So just to get this clear, you really do think it is mere coincidence that the clubs at the top of their leagues around Europe are those that spend the most on transfers and wages in their league?
If this argument falls down completely then where are all of these other clubs, equally or more budget constrained that we have been, who have been able to balance against the budget disparity as well as we have?
If having a bigger budget is completely irrelevant as you say it is, then why on earth has Levy embarked on such a risky and disruptive activity of building a new stadium, making us homeless in the interim when our squad was perhaps at its very peak for success? Why do we bother putting a sponsor's name on the front of our shirts (especially as they look so much nicer without)? Why do we bother going thousands of miles around the globe to play pre-season friendlies? Surely all of this is pointless as there are these magic ways to balance against the budget disparity that only Tottenham Hotspur has the magic formula for?
I feel like you are being deliberately quite difficult here, but perhaps Im just not explaining myself properly.
I have already stated the richest clubs buy the best/finished article players, and thats how they operate. Unless you are just skimming the post and missing that point, I think you should accept I am agreeing with you that traditionally the biggest banks end up in the better positions and with most success.
There is no denial of this.
The point I have made, is that we have operated in such a way as to mitigate that issue. Our MO explicitly recognises the issues presented by richer clubs, and finds its own solution to leveling the playing field.
Would you agree?
And if so - if we operate in a way to deliberately negate higher budgets - can you see that your insistence on our budget is essentially an irrelevance?
If all things were equal, everyone operated the same way, and budgets were the only variable - then yes you would be onto something. My view is that that is not the case, and as compelling as you think the numbers are - they miss the point.
Levy has embarked on what he has to increase our earning/spending potential, as you well know. Though Im not sure what you think it proves. Why wouldnt we want to grow our potential as a club and close the gap financially? Surely its more of an advantage to add to what we already do.
Nobody ever said the way we have worked to date was the only way we should. I think its pretty obvious its what we needed to do to compete given our resource - why on earth could we not simultaneously also want to increase our resource?
Sorry - I wasn't aware that we had qualified for the CL in those two seasons before Poch arrived.... To be fair I did sleep through a lot of AVB's time at the club so maybe I simply missed it?
I agree that half of the players that ended up becoming our best players were here when Pochettino arrived. However those players certainly were not (with the probable exception of Vertonghen) before Pochettino arrived. Do you feel that those players were were already considered to be top class players?
Equally if you feel that Pochettino doesn't deserve any credit for developing those players, then can I assume that you feel it doesn't really doesn't matter who manages our club?
AVBs second season/the Timmeh fiasco was probably the lowest point in the last 10 years.
AVBs first season missed 4th by a point, on the final day. Was very close the CL.
Redknapp also got us 4th twice, you failed to note. In more competitive premier league seasons, IMO. And depending on your view, maybe a worse squad too.
So its not like Poch getting us to the CL is anything new. It actually took Poch until his third attempt to exceed what Redknapp did in his first (second to match it) in the CL.
The players? I think for the most part they were on their way to being top players. I cant think of any immediately coming to mind as having developed in excess of what I thought they would. I dont think we can actually quantify just what impact Poch did/didnt have. Which is exactly why I raised the point, people just speaking as if truth these players were developed into what they are by Poch - as if they wouldnt have been as good without him. I really dont think we can treat that as a truth.
I do think it matters who manages the club, of course I do. Mostly because I dont boil the job down to "developing players" and thats it. And while thats where youve tried to box me in, I doubt you actually believe that either.
Awesome. You agree that it's not easy to do what we have done. We're getting somewhere.
What Leicester did was amazing. All credit to them. That was a fairytale season. The fact that they were a 5,000 to 1 shot though shows just how difficult and unexpected doing this is. The fact that they then dropped out of the top 4 for the next few seasons that immediately followed also showed how hard it is to sustain a place punching above your weight.
Liverpool did fantastically well to reach the CL final last year. I'm not sure where their £150 million spending and £240 million wage bill has them in European terms - I would imagine top 5 and top 8? That team they overcame in the final to win it also did really well to usurp all those other richer clubs right?
I have never, not once, claimed what we have done has been easy. Yet another part, of yet another post, that has me wondering if you even read what I write before replying.
Leicester disprove your point that budgets are the be all end all.
The prove mine that a long term strategy pays.
I forgot to mention us in that final, it occurred to me afterwards. So 2 of the not at the top teams made the final. What excuse those richer ones with all their money?
And I thought it interesting - Liverpools wage bill is of course very high and they pay too much imo. Actually their net transfer spend is, I believe, less than you might expect. Its a little disingenuous to claom their £150m of spending, without mentioning their sales, wouldnt you say? Unless thats net?
And then you have to ask - why didnt they spend anything this summer? Is it because they dont actually have as much to spend as people think? Because they already blew their budget?
Ill never deny Liverpool are a massive club, on and off the field, but Im not sure they really count as a genuine big spender. They have more in common with us than the biggest fish, IMO.
So let me get this right. You are saying that the players at both Southampton and Spurs didn't actually turn out to be that great when they left Southampton and Spurs and you suspect that they looked good because Pochettino has an incredibly effective system. Does that not tell you that Pochettino must therefore be a very good manager? Isn't that what every manager strives for? A team to be better than the sum of their parts?
I agree that Daniel Levy has been a very good chairman for this club. However it is 18 years since he came into Spurs. Levy has made 10 managerial appointments in that time. Only one of those managers has achieved even back to back Champions League finishes.
I think Levy has done fantastically well to grown our club and he will eventually leave it in a far better place than it was when he took it over. However I think Pochettino has played an at least equal part in us changing from a top 6 club into a top 4 club. As I have said before I think he deserves a chance to turn around our current under-performance before we turn to somebody else and ask them to attempt to get our club to continue to consistently punch above its weight.
Pochettino is a very good manager. Again, not something I have ever denied. In fact, until this season - if you were at all paying attention - you would note that I have been a huge advocate and defender of him.
So what exactly is your point?
Levy has been up and down. In saying he was the most important part of our development, I am not saying he is perfect and has never made mistakes. However, you do him a compete and absolute disservice in even trying to compare Pochettinos impact to his.
In those 18 years Spurs have gone in only one direction. Pochettino (a Levy decision) has played a big part in it, but IMHO - if Poch left tonight - we will still continue on that trajectory in the coming years. Because Levy is at the helm.
Does Poch deserve a chance? As much as we can afford, yes - but it needs to be based not on sentiment or prior achievement but of signs of recovery NOW. IMO.
It is clear some are too emotional about it and their love and affection for Poch leads to their view.
It is clear some think that because he WAS good, he WILL BE good at some (unspecified) point in the future.
Both of these types of people have, I feel, found a huge array of reasons to justify that stance.
For me, all I want is to see Poch getting back to the good stuff he did before. I think he is underperforming massively. And I mean
HE. I think many of the issues/constraints/things going on around the team and club (that people use to excuse him) are well within his power to put right or over come. And Im not seeing him do it.
And THAT is my sole issue here. Im not anti Poch. Im not blind to his successes. Im not blind to his good work. In fact Im all to aware of it - I want him to get back to that.