Levy's tough negotiating skills have also been to the detriment of the club. We have lost a few great players because of his haggling over a few hundred quid. Most certainly it has cost us champions league football on more than 1 occasion. I agree we are on the brink of a top 4 and the only way we are going to break into that top 4 is to consistently buy game changing players. I do think we bought wisely with the bale money but going forward we need to buy game changers. None of the teams fighting for top 4 honours have decent squads with no game changers except us. For us to consistently stay in the top 4 we will have no choice but to spend money Levy and the board are just not willing to spend. Under Levy's model yes the club will be around forever, but it will not be a top 4 staple like he seems to think we should be.
-
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
Yep, apparently AVB lost Moutiniho because Levy was haggling over £500,000 over a £26,000,000 bid. That wasn't the only player Levy failed to get AVB, in fact most of AVB's targets were ignored.
The man needs to keep his nose out of the footballing side of things a lot more. Give the DOF the transfer budget and let him and the manager spend it without interference.
So he shouldn't go because we could do a lot worse, but he needs to keep his nose out!
lets just all go , i hear the Fulham stewards are nice people
All this skirt lifting cobblers is tiresome. He was asked what he thought of the job and answered honestly. If he had issued an emphatic denial he would have been accused of being a liar. As for the DOF issue, I wouldn't have cared if he had wanted a witch doctor to advise him as long as the performances and results kept coming. All this painting the guy as Satan is boring as well, he got hammered for buying cast offs when he was given no budget and in some folks eyes, if he had won us the European cup and the league, it still wouldn't have Been enough.
We are both agreeing though, he got himself sacked, but not because the stuff on the pitch was as palatable as dogshit.
Haggling over a few hundred quid? We just sold Bale for a reported £86m. Please give me an example.
What other team in the Premier League have held onto players better than us? When we held onto Modric, it was a huge coup for the club and for clubs in general, as for the first time in a while a player had made it clear he wanted out, he had a suitor, and we refused to sell. How was that to our detriment?
Do we really want to hold onto players that don't want to play for us? Or more importantly, can we? How long can you deny these players a step up? We should think ourselves lucky that we've had players recently that Real Madrid were willing to pay big bucks for. I don't remember us selling Acimovic, Freund, Anderton or Sherwood for anything significant. There are only a handful of clubs in world football that can hold onto players like Bale and Modric - like it or not we aren't (and possibly never will) be one of them.
We do have game changers in our side. That is such a negative attitude. Christian Eriksen was one of the most courted players in Europe over the last couple of years. He is now in a Spurs shirt!!! But because he hasn't scored 20 goals he's forgotten? We have some amazing talents in our squad. Maybe no one world class yet (Rooney, RVP, Mata, Hazard, Oscar, Aguero, Toure, Ozil) but certainly some that have the potential. in order to buy ready made game changers, you're generally looking at spening £30m+. We can't afford to do that year in, year out, without selling as well.
Suggesting we don't spend money is ludicrous. I can't even be arsed to look up statistics but we have spent a fortune over the last few years. Regardless of Bale's sale, we spent £100m+ just 5 months ago.
There are 6, maybe 7 teams vying for top 4 now, particularly with Utd's transition stuttering. I'd say at least two of the top 4 spots aren't guaranteed, so how many clubs can say they are a 'top 4 staple'? I've never heard Levy say he thinks we should be a top 4 club. We haven't earned the right in any way, shape or form to demand such a thing.
Woolwich, Dortmund etc. Even these teams cannot keep there best players so realistically we don't stand a chance.
The players have are not fans. They want what is best for them, not us.
Walk the walk big mouth,easy calling us cunts on a keyboard,show us all you got the minerals front up or fuck of wanna b
Oh levy thought you said audere
Can somebody put this into a graph,we like graphs, in colour pleaseI have included the caretaker managers (even though pleat played caretaker twice I only counted it as once)
- 2001
David Pleat (C)
- 2001
- 2003
- 2004
Jacques Santini
- 2004
Martin Jol
- 2007
- 2007
Juande Ramos
- 2008
- 2012
André Villas-Boas
Be careful what you wish for. Whelan's money-pinching antics had Wigan fighting for relegation year and year, which was only possible because he had a fantastic manager at the helm. He is more focused on breaking even than Levy!
Madness...
This is all a bit contradictory. Lewis has bought 110 players (god knows how much they all cost!!) and Levy is on £2.5m a year, but he's just waiting to cash in on Spurs? At what point did all that become profit?? Sounds like he is investing millions of his own money into our club, at a sensible pace so as to not cripple us financially and watch us slide down the leagues.
Seriously, have there not been enough examples of teams going for broke, failing, and falling apart for us to not want that? Leeds, West Ham, Coventry, Wimbledon, Birmingham...need I go on? What is so envious about those clubs that makes us want to make exactly the same mistakes they did?
Most backed AVB, as I did, but we will move on and move forward as a club, that I am sure of. And it is because of Levy that I feel like that. Our stability in terms of a manager might not be the best, but he certainly leads by example as a chairman.
Walk the walk big mouth,easy calling us cunts on a keyboard,show us all you got the minerals front up or fuck of wanna b
No problem. Come down to the pub on Wednesday. I will pm you what one I will be at.
You're boring.
And its *off* boretard
If Abu Dhabi hadn't come in for Citeh after Thaksin Shiniwatra's disasterous tenure you could have consigned them to the scrap heap as well.
But their success is so envious they're wonderful what management what prestige what a leader of men Abramovich is such a financial genius accountant of the year they've won so much we've won fuck all Levy is a useless moron he can't even count to ten let alone run our finances Levy out we should merge clubs with Chelsea we could be Chelsham Hotski and play our home games on the moon and win the world cup and rule the world amazeballs yeah woooooo go us!!
But their success is so envious they're wonderful what management what prestige what a leader of men Abramovich is such a financial genius accountant of the year they've won so much we've won fuck all Levy is a useless moron he can't even count to ten let alone run our finances Levy out we should merge clubs with Chelsea we could be Chelsham Hotski and play our home games on the moon and win the world cup and rule the world amazeballs yeah woooooo go us!!
That's real ahead of the curve thinking. I've been saying for years we should merge with scum, Chelsea and wham and be the London Royals. Think how many yanks would love the new franchise. Forums would be brilliant fun. And home games a blast.
Let's start a petition.
Danny L. Age 20.
The case for the defence.
http://aintnosanantonio.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/in-defence-of-daniel-levy.html
'Stability'. That's the buzzword. According to George Graham, all clubs need it, and David Moyes says the best clubs have it. Even before breakfast, Alan Shearer had no doubt pondered 20 or so times what would have happened had Manchester United sacked Alex Ferguson after his rocky start to life at Old Trafford, but a better question is surely, what would have happened at Manchester United if the footballing landscape had been then as it is today? Because something Shearer and many others appear only too willing to forget is Ferguson was hired almost 30 years ago, when the Premier League and the riches that came with it were but a glimmer in Rupert Murdoch's eye. Such riches mean the likes of Liverpool, Chelsea, Manchester City, Newcastle and Southampton can surge up the table, having replaced managers who were doing okay but apparently not okay enough, as well as meaning the price of exiting the top flight can be disastrous. So the likelihood is, Manchester United would have been relegated or Martin Edwards would have fired Ferguson before that could happen.
How about Arsène Wenger? He was hired during the Premier League era. Equally though, he took Woolwich from 5th to 3rd in his first season and won the league-cup double in his second. That probably had more influence on the decision to give him further time to prove himself than any particular desire for stability. How about Everton? They seem to be doing okay without it. Stoke? Clutching at straws now. The point isn't just that stability in those cases was simply a result of the respective clubs having no need to replace their managers, but that it's not even clear stability has significant, inherent worth. If you employ a manager well suited to the job at hand, it's in your best interests to keep him for as long as possible, but continuity for the sake of continuity? Do people think we'd be better off today if Christian Gross had just completed his sixteenth year in charge? It seems unlikely.
Of course, Gross wasn't appointed by Daniel Levy, so perhaps it would be more pertinent to ask if we should have stuck with Glenn Hoddle. Or Jacques Santini. Or Juande Ramos. I think the only dismissal Levy can sensibly have regrets over is that of Martin Jol, but doubts concerning his tactical nous and the breakdown of his relationship with Damien Comolli effectively made Jol's position untenable. Nonetheless, replacing him with Ramos was a bold move. It was comparable to Southampton's decision to fire Nigel Adkins and bring in Mauricio Pochettino, for which Nicola Cortese initially received plenty of flak but now gets only praise. If our version had worked out, Levy would have been hailed as a genius, but in spite of the similarities between Ramos and Pochettino – the Spaniard in fact augmented Pochettino's preference for fast, attacking football and distaste for the English language with greater experience and a more mature reputation – it wasn't to be. We move on.
[Read the rest at the link below.]
How about Arsène Wenger? He was hired during the Premier League era. Equally though, he took Woolwich from 5th to 3rd in his first season and won the league-cup double in his second. That probably had more influence on the decision to give him further time to prove himself than any particular desire for stability. How about Everton? They seem to be doing okay without it. Stoke? Clutching at straws now. The point isn't just that stability in those cases was simply a result of the respective clubs having no need to replace their managers, but that it's not even clear stability has significant, inherent worth. If you employ a manager well suited to the job at hand, it's in your best interests to keep him for as long as possible, but continuity for the sake of continuity? Do people think we'd be better off today if Christian Gross had just completed his sixteenth year in charge? It seems unlikely.
Of course, Gross wasn't appointed by Daniel Levy, so perhaps it would be more pertinent to ask if we should have stuck with Glenn Hoddle. Or Jacques Santini. Or Juande Ramos. I think the only dismissal Levy can sensibly have regrets over is that of Martin Jol, but doubts concerning his tactical nous and the breakdown of his relationship with Damien Comolli effectively made Jol's position untenable. Nonetheless, replacing him with Ramos was a bold move. It was comparable to Southampton's decision to fire Nigel Adkins and bring in Mauricio Pochettino, for which Nicola Cortese initially received plenty of flak but now gets only praise. If our version had worked out, Levy would have been hailed as a genius, but in spite of the similarities between Ramos and Pochettino – the Spaniard in fact augmented Pochettino's preference for fast, attacking football and distaste for the English language with greater experience and a more mature reputation – it wasn't to be. We move on.
[Read the rest at the link below.]
The teams that went for it and failed didn't have the necessary cash. Chelsea and City went for it and succeeded because they have, and continue to have, the necessary cash. For a while Blackburn, a smaller club than us most would agree, had the cash and succeeded. then the cash disappeared and so did they.
Cash is king, the Prem is capitalism writ large. The teams with the most cash win most prizes, it's very simple.
The only way to break the Utd/Pool/Woolwich cartel is through stacks of cash. City and Chelsea have done it that way. Until we get rid of ENIC or they change their ways we'll be looking in from the outside, with a very occasional trophy or CL outing to keep us (un)happy.
Money talks, loads of money talks louder.
I don't care who we get as manager, while we've got ENIC and our present stadium we won't win the Prem or CL. Even a new stadium is unlikely to do the trick if ENIC drain off a major part of the income to pay for building it.
Cash is king, the Prem is capitalism writ large. The teams with the most cash win most prizes, it's very simple.
The only way to break the Utd/Pool/Woolwich cartel is through stacks of cash. City and Chelsea have done it that way. Until we get rid of ENIC or they change their ways we'll be looking in from the outside, with a very occasional trophy or CL outing to keep us (un)happy.
Money talks, loads of money talks louder.
I don't care who we get as manager, while we've got ENIC and our present stadium we won't win the Prem or CL. Even a new stadium is unlikely to do the trick if ENIC drain off a major part of the income to pay for building it.