Next Spurs Manager v.2

[Daisuk]

What went wrong?

Van Gaal has had difficulty dealing with the problems facing Bayern Munchen. The Van Gaal era took a turn for the worst after Bayern Munchen's loss to Inter in March 2011.

The only person to blame has been Van Gaal himself, even though other players should share the blame. Van Gaal put more emphasis on passing and ball control instead of defense.

Van Gaal also clashed with the Bayern Munchen board members, who resented his dictatorial style and arrogance. The undignified treatment of Mark Van Bommel worsened the already tense relationship between the players and him.

The best that FC Bayern Munchen can do is salvage what remains of its current season and start from the beginning in the 2011-2012 Bundesliga.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...louis-van-gaal-to-be-sacked-as-coach-tomorrow

Sounds awfully familiar. :lol:

 

[Gutter Boy]

Anyone seen this worrying theory from a Gooner blog?
Basically suggests that it is they who will snag Van Gaal, as they have already got one of his coaches, Jonker, who has worked with him many times in the past

http://1nildown2oneup.net/have-arsenal-already-employed-wengers-successor-conspiracy-theory/

Thoughts??

I think history suggests LVG likes to freshen up his coaching staff with each new role. He's more like Ferguson in that aspect, than say Redknapp or AVB who comes as a package with their team.

What went wrong?

Van Gaal has had difficulty dealing with the problems facing Bayern Munchen. The Van Gaal era took a turn for the worst after Bayern Munchen's loss to Inter in March 2011.

The only person to blame has been Van Gaal himself, even though other players should share the blame. Van Gaal put more emphasis on passing and ball control instead of defense.

Van Gaal also clashed with the Bayern Munchen board members, who resented his dictatorial style and arrogance. The undignified treatment of Mark Van Bommel worsened the already tense relationship between the players and him.

The best that FC Bayern Munchen can do is salvage what remains of its current season and start from the beginning in the 2011-2012 Bundesliga.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...louis-van-gaal-to-be-sacked-as-coach-tomorrow

Sounds awfully familiar. :lol:

From memory, the problems LVG had at Bayern started once it was announced he was leaving at the end of the season/his contract (to take the Dutch national team job).

Just like Ferguson's first retirement season, or even Redknapp's apparent position with us and the England job, it just made his situation untenable and things quickly fell apart.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Anyone who thinks we're going to spend any money (net) in the summer obviously hasn't been paying attention for about the last 5 years.

If there's any money from the new tv deal that isn't eaten up by salary clauses (remember what happened to our CL 'windfall'), it will all go straight on the stadium.
Zero net spend has been the mantra for the last 10 windows (our last substantial spend was Jan 09)

I disagree with you. The CL windfall was eaten up due to the fact that many of our players and management staff had clauses in their contracts that netted them large bonuses in the event of qualifying for the Champions League, something that isn't going to happen this year. If the TV contract is worth an extra £20 million per season then I can see at least half of that being used as a transfer budget. It's also worth noting that 'profit from normal operations excluding football trading and depreciation" for 1st July 2012 to 31st June 2013 was £23.4 million.

While we have indeed been frugal over the last 5 years or so, this has been during a period where we were buying land, drawing up plans and carrying out development for both the training ground and stadium site. The recent publication of the financial results indicate that having realised profits from divesting the phase 1 NDP development along with ancilary buildings to the West of the high road to ENIC we are now largely debt free, "negligible net debt" I think was the term used.

Levy has always stated that the new stadium project will be financed entirely separately from the football side of the operation and for once I actually believe him. If we cannot make the stadium pay for itself (as a minimum!) then there is absolutely no point at all in building it. We are at a stage now where we are apparently debt free and probably only require another £250 million to complete the stadium project. If I take a worst case scenario with low estimates on valuations and high estimates on borrowing costs then:

£100 million naming rights deal would leave £150 million to find.
£25 million income from selling the phase 3 site to a developer leaves £125 million to be borrowed.
Borrowing at a punitive rate of 7% would equate to £8.75M interest per annum.
The lower end estimates on the additional income our stadium would generate us each year is £25M.
That would mean completely paying the stadium off in around 5 to 10 years without impacting our existing football budget in any way.

Arsenal's stadium building significantly handicapped them financially for a good decade. ​

It didn't at all.... Take a look at Arsenal's wage bill since they left Highbury and you'll see that their new stadium had the complete opposite effect. Arsenal's huge amount of surplus cash in the bank also demonstrates this. They could've spent some or all of that cash in bank at any point over the last few years but had a board/manager that chose not to....

Perhaps they did this because they wanted to pay off the stadium completely instead of continuing to 'waste' money on interest on their loans? But to say that they hampered themselves financially isn't true at all. Do you think they would've been able to sustain a £150 million yearly wage bill while playing at Highbury?

 

[spasm]

someone should start a pool on who will be the first player to cross LVG (assuming he comes, of course)..

my money would be on Adebayor

idle minds and all that..but farking long wait for next season.

 

[NWND]

Yeah, i'm not sticking up for the sc** but they've only really fallen away due to having an injury list that has been pretty much as ridiculous as ours. They've simply not been able to compete as unlike Emirates Marketing Project & Chelsea, they can't afford to pay world-class players millions to play for their U21s.

Liverpool would have dropped off just as badly if Suarez, Sturridge, Coutinho and Gerrard had missed significant game time at more or less the same time.

 

[NWND]

I disagree with you. The CL windfall was eaten up due to the fact that many of our players and management staff had clauses in their contracts that netted them large bonuses in the event of qualifying for the Champions League, something that isn't going to happen this year. If the TV contract is worth an extra £20 million per season then I can see at least half of that being used as a transfer budget. It's also worth noting that 'profit from normal operations excluding football trading and depreciation" for 1st July 2012 to 31st June 2013 was £23.4 million.

While we have indeed been frugal over the last 5 years or so, this has been during a period where we were buying land, drawing up plans and carrying out development for both the training ground and stadium site. The recent publication of the financial results indicate that having realised profits from divesting the phase 1 NDP development along with ancilary buildings to the West of the high road to ENIC we are now largely debt free, "negligible net debt" I think was the term used.

Levy has always stated that the new stadium project will be financed entirely separately from the football side of the operation and for once I actually believe him. If we cannot make the stadium pay for itself (as a minimum!) then there is absolutely no point at all in building it. We are at a stage now where we are apparently debt free and probably only require another £250 million to complete the stadium project. If I take a worst case scenario with low estimates on valuations and high estimates on borrowing costs then:

£100 million naming rights deal would leave £150 million to find.
£25 million income from selling the phase 3 site to a developer leaves £125 million to be borrowed.
Borrowing at a punitive rate of 7% would equate to £8.75M interest per annum.
The lower end estimates on the additional income our stadium would generate us each year is £25M.
That would mean completely paying the stadium off in around 5 to 10 years without impacting our existing football budget in any way.

Arsenal's stadium building significantly handicapped them financially for a good decade. ​

It didn't at all.... Take a look at Arsenal's wage bill since they left Highbury and you'll see that their new stadium had the complete opposite effect. Arsenal's huge amount of surplus cash in the bank also demonstrates this. They could've spent some or all of that cash in bank at any point over the last few years but had a board/manager that chose not to....

Perhaps they did this because they wanted to pay off the stadium completely instead of continuing to 'waste' money on interest on their loans? But to say that they hampered themselves financially isn't true at all. Do you think they would've been able to sustain a £150 million yearly wage bill while playing at Highbury?

I agree. Even the Arsenal board have regularly said there are significant funds available. Wenger chose not to buy. Wenger's principles mean he prefers purchasing young talent and developing them rather than go for the ready-made superstar. Its his style. Infact, its the occasions when he decides to go big in the transfer market that tend to end up with egg on his face. Arshavin & Reyes were both dissapointing for them and to be fair, Ozil's impact this season has been very dissapointing for them.

 

[billyiddo]

Spoiler

I disagree with you. The CL windfall was eaten up due to the fact that many of our players and management staff had clauses in their contracts that netted them large bonuses in the event of qualifying for the Champions League, something that isn't going to happen this year. If the TV contract is worth an extra £20 million per season then I can see at least half of that being used as a transfer budget. It's also worth noting that 'profit from normal operations excluding football trading and depreciation" for 1st July 2012 to 31st June 2013 was £23.4 million.

While we have indeed been frugal over the last 5 years or so, this has been during a period where we were buying land, drawing up plans and carrying out development for both the training ground and stadium site. The recent publication of the financial results indicate that having realised profits from divesting the phase 1 NDP development along with ancilary buildings to the West of the high road to ENIC we are now largely debt free, "negligible net debt" I think was the term used.

Levy has always stated that the new stadium project will be financed entirely separately from the football side of the operation and for once I actually believe him. If we cannot make the stadium pay for itself (as a minimum!) then there is absolutely no point at all in building it. We are at a stage now where we are apparently debt free and probably only require another £250 million to complete the stadium project. If I take a worst case scenario with low estimates on valuations and high estimates on borrowing costs then:

£100 million naming rights deal would leave £150 million to find.
£25 million income from selling the phase 3 site to a developer leaves £125 million to be borrowed.
Borrowing at a punitive rate of 7% would equate to £8.75M interest per annum.
The lower end estimates on the additional income our stadium would generate us each year is £25M.
That would mean completely paying the stadium off in around 5 to 10 years without impacting our existing football budget in any way.

Arsenal's stadium building significantly handicapped them financially for a good decade. ​

It didn't at all.... Take a look at Arsenal's wage bill since they left Highbury and you'll see that their new stadium had the complete opposite effect. Arsenal's huge amount of surplus cash in the bank also demonstrates this. They could've spent some or all of that cash in bank at any point over the last few years but had a board/manager that chose not to....

Perhaps they did this because they wanted to pay off the stadium completely instead of continuing to 'waste' money on interest on their loans? But to say that they hampered themselves financially isn't true at all. Do you think they would've been able to sustain a £150 million yearly wage bill while playing at Highbury?

a much better response than i managed, and i fully agree

 

[milo]

I agree. Even the Arsenal board have regularly said there are significant funds available. Wenger chose not to buy. Wenger's principles mean he prefers purchasing young talent and developing them rather than go for the ready-made superstar. Its his style. Infact, its the occasions when he decides to go big in the transfer market that tend to end up with egg on his face. Arshavin & Reyes were both dissapointing for them and to be fair, Ozil's impact this season has been very dissapointing for them.

It's funny how they always say there is plenty of money to spend around season ticket renewal time. I think that they are quite happy finishing 4th each season and getting into the Champions League and have no intention of spending the huge sums it would take them to bridge the gap to Chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project.

 

[milo]

I disagree with you. The CL windfall was eaten up due to the fact that many of our players and management staff had clauses in their contracts that netted them large bonuses in the event of qualifying for the Champions League, something that isn't going to happen this year. If the TV contract is worth an extra £20 million per season then I can see at least half of that being used as a transfer budget. It's also worth noting that 'profit from normal operations excluding football trading and depreciation" for 1st July 2012 to 31st June 2013 was £23.4 million.

While we have indeed been frugal over the last 5 years or so, this has been during a period where we were buying land, drawing up plans and carrying out development for both the training ground and stadium site. The recent publication of the financial results indicate that having realised profits from divesting the phase 1 NDP development along with ancilary buildings to the West of the high road to ENIC we are now largely debt free, "negligible net debt" I think was the term used.

Levy has always stated that the new stadium project will be financed entirely separately from the football side of the operation and for once I actually believe him. If we cannot make the stadium pay for itself (as a minimum!) then there is absolutely no point at all in building it. We are at a stage now where we are apparently debt free and probably only require another £250 million to complete the stadium project. If I take a worst case scenario with low estimates on valuations and high estimates on borrowing costs then:

£100 million naming rights deal would leave £150 million to find.
£25 million income from selling the phase 3 site to a developer leaves £125 million to be borrowed.
Borrowing at a punitive rate of 7% would equate to £8.75M interest per annum.
The lower end estimates on the additional income our stadium would generate us each year is £25M.
That would mean completely paying the stadium off in around 5 to 10 years without impacting our existing football budget in any way.

Arsenal's stadium building significantly handicapped them financially for a good decade. ​

It didn't at all.... Take a look at Arsenal's wage bill since they left Highbury and you'll see that their new stadium had the complete opposite effect. Arsenal's huge amount of surplus cash in the bank also demonstrates this. They could've spent some or all of that cash in bank at any point over the last few years but had a board/manager that chose not to....

Perhaps they did this because they wanted to pay off the stadium completely instead of continuing to 'waste' money on interest on their loans? But to say that they hampered themselves financially isn't true at all. Do you think they would've been able to sustain a £150 million yearly wage bill while playing at Highbury?

Any increase in TV revenue will be eaten up by an increase in transfer fees and player wages, the same as it has every other time.

 

[Gutter Boy]

someone should start a pool on who will be the first player to cross LVG (assuming he comes, of course)..

my money would be on Adebayor

idle minds and all that..but farking long wait for next season.

Ade and BAE are the only two I can see not being submissive enough for him. AVB purposely assembled a squad who could be forged and made to play to a system - that will suit LVG purposely. He doesn't like superstars, but we don't really have any of them.

He's good with firey young players, e.g. Davids and Kliuvert. So even angry man Rose would probably be ok (if he wasn't such a bad footballer).

Remember the Dutch national team have the biggest problem with egos of about any side anywhere. Our meek lot will be a breeze for him.

He's also already worked with Dembele at AZ and Verts at Ajax (Verts was in the academy when LVG was DoF there), who are possibly two of our more critical players.

 

[Hashegotthesackyet?]

FSW odds have shortened quite considerably today :?:

 

[Baleforce]

FSW odds have shortened quite considerably today :?:

i think id rather him than LVG actually

 

[indianspur]

anyone know LVGs attitude towards ketchup, mayonnaise, chips, Mcdonalds and KFC??...could have a big bearing on how long he is allowed to hang around Tottenham FC

 

[Hashegotthesackyet?]

I certainly wouldn't be against him either, but would be pleased with either.
He's grown on me more since he left, probably made me look at him more since the time we were linked prior to AVB.
I just want to know, it's really ****ing up my productivity at work!

 

[Lily White]

If we are looking fo a new manager then I would want either Martinez or Ancelotti. I wanted Martinez when Harry was sacked and I have a lot of time for Ancelotti.

 

[Spur of the moment]

If we are looking fo a new manager then I would want either Martinez or Ancelotti. I wanted Martinez when Harry was sacked and I have a lot of time for Ancelotti.

Me too. But that boat has likely sailed way over the horizon. Also like you I'd be happy with Ancelotti, but reality is he too is way beyond our reach.

 

[chancer]

If we are looking fo a new manager then I would want either Martinez or Ancelotti. I wanted Martinez when Harry was sacked and I have a lot of time for Ancelotti.

+1 on both your points. And since Martinez is not happening - barring a call from the Bernabeu or OT, he's not leaving Everton - I think CA would be my pick. And there's a good chance those lunatics at RM will dump him at season's end.

I wouldn't be unhappy about LvG, but I have serious concerns about his personality/interpersonal skills/politicking and his age/generation. His positives - his CV and Galactico pulling power for new signings - go without saying.

I also wouldn't be unhappy about Sherwood continuing on the basis that that would be a real revolution for the club - something we haven't tried before - as opposed to the phoney "revolution" of bringing in yet another great white hope as we've been doing for decades.

 

[harr1984]

+1 on both your points. And since Martinez is not happening - barring a call from the Bernabeu or OT, he's not leaving Everton - I think CA would be my pick. And there's a good chance those lunatics at RM will dump him at season's end.

I wouldn't be unhappy about LvG, but I have serious concerns about his personality/interpersonal skills/politicking and his age/generation. His positives - his CV and Galactico pulling power for new signings - go without saying.

I also wouldn't be unhappy about Sherwood continuing on the basis that that would be a real revolution for the club - something we haven't tried before - as opposed to the phoney "revolution" of bringing in yet another great white hope as we've been doing for decades.

Exactly my thoughts.

As for your point re LVG's generation, is he that much older than CA? I have no idea, just wondered considering CA has grey hair although that doesn't necessarily mean anything.....

 

[billyiddo]

Any increase in TV revenue will be eaten up by an increase in transfer fees and player wages, the same as it has every other time.

we haven't seen a rise of this magnitude for some time and id assume that it would take several seasons before the things you mention fall in line with the extra money

 

[Jordinho]

Yeah, i'm not sticking up for the sc** but they've only really fallen away due to having an injury list that has been pretty much as ridiculous as ours. They've simply not been able to compete as unlike Emirates Marketing Project & Chelsea, they can't afford to pay world-class players millions to play for their U21s.

Liverpool would have dropped off just as badly if Suarez, Sturridge, Coutinho and Gerrard had missed significant game time at more or less the same time.

If they weren't paying their kids obscene wages they might have money left over. How much was someone like Frimpong on? £30K? £50K? More?