Sevilla won the Europa League in 2014, 2015, and 2016. That's quite recent. SAF spent much less on tranfers than either Chelsea or Man City in years competing against them. And football is a global game, if you rely on only English examples you're ignoring roughly 95% of the sport.
You are making an arbitrary claim. "spend big". Define big? If you spend a % less than your rivals is it not spending big? Or is it an absolute dollar amount, adjust or not adjusted for inflation?
The facts are this: Spurs are building a stadium. Spurs are also an on-going business with expenses and regular business things like payroll to consider. Transfers cost money. Right now, English clubs are charged more money than other clubs because the PL spent so long talking shit about how much money they got that other clubs noticed. There are very few players available for transfer to Spurs who would be able to join the club as a useful depth choice who are also content to sit on our bench instead of starting for other teams. There are NO players available for transfer to Spurs who would improve our starting 11 bar at right back.
We're not spending 50 million on a player. We're not paying them more than the rest of the squad. We're trying to avoid having to give everyone pay raises all the time so that cash can be devoted to building the stadium.
The club operates under very real constraints. If you have solutions to those constraints other than "ENIC need to operate the club at a loss because I demand other people treat their property as I wish", then let's hear them. If you don't, then I don't see what point there is in having a discussion about these topics.
