• 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...

    Get involved!

Transfers Summer 2022 Transfer Thread.

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

1882 said:
Honest question, do other clubs struggle so much with their HG quota?
I know Man City buy up alit of English players, but that's cos they can afford bloated, English prices...

But are Chelsea and Liverpool, and Utd's squads brimming with HG players, cos it always feels as if they have plenty of foreign talent at their disposal without having to 'balance the books' each season, and worry about HG players over foreign ones....

Maybe it's the same feeling that EVERY fan has about their own club... Bit like the 'bias' argument....
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

When Poch arrived we had a lot of Club trained players in or on the fringe of the squad - Townsend and Mason both England internationals, Bentaleb, Carroll and a few others. Poch sold the lot to generate £100m+ sadly mis-spent on buying Sisssoko and the like.

Problem is that Poch only brought through Winks into the first team in his 6 years as manager through his dislike of loaning players out to gain experience and not playing youth. So our current HG issues are simply a result of Poch mananagement of youth, partially offset by Skipp being sent on loan and coming back a top club trained player...... so we just need to loan out players and hope we get another Skipp back.

Many clubs have an HG issue but manage it better - although Chelsea buying Ake back for mega millions shows they have screwed up in developing Ake, selling him to Bournemouth for a song, then sold to ManCity and Chelsea having to buy him back to get enough Club trained players, shows their management of HG isn't the best.
 
Oracle said:
The next person who mentions James fucking Maddicunt gets sinbinned ok?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

ANNOUNCE MADDISON!

Spring Love GIF by Shalita Grant
 
Get in! said:
The only teams that consistently outspent Spurs were City, Chelsea, Pool, United, and Woolwich. Clubs that had revenues far greater to ours and were consistently in the CL. If Leicester or Spam outspent us one or two years that does not a trend make.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Consistently yes. But they're megapowers when it comes to finances so I would expect it. Especially before the myth of FFP came about.

www.givemesport.com

The 20 clubs with the biggest net spend since Roman Abramovich bought Chelsea in 2003

🇮🇹 20. Inter Milan (£272.61m) 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 18. Newcastle (£305.75m) 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 10. Liverpool (£527.23m) 🇩🇪 9. Bayern Munich (£545.47m) 🇪🇸 5. FC Barcelona (£789.01m) Chelsea have a net spend of nearly £1 billion since 2003, but they are still £400m away from top spot 😮
www.givemesport.com www.givemesport.com

This isn't likely to be totally accurate but it's interesting.
We're 12th in the table for net spend in Europe since Chelsea won the lotto as at March 2022. Which is actually better than i expected.
We share the bottom half with Villa, Everton, West Ham and Newcastle. 3 of which have spent time in the Championship. We've only spent £30m more than Villa in 22 years.
 
charge said:
Can somebody with knowledge of the market list players that are possible options? Hypothetically if we were to spend £80m on a player that fits this mould (and realistically would come to us), who would it be?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Wirtz (Leverkusen) would be good but he did his cruciate at the end of the season and just signed a new deal.

Brandt (Dortmund).

Majer (Rennes).

I think both LoCelso and Ndombele would be good for that 8/10 remit, but hey ho…
 
Matt1882 said:
This all sounds logical and reasonable.

Until you realise that teams with no more money than Spurs outspent Spurs most years.
For a large portion of the 00's you'd say only Chelsea and Man United should have had the power to comprehensively outspend Spurs. The rest of the league didn't have the power of United or the wealth of Chelsea. The Emptycrates didn't open until 2006 and actually hindered Woolwich and yet they completely outspent us and continue to do so most seasons.

The simple fact of the matter is, some teams speculated to accumulate and some ran the team like a business, trying to increase income to subsequently increase spending.
We fell into the latter and, as a result, had a very, vey slow climb. Teams like the rich clubs, Woolwich, Liverpool to some degree gambled by spending the money to elevate themselves as quickly as possible or where there was an opportunity.

What I'm willing to say is that what is done is done and no amount of internet bitching changes it.
If the leopard has changed it's spots and keeps the new ones then this place should be better for everyone.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That’s fact free nonsense.

Woolwich had bigger revenue than spurs throughout the 00s and had won the league and reached a champions league final. And they had world class players. They had FAR more revenue and FAR higher reputation than us. We only overtook Woolwich for revenue 2 years ago.

Liverpool won a champions league and reached another final but in any case had FAR higher revenue than us.

In the 00s we were at best the 5th most attractive team. AT BEST.

Oh and Man City for the past decade.

Were still only the 5th biggest club by revenue so finishing in the CL spots requires a richer and more attractive team to fuck up.

And we’re only in the position we’re in revenue wise because of the amazing off the field work Levy has overseen. Otherwise we’d still be a long way behind… just like the other clubs who were similar in size in the 00s still are to this day.
 
bus-conductor said:
Wirtz (Leverkusen) would be good but he did his cruciate at the end of the season and just signed a new deal.

Brandt (Dortmund).

Majer (Rennes).

I think both LoCelso and Ndombele would be good for that 8/10 remit, but hey ho…
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Thoughts on Nkunku? Few times I have seen him he looked good, one time playing it looked like as an AM and then another it looked like a second striker or something but there is now a lot of hype around him.
 
Matt1882 said:
This all sounds logical and reasonable.

Until you realise that teams with no more money than Spurs outspent Spurs most years.
For a large portion of the 00's you'd say only Chelsea and Man United should have had the power to comprehensively outspend Spurs. The rest of the league didn't have the power of United or the wealth of Chelsea. The Emptycrates didn't open until 2006 and actually hindered Woolwich and yet they completely outspent us and continue to do so most seasons.

The simple fact of the matter is, some teams speculated to accumulate and some ran the team like a business, trying to increase income to subsequently increase spending.
We fell into the latter and, as a result, had a very, vey slow climb. Teams like the rich clubs, Woolwich, Liverpool to some degree gambled by spending the money to elevate themselves as quickly as possible or where there was an opportunity.

What I'm willing to say is that what is done is done and no amount of internet bitching changes it.
If the leopard has changed it's spots and keeps the new ones then this place should be better for everyone.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Great post, Matt.

I for one am delighted to see us once again starting to flex our muscles.

I ❤ our newer fans and welcome them all with open arms. Just wish they'd realise we're not some historical small club that's just been elevated to the big time.

We're historically a giant that's been acting like a midget for a few decades.

Let the good times roll in.

:coys:
 
LeParisien said:
That’s fact free nonsense.

Woolwich had bigger revenue than spurs throughout the 00s and had won the league and reached a champions league final. And they had world class players. They had FAR more revenue and FAR higher reputation than us. We only overtook Woolwich for revenue 2 years ago.

Liverpool won a champions league and reached another final but in any case had FAR higher revenue than us.

In the 00s we were at best the 5th most attractive team. AT BEST.

Oh and Man City for the past decade.

Were still only the 5th biggest club by revenue so finishing in the CL spots requires a richer and more attractive team to fuck up.

And we’re only in the position we’re in revenue wise because of the amazing off the field work Levy has overseen. Otherwise we’d still be a long way behind… just like the other clubs who were similar in size in the 00s still are to this day.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

POST OF THE THREAD.

Super Troopers Yes GIF by Searchlight Pictures
 
Matt1882 said:
Consistently yes. But they're megapowers when it comes to finances so I would expect it. Especially before the myth of FFP came about.

www.givemesport.com

The 20 clubs with the biggest net spend since Roman Abramovich bought Chelsea in 2003

🇮🇹 20. Inter Milan (£272.61m) 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 18. Newcastle (£305.75m) 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 10. Liverpool (£527.23m) 🇩🇪 9. Bayern Munich (£545.47m) 🇪🇸 5. FC Barcelona (£789.01m) Chelsea have a net spend of nearly £1 billion since 2003, but they are still £400m away from top spot 😮
www.givemesport.com www.givemesport.com

This isn't likely to be totally accurate but it's interesting.
We're 12th in the table for net spend in Europe since Chelsea won the lotto as at March 2022. Which is actually better than i expected.
We share the bottom half with Villa, Everton, West Ham and Newcastle. 3 of which have spent time in the Championship. We've only spent £30m more than Villa in 22 years.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeh, and the other one is a clusterfuck that has ruined itself acting like big bollocks in the trf market.

Yet divs would have you think that we're the one's who have been poorly run and should be jealous of WH, Eve & Villa! :avbhumph:
 
Tomo said:
Thoughts on Nkunku? Few times I have seen him he looked good, one time playing it looked like as an AM and then another it looked like a second striker or something but there is now a lot of hype around him.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Love Nkunku, would have loved him here, but I think he’s more a front line type and we’ve signed Richarlison to fill that “front three” remit.

As you say, there would be bigger fish interested, and I think he fancies PSG.
 
Col_McCafferty said:
It's all Hail Levy on here I see.

:mourcheeks:


My rebuttal: ONE trophy in 22 years.





















Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Not really. Criticise when its deserved, praise when its due. It's not rocket science.

I would counter your point with - brand spanking new super stadium that is the envy of the sporting world.

Bottom line - has Levy done anything to be criticised for? Yes, loads. Has he done anything he should receive praise for? Yes, he has.

Bleedin' nora.
 
LeParisien said:
That’s fact free nonsense.

Woolwich had bigger revenue than spurs throughout the 00s and had won the league and reached a champions league final. And they had world class players. They had FAR more revenue and FAR higher reputation than us. We only overtook Woolwich for revenue 2 years ago.

Liverpool won a champions league and reached another final but in any case had FAR higher revenue than us.

In the 00s we were at best the 5th most attractive team. AT BEST.

Oh and Man City for the past decade.

Were still only the 5th biggest club by revenue so finishing in the CL spots requires a richer and more attractive team to fuck up.

And we’re only in the position we’re in revenue wise because of the amazing off the field work Levy has overseen. Otherwise we’d still be a long way behind… just like the other clubs who were similar in size in the 00s still are to this day.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Fact - Woolwich didn't move into their stadium until 2006 and once they did, were supposed to be crippled until it was paid for.
Fact - they compete in the same league as us. How did they bring in more money with a similar stadium pre 2006? By being in the champions league.
Fact - they got in the champions league by getting a good coach and consistently backing him. Every year. They gave him complete control and an open cheque book. This happened after they finished behind us (in the sugar era)
Fact - City didn't win the lotto until 2008 and didn't really really spend until 2009, hence why I said "the majority of the 00's" - 9 years out of 10 is factually "the majority"

There is no denying we have barely outspent, and in some cases have been outspent by, teams like West Ham, Newcastle, Villa, Everton. Over that 2 year period we're ahead of them but there are times when they have outspent us.

What is interesting is that none of them have won a fucking thing, so money isn't the only key.
Our 13 year baron run is nothing compared to those 4. Everton - 1995. Villa 96. West Ham and Newcastle last won in black and white.


People make a big song and dance about stadium revenue. Proportionately, how much of Spurs' total income comes from the stadium?
Vs TV, CL, sponsor, stadium name etc. I bet it's small. It might be bigger than other teams, but as a proportion of the overall income, what is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top