The owners - where do you sit?

[harr1984]

Look I’ve said he’s done good things for us and we have closed the gap off the pitch to our rivals but i just can’t agree that he’s the best chairman in the game when we’ve not won anything as a club for 15 years. The game isn’t just about spreadsheets. And id argue we got to the CL final in spite of our business model during the poch years not because of it. Also you have to take into account just how big the PL is now. Even West Ham are in the top 20 richest clubs in the world and they are not known for being particularly well run nor do they have any kind of successful history to fall back on so there is an element of the PL clubs being so dominant partly because of the revenue it generates due to its global appeal.

So out of curiosity who are all these amazing chairman that could sustainably take Spurs from mid table mediocrity to consistent top 4 challengers and the only club to consistently break into the top 4 outside the big boys meaning Sky had to make it a 'Big 6'?

Levy has made mistakes for sure on the footballing side, but he's recognised that and getting us back on the model that's served us well. And considering our thirst for trophies, I don't blame him for trying with 'serial winners' Conte and Jose. It was a gamble that didn't pay off, and yet here we are playing some of the best football in the league, competing again at the top of the league and acquiring real quality talent for the team.

We were an Aston Villa, Everton level of team when Levy took over that is the reality - compare sides of that size to us over the Levy period and we've done well. The hardest part is the final yards getting over the finish line, and as much as the League cup wins under George Graham and Ramos were great that didn't mean we were able to kick on to greater things. But Levy's graft has ensured we are flirting with it and with our financial muscle bigger than ever before and with FFP (hopefully) we are fantastically positioned to make that final step not just to win a League cup, but perhaps one of the biggest prizes possible.

Beyond an oil rich chairman in cheat mode, I do not see any chairman where I think 'Jeez, if only we had that chairman we would be knee deep in trophies right now.'....

 

[Bishop]

His kids? No idea how it was set up but very few wipe off a billion+ loan. When they were bought he tried to get it as well.

Well yes he was being forced to sell. Most ppl in that position would attempt to get as much of their money back as possible. Before that that as I said the loans had no maturation date which means there was no expiry for said loans.

Some weird form of inverted Stockholm Syndrome then I guess. He absolutely didn't buy Chelsea altruistically he was in deep do do like litvenyenko and Co.

That isn't the argument. The claim was made that he didn't care when years of evidence and behaviour quite clearly shows otherwise. As I said earlier he did not need to be a Chelsea fan before he purchased them to care about during his ownership. Ange was not not a Tottenham fan, yet I doubt many of us would claim he doesn't care.

Why are we even talking about roman?

He's spilt milk.

I actually have no idea. I just have unquenchable need to correct things that I see as clearly evidentially incorrect.

The idea that Roman didn't care about Chelsea is nonsense. What Roman did at Chelsea doesn't diminish levy and cos work. I don't get the insecurity.

 

[Baleforce]

So out of curiosity who are all these amazing chairman that could sustainably take Spurs from mid table mediocrity to consistent top 4 challengers and the only club to consistently break into the top 4 outside the big boys meaning Sky had to make it a 'Big 6'?

Levy has made mistakes for sure on the footballing side, but he's recognised that and getting us back on the model that's served us well. And considering our thirst for trophies, I don't blame him for trying with 'serial winners' Conte and Jose. It was a gamble that didn't pay off, and yet here we are playing some of the best football in the league, competing again at the top of the league and acquiring real quality talent for the team.

We were an Aston Villa, Everton level of team when Levy took over that is the reality - compare sides of that size to us over the Levy period and we've done well. The hardest part is the final yards getting over the finish line, and as much as the League cup wins under George Graham and Ramos were great that didn't mean we were able to kick on to greater things. But Levy's graft has ensured we are flirting with it and with our financial muscle bigger than ever before and with FFP (hopefully) we are fantastically positioned to make that final step not just to win a League cup, but perhaps one of the biggest prizes possible.

Beyond an oil rich chairman in cheat mode, I do not see any chairman where I think 'Jeez, if only we had that chairman we would be knee deep in trophies right now.'....

We were a long way behind Villa when they took over, they were a solid top half team, we were bottom half in the 3 years before ENIC took over, we were Leicester, Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Southampton. The company we kept would often be fighting relegation soon after.

 

[Jurgen the German]

We have been to enough finals and semifinals in these 15 years. The reason we didn't win any silverware wasn't because we had brick teams as a result of Levy's management. It was because of how we played in particular games.

And I beg to differ, but the game is also about spreadsheets. Because it's these spreadsheets that will allow you to purchase the players you want and pay their wages so that you can achieve success on the pitch. Levy took the long view and created a high turnover, self-sustaining club that lives within its means and this is now beginning to pay dividends. Even in spite of some catastrophic signings that tinkled money away, we are still in a better position than almost all our PL rivals. Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Chelsea, Arsenal, United, Villa all need to sell before they buy to balance the books. Meanwhile, we've had the 4th highest net spend in the past 5 years and aren't even batting an eyelash.

And although Levy has been extremely successful in increasing our revenues and spending power, he also banked on the fact that the sustainability rules that are finally showing some teeth will prevent our main rivals from continuing their spending habits, thus bringing us close to parity with them. Even if the latter hadn't panned out, we'd still be in a great spot.

But Levy is the chairman, if we are successful then he is partly responsible. If we’re not then again, he’s partly responsible.

 

[Jurgen the German]

So out of curiosity who are all these amazing chairman that could sustainably take Spurs from mid table mediocrity to consistent top 4 challengers and the only club to consistently break into the top 4 outside the big boys meaning Sky had to make it a 'Big 6'?

Levy has made mistakes for sure on the footballing side, but he's recognised that and getting us back on the model that's served us well. And considering our thirst for trophies, I don't blame him for trying with 'serial winners' Conte and Jose. It was a gamble that didn't pay off, and yet here we are playing some of the best football in the league, competing again at the top of the league and acquiring real quality talent for the team.

We were an Aston Villa, Everton level of team when Levy took over that is the reality - compare sides of that size to us over the Levy period and we've done well. The hardest part is the final yards getting over the finish line, and as much as the League cup wins under George Graham and Ramos were great that didn't mean we were able to kick on to greater things. But Levy's graft has ensured we are flirting with it and with our financial muscle bigger than ever before and with FFP (hopefully) we are fantastically positioned to make that final step not just to win a League cup, but perhaps one of the biggest prizes possible.

Beyond an oil rich chairman in cheat mode, I do not see any chairman where I think 'Jeez, if only we had that chairman we would be knee deep in trophies right now.'....

At the end of the day I can’t say that a club who has won zero trophies in the last 15 years has the best chairman in the league. We can debate who is and who isn’t all day long but it’s like advocating that the best manager or coach in the world is someone who has zero trophies or the best player in the world also has zero trophies. In the conversation for sure but not above others who have actually won things.

 

[Baleforce]

At the end of the day I can’t say that a club who has won zero trophies in the last 15 years has the best chairman in the league. We can debate who is and who isn’t all day long but it’s like advocating that the best manager or coach in the world is someone who has zero trophies or the best player in the world also has zero trophies. In the conversation for sure but not above others who have actually won things.

Surely it’s all relative, you can be a crap coach in the right club and win trophies.

 

[Lilbaz]

At the end of the day I can’t say that a club who has won zero trophies in the last 15 years has the best chairman in the league. We can debate who is and who isn’t all day long but it’s like advocating that the best manager or coach in the world is someone who has zero trophies or the best player in the world also has zero trophies. In the conversation for sure but not above others who have actually won things.

Utds chairman won a trophy last season. Does that make them better? I'd argue brighton and brentfords have done better with the resources available.
Liverpool are in with a shout. They have won trophies.

City on cheat mode with the best manager in the world. Nope. Not exactly the most difficult job in the world.

Parish at palace has done a great job.

No-one else sticks out.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Utds chairman won a trophy last season. Does that make them better? I'd argue brighton and brentfords have done better with the resources available.
Liverpool are in with a shout. They have won trophies.

City on cheat mode with the best manager in the world. Nope. Not exactly the most difficult job in the world.

Parish at palace has done a great job.

No-one else sticks out.

I see your point and I don’t disagree but are we really saying the chairman with no trophies in 15 years is the best in the league? Because that is the point I was originally responding to. I wasn’t arguing that he isn’t a good chairman, just that he isn’t the best.

 

[Lilbaz]

I see your point and I don’t disagree but are we really saying the chairman with no trophies in 15 years is the best in the league? Because that is the point I was originally responding to. I wasn’t arguing that he isn’t a good chairman, just that he isn’t the best.

I dunno and it doesn't really matter. But there are very few chairmen that can improve a club sustainably over a number of years without a lot of overfunding by owners.

Cut out the overfunding (as now seems to be happening) a new picture might emerge. Different teams winning trophies.

Champions league has been a massive skew over the last 30 years. For all of european football. Uefa should have made it that far more of the money was split with smaller teams. Nations buying football teams is just another blight on the game.

 

[tommysvr]

Why do we need to rank chairman? Daniel Levy is good for Tottenham. Bothered about where he fits compared to other chairman and teams.

 

[Lilbaz]

Why do we need to rank chairman? Daniel Levy is good for Tottenham. Bothered about where he fits compared to other chairman and teams.

It's a discussion forum. Someone brought it up. We discuss it.

Could talk about something else if you'd like?

 

[alekaras]

At the end of the day I can’t say that a club who has won zero trophies in the last 15 years has the best chairman in the league. We can debate who is and who isn’t all day long but it’s like advocating that the best manager or coach in the world is someone who has zero trophies or the best player in the world also has zero trophies. In the conversation for sure but not above others who have actually won things.

All a chairman can do is set up the club for it to be successful. Levy has definitely done that, as can be evidenced by the fact we have made several finals and semis (not one, like a Wigan or a Hull) and have been a CL and Europa regular.

As I said in another post, fans have no patience. They want instant success. They judge Levy on a season or two, or a transfer window or two, rather than on the totality of his work. Well, absent money doping, success is going to be a long process with ups and downs. But as long as the trajectory is upward, which it has been, that's what matters. The good thing is that it looks like we are nearing the end of that process and 10 years from now even those that have been slagging Levy will look back and hopefully recognize what he has achieved.

 

[greatwhitenorf]

Levy getting acknowledged by The Athletic for his steady hand at the helm. The irony of this piece is that it's written by Jack Pitt-Brooke, well known to be a Manc City fan.

What other Premier League clubs' FFP issues tell us about Daniel Levy and Spurs

Spurs have been committed to sticking to Premier League and UEFA rules on finance - a position that has now been justified more than ever

theathletic.com

 

[Bishop]

Why do we need to rank chairman? Daniel Levy is good for Tottenham. Bothered about where he fits compared to other chairman and teams.

The fans are desperate for us to be the best at something. As that's clearly not been football, instead it's the chairman. You see it with ground as well, how much is spoken of it possibly being the best ground in the world. It's reflected greatness.

 

[tommysvr]

The fans are desperate for us to be the best at something. As that's clearly not been football, instead it's the chairman. You see it with ground as well, how much is spoken of it possibly being the best ground in the world. It's reflected greatness.

Yeah, probably something like that...maybe a social media influence? The obsession with having the lowest net spend, suddenly directors and scouts are as famous as players. It's all a bit weird to me.

 

[glasgowspur]

Is levy the best chairman in football, possibly, but probably not.
Is he the best chairman for our club, I would say yes.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Yeah, probably something like that...maybe a social media influence? The obsession with having the lowest net spend, suddenly directors and scouts are as famous as players. It's all a bit weird to me.

Re the net spend, as Bishop said, we don’t have tangible success i.e. trophies to point to. Liverpool fans used to boast about their spending when they weren’t winning anything, until they started to win things again, funny that.

 

[Baleforce]

Is levy the best chairman in football, possibly, but probably not.
Is he the best chairman for our club, I would say yes.

It’s likely that the objective “best chairman in football” is at a small club surviving against the odds.

There are well run clubs all over the country who will never get a sniff of PL, let alone CL. They can’t all be failures.

 

[Raziel]

I see your point and I don’t disagree but are we really saying the chairman with no trophies in 15 years is the best in the league? Because that is the point I was originally responding to. I wasn’t arguing that he isn’t a good chairman, just that he isn’t the best.

Really? of course you can make that connection

If Luton finished in top 6 for next 15 years, built a new stadium, new training facilities and regularly had WC players in their squad while staying within spending rules under the same chairman, you don't think that chairman would have a case for best chairman in the league? regardless of if they never got past a cup QF?

Clearly an OTT example, but it is context that matters

Lets judge Levy on results

Off-field, this isn't even a fight, and what's interesting here is he's done better than clubs that got free stadiums (West Ham & City) or even clubs with cheat mode on
- Improvements to infrastructure under his time -> #1 in league, likely #1 or 2 globally (Madrid's new place? arguably influenced by ours)
- Commercial position of club -> #1 in Europe (do we need to argue this one?), match day revenue, most profitable, improvements in top 10 global club position, etc.

On-field (and here context matters)
- PL results, only been outside top 6 twice in last 16 years, been in CL 5 of last 8, 2nd +two 3rd place finishes in a league with cheat mode City & Chelsea. Context -> best run of consistent finishes in the clubs history (never been better), could/should we have won at least 1? yes but in context Spurs has won 2 league titles in 141 years, so Levy has another 50 years to win one to keep up with average.
- We have firmly established ourselves in top 6 (probably invented the top 6 idea), actually finished above every team in the league at least once, 6+ times over clubs like United, Pool, Arsenal, put ourselves out of the league of clubs we were competing with in 2001 (Everton, West Ham, Villa, etc.)
- Cups/Trophies, 1 Trophy, 5 runner ups, 6 SF's, 10 QF's, so on average we get to at least a QF each year, and again re context, we have won less than 20 trophies in 141 years, so Levy is about 2 short/behind the average club output

Peer comparison (someone has to the best against?)
- United & Arsenal have squandered their dominance of league/trophies position from the 00's decade, yes, still won more than us, but both clubs are worse off (declined), Chelsea almost went bust, had the RA era and now who knows? Liverpool is probably the success story of the last decade but hard to say that was a 20 year plan, lucked out on not carrying the debt of previous owners, City is a nation state funding, hopefully we don't need to have this conversation
- Nobody outside the top 6 is even in the equation, the outlier short frame success (e.g. Leicester) actually highlights the difficulty/risks in breaking into top level
- The interesting part is I'm trying to find a club that has had the same owners for the last 20+ years, that in itself says something.

I get Levy isn't perfect, they have been mistakes, there have been things all of us have disagreed with but if he isn't the best chairman in the league over the last 20+ years, who is (and what data shows that?)

 

[Jurgen the German]

Really? of course you can make that connection

If Luton finished in top 6 for next 15 years, built a new stadium, new training facilities and regularly had WC players in their squad while staying within spending rules under the same chairman, you don't think that chairman would have a case for best chairman in the league? regardless of if they never got past a cup QF?

Clearly an OTT example, but it is context that matters

Lets judge Levy on results

Off-field, this isn't even a fight, and what's interesting here is he's done better than clubs that got free stadiums (West Ham & City) or even clubs with cheat mode on
- Improvements to infrastructure under his time -> #1 in league, likely #1 or 2 globally (Madrid's new place? arguably influenced by ours)
- Commercial position of club -> #1 in Europe (do we need to argue this one?), match day revenue, most profitable, improvements in top 10 global club position, etc.

On-field (and here context matters)
- PL results, only been outside top 6 twice in last 16 years, been in CL 5 of last 8, 2nd +two 3rd place finishes in a league with cheat mode City & Chelsea. Context -> best run of consistent finishes in the clubs history (never been better), could/should we have won at least 1? yes but in context Spurs has won 2 league titles in 141 years, so Levy has another 50 years to win one to keep up with average.
- We have firmly established ourselves in top 6 (probably invented the top 6 idea), actually finished above every team in the league at least once, 6+ times over clubs like United, Pool, Arsenal, put ourselves out of the league of clubs we were competing with in 2001 (Everton, West Ham, Villa, etc.)
- Cups/Trophies, 1 Trophy, 5 runner ups, 6 SF's, 10 QF's, so on average we get to at least a QF each year, and again re context, we have won less than 20 trophies in 141 years, so Levy is about 2 short/behind the average club output

Peer comparison (someone has to the best against?)
- United & Arsenal have squandered their dominance of league/trophies position from the 00's decade, yes, still won more than us, but both clubs are worse off (declined), Chelsea almost went bust, had the RA era and now who knows? Liverpool is probably the success story of the last decade but hard to say that was a 20 year plan, lucked out on not carrying the debt of previous owners, City is a nation state funding, hopefully we don't need to have this conversation
- Nobody outside the top 6 is even in the equation, the outlier short frame success (e.g. Leicester) actually highlights the difficulty/risks in breaking into top level
- The interesting part is I'm trying to find a club that has had the same owners for the last 20+ years, that in itself says something.

I get Levy isn't perfect, they have been mistakes, there have been things all of us have disagreed with but if he isn't the best chairman in the league over the last 20+ years, who is (and what data shows that?)

On the commercial side I’d say he is, but the football side is just as important and it’s my opinion that the best chairman, player, coach etc has to have some form of silverware in order to claim they are the best in the league/world.