Daniel Levy - Chairman

[Bedfordspurs]

It's a fair question, and then it becomes a case of how much was wanted upfront and whether we had the money to do it.

That we don’t know
It’s why I keep on saying we have to look at things in the round mate
I assume that Levy gives his subordinates a lot of money and says make haste with it you rogues in a camp theatrical style
They then sit around a white board and draw up names with transfer value as a thermometer image that denotes the money
And of course I’m taken the tinkle… level being theatrical, never
But the pot of money bit I’m sure about
The club will have a working revenue pot and the football leadership will have ways of making that greater by selling
The selling it is key because we have arguably been worse than anyone other than United at selling players until very recently
And back on Eze … it was reported that they wanted £40m of the fee up front and they wanted £60m
A normal transfer is paid over 3 years or more
And we have a lot of transfer debt, was the 2nd or 3rd highest in the league behind United and possibly Arsenal (Chelsea may have a say in that now)
And that of course is where sales come in to play. That balancing act of money in and out
I like Eze. I think we’re a prefect fit although I know many disagree with me (pity the fools ) but I also think in the summer just gone the deal for a striker was key. And by all accounts that included a lot up front too
I’d love is to get him in Jan or the summer
I’ve said it before but for me the ideal business we can di is being smart and get in Gomes and David from Lille on reduced fees due to their contract (will want decent wages)
Sell richarlison and use that to buy Eze
Sell a CM to help pay for the 2 from Lille
And we would in effect have Eze for net zero money
That would then allow the club to spend even more on some others
But, I don’t think that will happen of course and I also know do we did do the deals for either Lille player our fan base would have kittens saying we’re being cheap rather than smart

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I think that dovetails into the other 2 big conversations on Sonny and Madds though.

We don't really know yet which positions these players settle in. I've read before that Moore wore the number 10 in academy teams and was an attacking midfielder. He's labelled a winger nowadays, perhaps because it's the safest way of fast tracking him into the setup. As he matures perhaps he moves inside. Eze seems to cover both central and wide areas.

In my mind, I have plenty of space for Eze AND Moore in any future squad. I could see them easily playing in the same team as well.

Moore will be whatever he wants imo, position wise
We also have Donley who I personally think is brilliant but we haven’t seen much of in the first team yet (he is the smartest passer of a ball I’ve seen years)
We also have coming though several other super attacking young players who are all excelling above their age groups
But Eze would give someone like Donley time so that we don’t push him too hard quickly. Would also give Moore time too but they play different roles today

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

That we don’t know
It’s why I keep on saying we have to look at things in the round mate
I assume that Levy gives his subordinates a lot of money and says make haste with it you rogues in a camp theatrical style
They then sit around a white board and draw up names with transfer value as a thermometer image that denotes the money
And of course I’m taken the tinkle… level being theatrical, never
But the pot of money bit I’m sure about
The club will have a working revenue pot and the football leadership will have ways of making that greater by selling
The selling it is key because we have arguably been worse than anyone other than United at selling players until very recently
And back on Eze … it was reported that they wanted £40m of the fee up front and they wanted £60m
A normal transfer is paid over 3 years or more
And we have a lot of transfer debt, was the 2nd or 3rd highest in the league behind United and possibly Arsenal (Chelsea may have a say in that now)
And that of course is where sales come in to play. That balancing act of money in and out
I like Eze. I think we’re a prefect fit although I know many disagree with me (pity the fools ) but I also think in the summer just gone the deal for a striker was key. And by all accounts that included a lot up front too
I’d love is to get him in Jan or the summer
I’ve said it before but for me the ideal business we can di is being smart and get in Gomes and David from Lille on reduced fees due to their contract (will want decent wages)
Sell richarlison and use that to buy Eze
Sell a CM to help pay for the 2 from Lille
And we would in effect have Eze for net zero money
That would then allow the club to spend even more on some others
But, I don’t think that will happen of course and I also know do we did do the deals for either Lille player our fan base would have kittens saying we’re being cheap rather than smart

Eze will be 27 next summer...if, as is normal, he wants a 4/5 year contract then he'll end up a sunk cost, with perhaps just a small transfer recoup at the end (unless Saudi is still going strong).

Now, I'm ok with that as long as the incoming player 100% fills a hole (eg Solanke) and looks nailed on to be a net contributor. And I say that from the club's pov, in that they can include that kind of purchase in their model, but only up to a certain point. If cash flow keeps increasing we can accommodate it more. (that's inc moving players on for decent money btw)

Fwiw Eze is a 1 in 5 goalscorer for QPR and Palace over 8 years, for someone 27 next summer there hasn't been much clamour for him during his formative years imo... especially for someone who looks like an extremely skilful game changer type player.

And in that regard, Olise is/was probably the one.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Eze will be 27 next summer...if, as is normal, he wants a 4/5 year contract then he'll end up a sunk cost, with perhaps just a small transfer recoup at the end (unless Saudi is still going strong).

Now, I'm ok with that as long as the incoming player 100% fills a hole (eg Solanke) and looks nailed on to be a net contributor. And I say that from the club's pov, in that they can include that kind of purchase in their model, but only up to a certain point. If cash flow keeps increasing we can accommodate it more. (that's inc moving players on for decent money btw)

Fwiw Eze is a 1 in 5 goalscorer for QPR and Palace over 8 years, for someone 27 next summer there hasn't been much clamour for him during his formative years imo... especially for someone who looks like an extremely skilful game changer type player.

And in that regard, Olise is/was probably the one.

Olise is brilliant
Eze is too imo
Should have got them when in the championship
I said it at the time, along with bowen and a few others. fudging obvious signings
Gray is in the same mould but we paid a huge fee because we didn’t exploit the contract situation
Eze would be in addition to what we have and play in a much more attacking like up here.i want him for creativity as much as anything, he killed us recently and had players faking over. That’s a game changer for us in the right games
His fee will have dropped too because of their situation

 

[Bishop]

How can you match what an oil producing country can pay? Or the likes of madrid or barca? Who have much bigger fan bases than us.

I don't think we especially need to or should be matching the wage bills of the bigger clubs across the board. There have been times when for certain key players it might have made sense to stretch what we were willing to pay and we should have course also raise our own self imposed wage to revenue ceiling. There is space to do so reasonably comfortably as ours has always been significantly lower than every other team in the PL.

But that's not even the model I particularly advocate for. My thinking has always been that we should be trying for these players when we identify them earlier on in their development (which we have done many times). At which point we can still afford them as their wage demands will not be so high and the potential transfer fee lower. That's where I criticise ENIC and Levy in particular. We haven't been bold, we haven't been courageous we've tended to play it safe and not take risks. For me that demonstrates a lack of ambition and desire to win because if winning is what matters you will do what it takes to make that happen and we never have.

 

[Bishop]

But his salary is huge
People are talking salaries, wages
That’s their measure and he is on £170k a week
And he is a squad player

Looking back at this if those wages are true it's actually madness. Who the hell sanctioned that kind of wage for a player like Werner? That's not smart business. I don't understand a model where we don't spend big on players that deserve it but then spend a decently on players on unworthy if it, ie the likes of Werner, Sissoko etc.

 

[Muttley]

Moore will be whatever he wants imo, position wise
We also have Donley who I personally think is brilliant but we haven’t seen much of in the first team yet (he is the smartest passer of a ball I’ve seen years)
We also have coming though several other super attacking young players who are all excelling above their age groups
But Eze would give someone like Donley time so that we don’t push him too hard quickly. Would also give Moore time too but they play different roles today

It definitely jives with what we saw with Poch. His best team in 16/17 had Dele as the youngest at 21 and Vertonghen and Lloris as the oldest at 30. It never had U21's in it at it's peak unlike the way some like to remember it. Kane was already 21 when Poch walked in the door. He was 23 in our best season. The others were in that 25-30 range by the time we got to 86 points in the league.

What made the difference back then was the second and third season signings of Son, Toby and Big Vic who were bought when they were 23-26. OK, it didn't work with Big Vic but was bad luck rather than bad recruitment. I didn't see any other signings who even scratched the surface of greatness compared to those 3 and obviously Dele in as a year 1 purchase. Dier was a decent signing in year 1 as well.

I often ask whether Eze would have that same impact. I think he has the tools, but probably needs more consistency. He fits the profile.

This time we have the pipeline of kids that Poch never had. He managed to get Winksy through, but others like Onomah and CCV just weren't good enough. Ange has loads of them, including Donley, and some are already involved. I think this time it will very, very different.

I do though that we need to find a couple more players in that 24-26 age range for this journey. Like Solanke, tailor made for our setup.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Looking back at this if those wages are true it's actually madness. Who the hell sanctioned that kind of wage for a player like Werner? That's not smart business. I don't understand a model where we don't spend big on players that deserve it but then spend a decently on players on unworthy if it, ie the likes of Werner, Sissoko etc.

I think he is probably our second highest paid player
But without him and the injuries we gave had in his position I dread to think what we would have done

 

[Bedfordspurs]

It definitely jives with what we saw with Poch. His best team in 16/17 had Dele as the youngest at 21 and Vertonghen and Lloris as the oldest at 30. It never had U21's in it at it's peak unlike the way some like to remember it. Kane was already 21 when Poch walked in the door. He was 23 in our best season. The others were in that 25-30 range by the time we got to 86 points in the league.

What made the difference back then was the second and third season signings of Son, Toby and Big Vic who were bought when they were 23-26. OK, it didn't work with Big Vic but was bad luck rather than bad recruitment. I didn't see any other signings who even scratched the surface of greatness compared to those 3 and obviously Dele in as a year 1 purchase. Dier was a decent signing in year 1 as well.

I often ask whether Eze would have that same impact. I think he has the tools, but probably needs more consistency. He fits the profile.

This time we have the pipeline of kids that Poch never had. He managed to get Winksy through, but others like Onomah and CCV just weren't good enough. Ange has loads of them, including Donley, and some are already involved. I think this time it will very, very different.

I do though that we need to find a couple more players in that 24-26 age range for this journey. Like Solanke, tailor made for our setup.

Agreed.
It’s why I think we will address the extra quality options next summer

 

[Lilbaz]

I don't think we especially need to or should be matching the wage bills of the bigger clubs across the board. There have been times when for certain key players it might have made sense to stretch what we were willing to pay and we should have course also raise our own self imposed wage to revenue ceiling. There is space to do so reasonably comfortably as ours has always been significantly lower than every other team in the PL.

But that's not even the model I particularly advocate for. My thinking has always been that we should be trying for these players when we identify them earlier on in their development (which we have done many times). At which point we can still afford them as their wage demands will not be so high and the potential transfer fee lower. That's where I criticise ENIC and Levy in particular. We haven't been bold, we haven't been courageous we've tended to play it safe and not take risks. For me that demonstrates a lack of ambition and desire to win because if winning is what matters you will do what it takes to make that happen and we never have.

I would love us to go out and bring in a proper world class player but the risk of them not working out is huge. If they are on massive wages you can't get rid.

Which is why i'd like new owners that wouldn't care so much. But it isn't how football should be. It's massively dangerous. Only one team can win the league etc... the ones that miss out will hurt.

I'd really like financial rules to work as intended. Let every club be self sufficient. You'd have to cut the money from cl though.

 

[Mikey10]

I don't think Poch ever had to work with young players in the way that Ange is having / choosing to though. I find it refreshing that Ange could end up keeping a nucleus together for 6-8 years, perhaps even longer.

Pie-in-the-sky stuff, unfortunately. Our record in sacking managers, Ange's record of staying only for short spells at clubs, and PL averages all suggest that he won't be here for anywhere near that time. In fact, going by statistics, there is a good chance that he is already more than halfway through his tenure.

 

[harr1984]

Pie-in-the-sky stuff, unfortunately. Our record in sacking managers, Ange's record of staying only for short spells at clubs, and PL averages all suggest that he won't be here for anywhere near that time. In fact, going by statistics, there is a good chance that he is already more than halfway through his tenure.

To be fair, you have to dive a bit deeper into stats than that and look at the reasons why. He might well not have stayed in any role for that long (I haven't even checked myself but I'm sure you're right) but we do know that he has left having won things at every club he has been at, he doesn't strike me as a guy who walks away from something having not achieved what he set out to. That combined with the fact that he knew from the start this was a 'project' means he might well stay for a bit longer in the past if circumstances dictate....

 

[Bishop]

I would love us to go out and bring in a proper world class player but the risk of them not working out is huge. If they are on massive wages you can't get rid.

Which is why i'd like new owners that wouldn't care so much. But it isn't how football should be. It's massively dangerous. Only one team can win the league etc... the ones that miss out will hurt.

I'd really like financial rules to work as intended. Let every club be self sufficient. You'd have to cut the money from cl though.

That's a utopian idea but football has never worked that way. Not in the 70s when the Littlewoods family backed Liverpool, not in the 90s when Jack Hall bankrolled Blackburn or Saudi Sportswashing Machine when Hall tried to do the same.

I kind of feel because we aren't one of those clubs with that kind of owner we have latched on to the idea of financial parity for all (and not even true parity, just a version of it that suits our interests) when it's just never worked that way. Financial parity is not what got Spurs to the level we are at, otherwise we might just be a Barnet Town.

I don't know what the solution is really beyond maximising your opportunities in whatever the model is. That is something I don't think we've done enough of on the pitch.

 

[Lilbaz]

That's a utopian idea but football has never worked that way. Not in the 70s when the Littlewoods family backed Liverpool, not in the 90s when Jack Hall bankrolled Blackburn or Saudi Sportswashing Machine when Hall tried to do the same.

I kind of feel because we aren't one of those clubs with that kind of owner we have latched on to the idea of financial parity for all (and not even true parity, just a version of it that suits our interests) when it's just never worked that way. Financial parity is not what got Spurs to the level we are at, otherwise we might just be a Barnet Town.

I don't know what the solution is really beyond maximising your opportunities in whatever the model is. That is something I don't think we've done enough of on the pitch.

I never said financial parity. Just that clubs should be self sufficient. Which was the whole idea of ffp. Cutting cl revenues (giving half to fa's). Would mean you limit the mega clubs. It's what should have been agreed on 30 years ago.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

That's a utopian idea but football has never worked that way. Not in the 70s when the Littlewoods family backed Liverpool, not in the 90s when Jack Hall bankrolled Blackburn or Saudi Sportswashing Machine when Hall tried to do the same.

I kind of feel because we aren't one of those clubs with that kind of owner we have latched on to the idea of financial parity for all (and not even true parity, just a version of it that suits our interests) when it's just never worked that way. Financial parity is not what got Spurs to the level we are at, otherwise we might just be a Barnet Town.

I don't know what the solution is really beyond maximising your opportunities in whatever the model is. That is something I don't think we've done enough of on the pitch.

There isn’t a solution
The sport is actually doomed because of money but the owners don’t realise it
As prices keep on going up
And the quality doesn’t improve per se what matters is the competition
The premier league on that front is grim
What made this league interesting was that anyone could beat anyone but the more it becomes city’s league to lose the less interest the really normal fan with have
And that then makes it less appealing to watch
there is also no jeopardy in the top divisions
Only the promoted teams plus maybe 2 others every season can get releagted
It’s quite an ugly outlook being skewed by sky TV and €€€

 

[Muttley]

Pie-in-the-sky stuff, unfortunately. Our record in sacking managers, Ange's record of staying only for short spells at clubs, and PL averages all suggest that he won't be here for anywhere near that time. In fact, going by statistics, there is a good chance that he is already more than halfway through his tenure.

To be fair, you have to dive a bit deeper into stats than that and look at the reasons why. He might well not have stayed in any role for that long (I haven't even checked myself but I'm sure you're right) but we do know that he has left having won things at every club he has been at, he doesn't strike me as a guy who walks away from something having not achieved what he set out to. That combined with the fact that he knew from the start this was a 'project' means he might well stay for a bit longer in the past if circumstances dictate....

But who cares? If Ange falls on his sword for the right reasons, then the squad continues under the stewardship of the next guy some time in the future. It still in the framework of the squad that started evolving from about the 21/22 season which was before we even thought about Ange. He just picked up and run with the players and so will the next guy. The squad direction shouldn't change so much from manager to manager.

Hopefully we won't have to change manager again, and I don't think he'll be headhunted away from us.

 

[billyiddo]

I believe it was absolutely real mate. Agreed on your assertion of Eze as a wide player in Ange's ideal set-up (which should sadly make us wonder if Sonny is ever going to get a fair fit/shake). I think Maddison has been upgradable for sometime, I don't think we can say that Deki and Maddison are good enough options as a pair. I'd upgrade one of them, and it isn't Deki (because to your point, he has more uses in an Ange system than Madders).

I don't think we'd have been looking to drop 60m on a Maddison upgrade in the summer, just doesn't add up to me given where we are in the grand scheme of things

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I don't think we'd have been looking to drop 60m on a Maddison upgrade in the summer, just doesn't add up to me given where we are in the grand scheme of things

I’m with you
As much as id love for us to sign him getting in a proper CF was the biggest void to fill

 

[thfcsteff]

I don't think we'd have been looking to drop 60m on a Maddison upgrade in the summer, just doesn't add up to me given where we are in the grand scheme of things

I certainly concede that I am one of the few who wanted himm upgraded fromthat long ago...but again, 60 mill on Eze would've seen a player who could play two or three positions. Anyway, academic I suppose cos he ain't here LOL!