not for sale and ENIC going nowhere causing mayhem on some forums. Will have to see what the summer window brings and to see who De Zerbi wants to bring in , may not have the massive £££££££ that everyone thinks will solve everything.
With the money they will put in and the money from Sales, we should have a big chunk of change to make a decent impact in the window. The team will never be complete in one window.
 
I agree completely about the ownership — there’s been a clear lack of direction and no coherent long-term football plan for years.

I’m fully onboard with getting rid of VV and Lange as well.

What I can’t understand, though, is why some people suddenly want Levy back. You don’t gradually decline from genuine title contenders, to simply fighting for top four, to regularly missing out on Europe, and then end up finishing 17th twice in a few seasons if the club is being run properly on the football side.

Levy sanctioned many of the transfers, backed a number of poor managerial appointments, and repeatedly oversaw rebuilds that either lacked a clear identity or were abandoned halfway through. Were all the bad decisions solely his fault? Of course not. But when one person has been the constant throughout the entire decline, it’s impossible to separate him from the overall trajectory of the club.

The biggest issue for me is that Spurs have spent years operating without a consistent football philosophy. Managers with completely different styles were hired one after another — Pochettino, Mourinho, Nuno, Conte, Ange — with squads constantly being rebuilt for conflicting approaches. That’s not bad luck; that’s poor leadership from the top.

People also point to the stadium and commercial growth as proof of success, and financially the club is in a strong position. But ultimately football clubs are judged on what happens on the pitch, and Spurs have regressed badly over the last 5–6 years despite having world-class infrastructure and resources most clubs would dream of.

Levy deserves credit for modernising the club commercially, but football-wise the project has clearly stalled. At some point you have to judge ownership on results, and the results have been a steady decline for a long time now.

Hopefully the next step is the owners eventually selling the club and Spurs finally getting fresh leadership with a proper football vision.

I'll try to answer some/all of that

Re Levy - He did a lot for the club, a lot that will keep paying off decades into the future. His football failures are vastly overstated, the club went from a previous decade+ of only finishing in top 6 once and not playing in Europe for over 20 years to finishing in top 6 with 3 exceptions in 17+ years, two trophies (not good enough) and the club's best run of places in the top flight in it's history (not PL history, total). And all of his failures have to be caveated with competing against the cheating of Chelsea/City and Saudi Sportswashing Machine, London fudging with us over Stadium planning/approval for a decade, Covid just when Stadium came online, and the true owners who would not invest into club. He also had some tie in (even if just a lifetime/25 years of personal investment to club)

I think what most people want is leadership (good or bad), and Levy was that, and we all know Frank would have been gone long before the club got to a risk position, and even it would have been panic buys in January, we would have bought (he wouldn't risk club status). Viani/Lange are not leaders, they may be competent in -1/-2 roles but they have shown not to be leaders.

Levy to me will become like the Ange conversation, you have to separate the "was it smart/right to move them on" from "we replaced them with brick"

Commercial success is critical, I know it winds fans up, but it's the reason Leicester won the PL and FA Cup and are two tiers down now, is because they didn't raise their commercials to match their success. Levy deeply understood this, when you look at the PL revenues, there is a massive gap between the top 6 and the other 14, so even when Spurs, United, Chelsea drop out of top 6, it really doesn't change anything because the 7th best side with earn 200-300M less per season, over 5 or 10 years that is an insurmountable advantage. No amount of smart club running will overcome that, Brighton, Bournemouth, Bretford will never replace the top 6 clubs and probably all will drop out of the PL in the next decade.

Now to pieces I 100% agree with, consistent football philosophy, the swings have hurt us with a squad built for multiple managers, it also dilutes our brand having Conte/Jose/Frank type managers, more than most we have had a claim to at least trying to play entertaining football. That said as fans, we would have to accept that a club that runs that way will not hire big name managers (unless you get very lucky and find one that somehow plays your style), Spurs may have to be content with more "aligned to attacking/possession" than say a scenario where club dictates style/formation/players and managers align (and I'm not sure any elite club does that anyway)

Re sale of club, I don't think it happens, and the chances of it happening with a good outcome is pretty low
- The last two big owners in PL are Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Chelsea, Chelsea is an utter clusterfudge and probably has long term financial viability issues at this point and lots of rumours that the Saudi's are tied of Saudi Sportswashing Machine, the limitations and would likely move on if given chance.
- Middle East money into Sportswashing is probably dead at this stage (they have bigger problems)
- Private Equity/American investment is a disaster, the bankruptcy rate on firms bought by PE is something like10X the average, they only know how to pay execs and asset strip, not how to make anything successful, financially or product wise (see enbrickification)

Our best hope is the owners eat some humble pie (Levy wasn't that easy to replace), be ruthless with the failures (Vinai/Lange/medical team/etc) and understand that success requires constant investment, and while commercial revenue will offset large parts of that, some years you just have to go to your pockets.
 
The timing of the Levy removal was awful and utterly destabilizing. It paid little attention to the human side of football/need for fluid calmer transition as opposed to majot upheaval.
When I speak about fan connection I mean as a club, not specific depts or areas. I agreed with Gary Neville when he said he thought the 'together always' signs were a bit like those awful motivational posters some offices used to put up. We need some people in there that both love and understand this club deeply. Yes, credit for De Zerbi but their previous errors made that the bare, bare minimum. They need to stand up and do some serious self-reflection on all the things they got wrong. Judging by Charrington's statement, they might do on the football/transfer side, which again is the bare, bare minimum. The rest? Well it will all be Levy's fault, and whilst I agree he is responsible for much of the football side, he was an operator for the family too, and as such they are also somewhat responsible. I have heard some nasty rumours regarding trigger reasons why it happened so fast; those are best left well alone. I willl be interested to see if this whole thing gets uglier. But in short, IMO, they need to be honest with themselves too and not use the convenient excuse. My issue with Venkatesham is that he should've advised the Lewis Family harder not to throw us into turmoil they way they did (again my opinion). One poster here suggested that Lange looks like he'll be shunted back into youth talent spotting in a glorified role. That would be the bare minimum. He cannot remain as our Dof IMO.

I think Levy, Ange and Son (all very different roles in the club) all leaving at same time tore the club apart, they were all huge voices and the void and comparisons don't come off well.

There is lot re Levy we may never know, I will say Simon Jordan's views on Spurs (his personality aside) over last few weeks at minimum indicates he feels they did Levy dirty (but as a fanbase we probably should leave the dead buried)

Charrington's statement is actually the most professional thing I've seen out of the club for post Levy and again highlights the difference between and executive and managers (Vinai/Lange), and he does say "did not have the right expertise in key roles", I expect they will buy but they/he/someone needs to assume the Levy role. Even if they do it for self preservation as Levy took so much as their front over the years.
 
Back