Daniel Levy - Chairman

[Baleforce]

Don’t get your logic there
Buying ahh player has a risk so I don’t see how you differentiate that a higher cost player is more likely to fail other than maybe added pressure, but the counter would be they would have performed better already to justify the higher cost

Because we’d have so much invested in them, and less money to spend elsewhere.

I read the argument as being we should have spent all of our money when close to the top in the hope that player pushed us over, but if it’s another Ndombele, you get worse, and you’ve blown next summers budget.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

You're right, there's not MORE money.

It would have to come from the transfer fee budget. (Which if reduced would then be complained about)

And of course the budget is dictated by our revenue.

Player sales is one stream that has been underperforming for years now...and one with a direct link into providing liquidity for buys and wages (ie not re-directed elsewhere)

It’s where us, United and Arsenal have failed miserably and it’s hurt us all in different ways

 

[glorygloryeze]

Those big spending risks are far more likely to go wrong than right.

Had that been the plan from the start we may never have had the massive improvement, and likely would still be playing in the tiny run down version of the lane.

Hold on, just so i'm clear are you saying that every time we have a choice of spending a bit extra on a player that looks to be better talented than another who players in the same position who seems a lesser player and is cheaper we should instead always go for the cheaper alternative?

 

[lurker of old]

He is a souless man with dead eyes. We are very unlucky to be spurs fans in the period this useless clam has controlled us.

When you resort to insulting the man, you show your immaturity. It is very tacky. Of course DL has been over-cautious, but in principle his approach of increasing the ground capacity to allow for greater investment in players, is the right one. Now he has appointed a Board member tasked with the football side of the business and so far it's going poorly, but be very careful what you wish for. An American owner could extract cash, pile debt on the club and sink it deep. Let's see if the club can turn it around.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

He is a souless man with dead eyes. We are very unlucky to be spurs fans in the period this useless clam has controlled us.

When you resort to insulting the man, you show your immaturity. It is very tacky. Of course DL has been over-cautious, but in principle his approach of increasing the ground capacity to allow for greater investment in players, is the right one. Now he has appointed a Board member tasked with the football side of the business and so far it's going poorly, but be very careful what you wish for. An American owner could extract cash, pile debt on the club and sink it deep. Let's see if the club can turn it around.

Also an American owner may invest more
We just don’t know
That’s the issue
We don’t know anything

 

[glorygloryeze]

Without the stadium we couldn’t afford to these youngsters

What are you basing this on? Everyone buys youngsters, it's about what you choose to pay for them. Which if our youngsters would we not have been able to buy in your view without the stadium?
Also, we bought youngsters before we upgraded our stadium..

The club would be less attractive to them too

Depends on what you are willing to pay for them imo, then the stadium might swing it if you have a competitor who can match the offered wages.

And rather than say we are buying youngsters …you have added the “to sell” bit
We don’t know that

From how we've operated in the past it's a reasonable conclusion. We finished 5th last year and you'd assume we'd have bought more players for 'now' than what we did buy..you have to assume the focus switch to the 'future' rather than the 'now'...the 'future' would surely include those youngsters increasing in value at least

What we do know is we have had an ongoing issue with the ag wood the squad and the younger players address that. They also will fix the HG issue
They aren’t all for now players, that no one. CAn argue with for sure. And e have an issue in the squad depth after letting so many go
That is on the club 100%

Yep

 

[Baleforce]

Hold on, just so i'm clear are you saying that every time we have a choice of spending a bit extra on a player that looks to be better talented than another who players in the same position who seems a lesser player and is cheaper we should instead always go for the cheaper alternative?

No, not saying that at all.

I’m saying stick within our risk matrix, adhere to the principles that got us this far.

 

[glorygloryeze]

I posted this in the ENIC thread..so far it seems no-one has taken the time to offer any rebuttals to the piece (usually someone will say how the writer 'is a Gooner', 'has an anti-Spurs bias', explain how the details are ommiting x or y etc). Maybe someone will in this thread...

A chronic lack of ambition has laid waste to Tottenham | Jonathan Wilson

Ange Postecoglou has serious shortcomings as Spurs manager. But he has hardly been helped by a team trying to do things on the cheap

www.theguardian.com

 

[glorygloryeze]

No, not saying that at all.

I’m saying stick within our risk matrix, adhere to the principles that got us this far.

So staying within said 'risk matrix' means going for a Sissoko instead of a Mane?
Does it also mean going for Odebert instead of Neto?
Does it also mean trying to go for Nico Williams instead of Neto?

Just curious...

 

[Bedfordspurs]

What are you basing this on? Everyone buys youngsters, it's about what you choose to pay for them. Which if our youngsters would we not have been able to buy in your view without the stadium?
Also, we bought youngsters before we upgraded our stadium..

Depends on what you are willing to pay for them imo, then the stadium might swing it if you have a competitor who can match the offered wages.

From how we've operated in the past it's a reasonable conclusion. We finished 5th last year and you'd assume we'd have bought more players for 'now' than what we did buy..you have to assume the focus switch to the 'future' rather than the 'now'...the 'future' would surely include those youngsters increasing in value at least


Yep

We don’t have rep for selling
In fact we have failed badly on that front so I can’t agree
A smart club sells well
And we brought youngsters before the premium price was added
Dele was £4m
Now a dele is £15/£20m. Palace have just laid that kind of money for a kid form Millwall
We paid £40m for gray … a kid with one year pro football
We wouldn’t have the money to do that and buy a Solanke too
The stadium is the game changer regards income but all it does is put us at the top table… to then compete we still need to be smart as we’re not funded by a country or an investment fund
That’s part of what we have reverted back to buying youth
Interestingly city have done the same thing
There aren’t actually that many ready made players out there now, like there used to be
All teams what younger more malleable players

 

[RigorMortis]

The issue you have again.. like all the levy out crew is your assuming I don’t want change, when I clearly have said I do
I say it regularly
I haven’t met a fan who doesn’t. The issue remains and clearly you can’t address it, what’s the change. What is it you want different
Lets sack levy
He is still there in the background with his money/profit/capital at risk so nothing changes apart from the face
We what new owners
Great, who are they?
No one can say because so far there hasn’t been any that anyone publicly is aware of
Right now the the crusade can’t succeed because no one can say what success

I haven’t assumed anything about you. Why would I?

Of course I can’t address what the exact change is, and why on earth should I? Which fan who doesn’t have specific inside knowledge of the footballing industry and our club in particular, can have that ?
That’s utterly bizarre

We can say we want change because we support the club but apart from support we have little or no say in the matter, however we can view the state of the club, the the results, the progress over ENIC’s reign, compare it against our peers/rivals and give an informed opinion.

Why on earth should it be anything more than that?

 

[Baleforce]

So staying within said 'risk matrix' means going for a Sissoko instead of a Mane?
Does it also mean going for Odebert instead of Neto?
Does it also mean trying to go for Nico Williams instead of Neto?

Just curious...

You stay in the matrix, irrespective of the individuals.

 

[DubSpur]

I haven’t assumed anything about you. Why would I?

Of course I can’t address what the exact change is, and why on earth should I? Which fan who doesn’t have specific inside knowledge of the footballing industry and our club in particular, can have that ?
That’s utterly bizarre

We can say we want change because we support the club but apart from support we have little or no say in the matter, however we can view the state of the club, the the results, the progress over ENIC’s reign, compare it against our peers/rivals and give an informed opinion.

Why on earth should it be anything more than that?

Can you give your comparison for our progress against that of our peers over ENIC's reign then?

 

[billyiddo]

I posted this in the ENIC thread..so far it seems no-one has taken the time to offer any rebuttals to the piece (usually someone will say how the writer 'is a Gooner', 'has an anti-Spurs bias', explain how the details are ommiting x or y etc). Maybe someone will in this thread...

A chronic lack of ambition has laid waste to Tottenham | Jonathan Wilson

Ange Postecoglou has serious shortcomings as Spurs manager. But he has hardly been helped by a team trying to do things on the cheap

www.theguardian.com

There's nothing in there that hasn't already been argued and debated already - unless I'm missing some new angle or information within it, then if so please highlight it

 

[RigorMortis]

Can you give your comparison for our progress against that of our peers over ENIC's reign then?

In my eyes our comparable peers are Chelsea, arsenal and West Ham.
So against two of them, we are miles behind and against West Ham, we are better ( current league position not withstanding)

 

[Batspur]

He is a souless man with dead eyes. We are very unlucky to be spurs fans in the period this useless clam has controlled us.

When you resort to insulting the man, you show your immaturity. It is very tacky. Of course DL has been over-cautious, but in principle his approach of increasing the ground capacity to allow for greater investment in players, is the right one. Now he has appointed a Board member tasked with the football side of the business and so far it's going poorly, but be very careful what you wish for. An American owner could extract cash, pile debt on the club and sink it deep. Let's see if the club can turn it around.

Dude. We have the second biggest debt in world football.

Can't believe you're using that as a warning...

AHH. But it's good debt. Is that the line?

 

[Muttley]

So a straight question.
Do people think Daniel's wage and transfer policy hasn't contributed, over time, to our inability to win things or go the extra mile when in position to do so?

Yeah, but not in the way some think of it.

A football club needs to have a strategy and policy around squad optimisation. We all know the rules around PL and UEFA and that is the basic design principle. In the past, there have been ugly times where Levy hasn't respected these natural guard rails. We've ended up with squads closer to 35 senior players and haemorrhaged budget where it could be purposed elsewhere e.g. better salaries for the best players. It's take major cleanup operations, like we're going through in 2023-25, to get us back on track. That lack of discipline has meant that salaries have been sub-optimal and transfer budget hasn't regenerated quick enough.

We're in better shape now because the squad is finally lean and agile. Some fans think it is too lean but they're way off in my opinion. Numerically, we are perhaps one player short only of where we need to be. That is at centre half and goes away when Phillips and Vuskovic replace Davies.

The danger is that squad numbers proliferates again like it has done so many times in the past. Perhaps for a different reason though. In the past it's been because of not being able to shift older players whose value on our balance sheet is more than in the transfer market. Also, the salary we give them is more than elsewhere. This time it should be because we have more Masons and Townsends. Saleable assets who aren't quite at the level we need. That is likely to happen with our current academy prospects.

 

[DubSpur]

In my eyes our comparable peers are Chelsea, arsenal and West Ham.
So against two of them, we are miles behind and against West Ham, we are better ( current league position not withstanding)

Chelsea and Arsenal weren't our peers when ENIC took over. Have a look again at the time ENIC took over and come back and give a comparison to our peers at that time.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I haven’t assumed anything about you. Why would I?

Of course I can’t address what the exact change is, and why on earth should I? Which fan who doesn’t have specific inside knowledge of the footballing industry and our club in particular, can have that ?
That’s utterly bizarre

We can say we want change because we support the club but apart from support we have little or no say in the matter, however we can view the state of the club, the the results, the progress over ENIC’s reign, compare it against our peers/rivals and give an informed opinion.

Why on earth should it be anything more than that?

Who are our peers and rivals?
Sorry, seen you have posited that above
Chelsea arent miles ahead by the way
Despite their £B spend they are stil making it up as they go along

 

[Batspur]

What are you basing this on? Everyone buys youngsters, it's about what you choose to pay for them. Which if our youngsters would we not have been able to buy in your view without the stadium?
Also, we bought youngsters before we upgraded our stadium..

Depends on what you are willing to pay for them imo, then the stadium might swing it if you have a competitor who can match the offered wages.

From how we've operated in the past it's a reasonable conclusion. We finished 5th last year and you'd assume we'd have bought more players for 'now' than what we did buy..you have to assume the focus switch to the 'future' rather than the 'now'...the 'future' would surely include those youngsters increasing in value at least


Yep

The idea someone signs for us because we have a good stadium is so dumb I'm surprised you gave it credence in answering it tbh. But fair play to you giving it your time.

Players sign for money first. Money second. A manager third. Money 4th.