That's including Porro and Kulusevski and I don't think it is fair to include them in Ange's time.Remarkable how many of you will just lie out of your arse and make yourselves look like idiots rather than do a quick google.
Liverpool have spent more have they? They spent nothing this summer while we racked up another 150m on this manager.
Here's the net spend table since Ange signed:
2nd behind only United. In terms of total spend, again 2nd behind only Chelsea.
Now kindly put up some evidence for your claim that "weve spent less than our rivals" or fuck off.
-
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...
Manager Ange Postecoglou
- Thread starter The Fighting Cock
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Remarkable how many of you will just lie out of your arse and make yourselves look like idiots rather than do a quick google.
Liverpool have spent more have they? They spent nothing this summer while we racked up another 150m on this manager.
Here's the net spend table since Ange signed:
2nd behind only United. In terms of total spend, again 2nd behind only Chelsea.
Now kindly put up some evidence for your claim that "weve spent less than our rivals" or fuck off.
Welcome back buddy, missed you the last couple of weeks.
Thanks for bringing some data to the debate.
Here's my simplified approach to bringing wages into the equation: divide net transfer balance by 5 then add in wages. This is based on the simplified assumption that purchase costs are spread over 5 years. Accounting for sales is trickier depending on years remaining on the contract but 1/5th is not a ridiculous assumption on average.
So this then gives an approximate total squad spend per season:
| Team | Amortised Net Transfers 23/24 | Squad Wages 23/24 | Squad Cost 23/24 | Amortised Net Transfers 24/25 | Squad Wages 24/25 | Squad Cost 24/25 | Total Squad Spend 23/24 + 24/25 | Current Table Position |
| Manchester Utd | 28.8 | 243.6 | 272.3 | 22.3 | 223.3 | 245.6 | 517.9 | 12 (-11) |
| Manchester City | 27.6 | 238.0 | 265.6 | -23.2 | 242.9 | 219.7 | 485.3 | 2 (=) |
| Woolwich | 33.2 | 196.5 | 229.7 | 5.0 | 207.1 | 212.1 | 441.9 | 4 (-1) |
| Chelsea | 37.2 | 185.9 | 223.0 | 8.1 | 206.0 | 214.1 | 437.1 | 3 (+1) |
| Liverpool | 22.3 | 161.3 | 183.5 | -1.0 | 155.0 | 154.0 | 337.5 | 1 (+4) |
| Tottenham | 30.3 | 139.1 | 169.4 | 18.7 | 126.1 | 144.8 | 314.2 | 6 (=) |
| Aston Villa | 15.8 | 138.7 | 154.5 | 6.2 | 129.1 | 135.3 | 289.8 | 8 (-1) |
| Newcastle Utd | 20.7 | 100.0 | 120.7 | -1.6 | 124.3 | 122.7 | 243.4 | 10 (-2) |
| West Ham | -5.2 | 112.8 | 107.6 | 19.9 | 108.6 | 128.5 | 236.1 | 14 (-5) |
| Crystal Palace | 13.6 | 81.7 | 95.3 | -4.6 | 84.0 | 79.4 | 174.7 | 12 (-2) |
| Nott'ham Forest | 9.0 | 85.3 | 94.3 | 3.8 | 76.4 | 80.2 | 174.4 | 7 (+4) |
| Fulham | 4.0 | 78.9 | 82.9 | 4.6 | 82.3 | 86.9 | 169.8 | 9 (+3) |
| Brighton | -15.9 | 73.9 | 58.0 | 36.6 | 73.0 | 109.6 | 167.5 | 5 (+8) |
| Bournemouth | 25.2 | 64.9 | 90.1 | 7.7 | 65.8 | 73.5 | 163.5 | 13 (+1) |
| Everton | -8.5 | 93.5 | 85.0 | -6.7 | 83.4 | 76.7 | 161.8 | 15 (=) |
| Brentford | 12.4 | 47.3 | 59.7 | 4.7 | 49.9 | 54.6 | 114.3 | 11 (+5) |
| Wolves | -15.0 | 63.7 | 48.7 | -7.6 | 64.0 | 56.4 | 105.1 | 17 (=) |
All figures €M. Sources: transfermarkt for net transfer spend, fbref for squad wages estimates.
If you add in manager salaries then that bumps City and Arse up a bit but not too much change elsewhere.
There's a strong correlation between total squad costs and table position so far this season. Man United the massive under-performers per the above, especially since they finished 3rd in 2022/23. Brighton, Brentford and Forest doing well at the other end on limited resources.
Ange is definitely being backed but doesn't have quite the same checkbook-management resources as the top 4 on the above list.
Edit: here's a graph:
Last edited:
Net spend only tells half the story - look at wages too
its crazy isn't it.Remarkable how many of you will just lie out of your arse and make yourselves look like idiots rather than do a quick google.
Liverpool have spent more have they? They spent nothing this summer while we racked up another 150m on this manager.
Here's the net spend table since Ange signed:
2nd behind only United. In terms of total spend, again 2nd behind only Chelsea.
Now kindly put up some evidence for your claim that "weve spent less than our rivals" or fuck off.
I thought Porro and Kulu were already here.
Its not 50-50 on Ange. He pulled that out of his hole
Technically few paid post Ange joining.
The mental gymnastics in this one… Most of the players we bought under Postecoglou were with improving the first team in mind, they’re no "kids for the future" in the sense that we bought them on their potential rather than their ability. We barely bought players over 30 in the last decade anyway.
At least 90% of supporters want to give Ange a chance IMO, maybe even high 90s.
Would be interesting to hear your judgement on how we did last weekend despite losing all those bar the GK
Great stuff.
Here is my old school list of our ins and outs under Ange. Net spend £124.5m.
| VICARIO | 16.5 | 27/06/2023 | Bowden, Jamie Patrick | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| MADDISON | 40 | 28/06/2023 | Cesay, Kallum | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| Egan-Riley, Roman | 0 | 04/07/2023 | Fagan-Walcott, Malachi | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| James, Herbie | 0 | 04/07/2023 | Mathurin, Roshaun | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| Logan, Callum | 0 | 04/07/2023 | Muir, Marqes | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| SOLOMON | 0 | 11/07/2023 | Mundle, Romaine | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| PHILLIPS | 2 | 05/08/2023 | Bloxham, Thomas | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| VDV | 30 | 08/08/2023 | Bryan-Waugh, Brandon | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| VELIZ | 13 | 08/08/2023 | Owen, Riley | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| JOHNSON | 45 | 01/09/2023 | DANJUMA (L) | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| VUSKOVIC | 12 | 25/09/2023 | LENGLET (L) | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| WERNER | 0 | 09/01/2024 | LUCAS | 0 | 15/06/2023 | |
| DRAGUSIN | 22 | 10/01/2024 | Mundle | 0.5 | 27/06/2023 | |
| BERGVALL | 8 | 02/02/2024 | WINKS | 10 | 01/07/2023 | |
| Thompson | 0.5 | 19/04/2024 | KANE | 100 | 12/08/2023 | |
| WERNER (L) | 8.5 | 28/05/2024 | White | 0 | 01/09/2023 | |
| Feeney | 0.5 | 01/07/2024 | SANCHEZ | 9 | 04/09/2023 | |
| GRAY | 40 | 03/07/2024 | Paskotski | 0.5 | 06/09/2023 | |
| YANG | 3 | 28/07/2024 | LLORIS | 0 | 01/01/2024 | |
| SOLANKE | 57 | 10/08/2024 | DIER | 3 | 11/01/2024 | |
| ODOBERT | 25 | 16/08/2024 | PERISIC | 0 | 19/01/2024 | |
| Lyons-Foster | 0 | 14/02/2024 | ||||
| TANGANGA | 0 | 05/06/2024 | ||||
| SESSEGNON | 0 | 05/06/2024 | ||||
| Sayers | 0 | 05/06/2024 | ||||
| NDOMBELE | 0 | 12/06/2024 | ||||
| Willhoft-King | 0.5 | 01/07/2024 | ||||
| RODON | 10 | 02/07/2024 | ||||
| Parrott | 6.5 | 13/07/2024 | ||||
| HOJBJERG | 12 | 22/07/2024 | ||||
| Santiago | 0.5 | 30/07/2024 | ||||
| John | 0.5 | 06/08/2024 | ||||
| ROYAL | 12 | 12/08/2024 | ||||
| SKIPP | 20 | 19/08/2024 | ||||
| Soonsup-Bell | 0 | 22/08/2024 | ||||
| Lo Celso | 8.5 | 30/08/2024 | ||||
| Simons | 0 | 22/10/2024 | ||||
| Clarke SELL ON | 5 | |||||
| TOTAL BOUGHT | 323 | TOTAL SOLD | 198.5 | |||
| NET SPEND | 124.5 |
Summer 2024 ins and outs:
| Thompson | 0.5 | 19/04/2024 | TANGANGA | 0 | 05/06/2024 | |
| WERNER (L) | 8.5 | 28/05/2024 | SESSEGNON | 0 | 05/06/2024 | |
| Feeney | 0.5 | 01/07/2024 | Sayers | 0 | 05/06/2024 | |
| GRAY | 40 | 03/07/2024 | NDOMBELE | 0 | 12/06/2024 | |
| YANG | 3 | 28/07/2024 | Willhoft-King | 0.5 | 01/07/2024 | |
| SOLANKE | 57 | 10/08/2024 | RODON | 10 | 02/07/2024 | |
| ODOBERT | 25 | 16/08/2024 | Parrott | 6.5 | 13/07/2024 | |
| HOJBJERG | 12 | 22/07/2024 | ||||
| Santiago | 0.5 | 30/07/2024 | ||||
| John | 0.5 | 06/08/2024 | ||||
| ROYAL | 12 | 12/08/2024 | ||||
| SKIPP | 20 | 19/08/2024 | ||||
| Soonsup-Bell | 0 | 22/08/2024 | ||||
| Lo Celso | 8.5 | 30/08/2024 | ||||
| Simons | 0 | 22/10/2024 | ||||
| Clarke SELL ON | 5 | |||||
| TOTAL BOUGHT | 134.5 | TOTAL SOLD | 75.5 | |||
| NET SPEND | 59 |
It just means we can reel out the no vicario excuse should we suffer any perceived bad moments, it should make this thread a bit more quieter and we won't even need to lose our passwords by accident!!
Just means everyone is gonna flog to the ENIC thread though
Long term its probably a good thing for us. Means we have to sign a proper good GK in January now, which is something we would not have done otherwise. I guess it would have been a lot worse if we signed no GK in January and then had the Vicario injury. Plus we should have two really good goalkeepers next season then.It just means we can reel out the no vicario excuse should we suffer any perceived bad moments, it should make this thread a bit more quieter and we won't even need to lose our passwords by accident!!
Just means everyone is gonna flog to the ENIC thread though
There I found a positive!!
Crazy the amount we spent on Ndombele and got virtually nothing back, and no fee.
I think he is the worst signing in the history of the club.
I literally said days before the game that it was a free pass.