-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
For your support in getting the Geordie in the bin
I'll flip that around, you're fine with the rule makers imposing spending limits, but you have an issue with their sound decision making when it comes to sponsorship deals and transfers?
Ummm....yeah.
I can see what they're trying to do with the spending limits. I can see what they're allowing with the dodgy sponsorship approvals.
Moreover, I'm not the one crying about them on another team's forum.
I'm not sure this is the gotcha you think it is.
Deleted member 13260
Guest
We are the only club(?) that has 'done it the right way' and been able to come from mid table, to hanging around the top for more than the odd year. One of my proudest moments of a Spurs fan was beating City to Champions League football with Redknapp once their cheating had already started. A big 'fuck you' to them, albeit for 1 season and NICE TROPHY etc.
Newcastle can never do that.
We signed well, coached well and played well. It was the result of sustained good work by the club, with ups and downs along the way. As our status grew, the incoming player profiles grew too.
Newcastle can never do that.
Newcastle don't or won't charge London ticket prices and unfortunately for them the club is based in Newcastle - so realistically they can't attract a Bale or a Van der Vaart as easily. They need to throw salaries at them, and I would have a slight suspicion a few 'off the books' dealings that go on too.
For me, the Premier League need to bring in a salary cap. 100k p/w or something, then allow 3 ish un capped players per squad. Man City have 15 players earning over 100k p/w. If they were given the choice of 100k at City or 150k at Villa, Spurs, Newcastle for example - they probably take the 150k.
Just need to stop this ridiculous pooling of all the best talent to financially doped clubs. FFP isn't working. Talent ought to be better distributed and with the current setup it's never going to happen. Ultimately after money, owners, everything - the game comes down to 11vs11 men. Although I think the MLS drafting system is flawed, there is something to be said about attempted talent distribution.
Newcastle can never do that.
We signed well, coached well and played well. It was the result of sustained good work by the club, with ups and downs along the way. As our status grew, the incoming player profiles grew too.
Newcastle can never do that.
Newcastle don't or won't charge London ticket prices and unfortunately for them the club is based in Newcastle - so realistically they can't attract a Bale or a Van der Vaart as easily. They need to throw salaries at them, and I would have a slight suspicion a few 'off the books' dealings that go on too.
For me, the Premier League need to bring in a salary cap. 100k p/w or something, then allow 3 ish un capped players per squad. Man City have 15 players earning over 100k p/w. If they were given the choice of 100k at City or 150k at Villa, Spurs, Newcastle for example - they probably take the 150k.
Just need to stop this ridiculous pooling of all the best talent to financially doped clubs. FFP isn't working. Talent ought to be better distributed and with the current setup it's never going to happen. Ultimately after money, owners, everything - the game comes down to 11vs11 men. Although I think the MLS drafting system is flawed, there is something to be said about attempted talent distribution.
The problem is the Premier League doesn't exist in a vacuum like North American sports. Any change like that would need to be implemented Europe wide, and this could prove tricky.
Lets not forget the 'love it' bottle job
The increase of spending comes from wealthy owners having FFP wriggle room due to over a decade of parsimony from the previous owner who had no ambition.
The lurch from Relegation to Champions League owed as much to the poor performances of Liverpool, Chelsea and yourselves as it did to our growth. Had you three had anything like a normal season we would not have got that last Champions League spot.
You don't seem ok with the sponsorship deals. What with calling them dodgy and all that.
DId all the teams in between have a shit year too so.
Yeah you've misread what has been written.
I'm ok with what they're trying to do about spending limits. I'm not ok with their decisions about your dodgy deals.
You're just another fan of an oil club, whining that you're not allowed to emulate the last oil club while simultaniously saying you don't want to act like an oil club. All while acting like an oil club anyway.
You really think there's nothing fishy about your huge increase in spending and your fake sponsorship deals? Fine. Whatever. But I think we're all getting bored of it now.
Which teams in between? The ones between the CL spots and the clubs usually occupying them? No, they had good years because they finished above where you'd expect. Some of the clubs that finished below you had terrible seasons by their standards. Leeds and Leicester would have expected to finish around midtable, or at least comfortably safe of the relegation conversation.
Deleted member 13260
Guest
How many European clubs realistically would that affect anyway, like 5?
The Premier League are the pace setter for all European football. If we were to bring in some form of salary capping there would be a ripple effect. The cap could be tiered even, but set to still easily keep the Premier League the overall most attractive league.
Which was my point, I'm not ok with what the spending limits mean, regardless of their original intent (which was safeguarding the future of clubs against bad owners). I am ok that, given the restrictions and the rapid rule changes to further stymie any progress deemed too quick, the Sela deal represents fair market value and the ASM deal was a fair price too.
Leicesters were also handicapped by cutting back spending because they were close to ffp.they cut back as did wolves.
I don't want to emulate Man City or Chelsea. I've been consistent on that. I've also been consistent on saying that a spend cap is absolutely a thing the PL should have. I've even been consistent in saying that transfer budgets should only be what a club can afford.
I don't think it's fishy that new owners with ambition and the means to achieve it are using whatever room in the FFP envelope to strengthen the Newcastle squad, no. That's not fishy, that's the same thing that's happened at clubs after a takeover since time immemorial.
The PSR as it stands is protectionist, it benefits the biggest clubs the most and anyone wanting to challenge them the least. The same teams who tried to form the SuperLeague, because despite dominating the English and European footballing landscapes, it's not enough and they wanted to ringfence themselves away from any threats.
But that's why no-one likes you.
Your way round says to everyone else 'Fuck you all! We now have disgusting and rich owners and want to spend his dirty, blood soaked money as we see fit! Wah for trying to stop us with your rules (even though it'll stop us collapsing when our scumbag owners get bored and move on). Have a look at these new sponsorships we've just achieved - yes they're all companies with links to Saudi but I think you'll find they are fine and we can all move on! Your approval means I can use them as examples of how well we're doing commercially on the forums of other teams!'
Pathetic.
All the sponsorships are fair value, but for some weird reason only companies with the same parent company were willing and able to pay them.
It's all very legit and above board, honest.
It's all very legit and above board, honest.