The Tottenham Thread (Merged)

[gordondaviesmoustache]

What galls a lot of City fans, myself included, is the way that Spurs fans sneer at what a small club we were before the takeover.

Not me mate. Spurs and City were very similar even before the takeover. You spent some time in the third division which is a bit of a blot on your copybook but we haven't won the league in 50 years which is a considerable blot on ours...

Slight apologies, I should have said 'many Spurs fans' as in all fairness there are a number of Spurs mates I have who don't trot out that line ad nauseam.

As to our spell in the third tier being a blot on our copybook.

Hardly. That was our finest hour.

 

[yido in briefs]

!?!?!?!?!?!?

350 million pound losses over a two year period would suggest that quite the opposite is true!

How is that relevant? City have spent the money and now they're getting the status. Like Chelsea did. Like Blackburn did. Though Blackburn couldn't sustain it and stabilise. Their global fan base will grow and the losses will lessen, like Chelsea's now compared to 2003.

How is that relevant? Are you serious here?

You accuse a self sustaining club of punching above their weight while a club who lost 350 mill over their two most successful years in a generation apparently aren’t? Surely hemorrhaging that amount of money just to compete at a higher level is the very definition of ‘punching above your weight’?

You make the point re Chelsea...they thought they'd be self-sustaining within five years and they're no-where near that.

The difference between you and Chelsea is that they have had time on their side. You don’t. Financial Fair Play is clearly being taken seriously at City and as you’re kidding yourself if you think you can continue to operate with your current level of losses.

 

[Dirty Harry]

What galls a lot of City fans, myself included, is the way that Spurs fans sneer at what a small club we were before the takeover.

Not me mate. Spurs and City were very similar even before the takeover. You spent some time in the third division which is a bit of a blot on your copybook but we haven't won the league in 50 years which is a considerable blot on ours...

Slight apologies, I should have said 'many Spurs fans' as in all fairness there are a number of Spurs mates I have who don't trot out that line ad nauseam.

As to our spell in the third tier being a blot on our copybook.

Hardly. That was our finest hour.[/quote]


I was about to add exactly the same thing GDM, I am absolutely in no way embarrassed OR ashamed, call it what you will, that we went down into the third tier of English football, the fact is, at that time, we deserved to be there, simple as, but from that we showed truly, exactly what kind of club and fans we were and stuck by each other.

 

[yido in briefs]

Actually, according to your figures, our profile is more than twice that of AC Milan.

Well, mate, that is kind of my point. You can't for one second claim that City have a bigger profile than AC Milan, I would have thought that would be a given when one team has won seven Champs League's and the other team has won none.....

If you accept that fact you also have to accept that Google results do not tell the whole story, or even part of the story, when it comes to determining worldwide appeal.

Are you sure you're not a Scouser ? You seem to confusing history with profile. I doubt there are many clubs in the world with our profile. Everything we do is news, every time someone at City farts, there are tabloid journolists waiting to record the sound and describe the smell in the next super soar-away edition. We even get mentioned in the House FFS.
We're big news and have been since the takeover. Nothing to do with history or what we've won or worldwide appeal. We are talking about profile and ours is about as high as it gets.
We even get insecure fans of other clubs coming on here to plead their case. Ask yourself why you are here and why we're not all on glory glory, telling everyone who will listen that we are just as big as you. The simple answer, is that we don't need to.

we seem to have two entirely concepts of 'profile' here. I thought we were talking about worldwide appeal but you seemed concerned with what English tabloids are saying.

According to most on here Spurs are 'media darlings' and are always getting praised at city's expense so I guess our profile must be pretty big after all.

I'm not on GG or any other Spurs site because I like the disinterested opinions of rival fans. We have been directly competing with you over the last couple of years so I guess that's why I'm here.<br /><br />-- Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:44 pm --<br /><br />

You'd think WHL would be sold out every week.

It is pal.

Even Wigan at home on a Tuesday night is sold out weeks in advance

All our games are sold out weeks in advance.

The proof is in the pudding

http://tottenhamhotspur.com/spurs/Tickets/ticket-news.page

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Slight apologies, I should have said 'many Spurs fans' as in all fairness there are a number of Spurs mates I have who don't trot out that line ad nauseam.

As to our spell in the third tier being a blot on our copybook.

Hardly. That was our finest hour.

I was about to add exactly the same thing GDM, I am absolutely in no way embarrassed OR ashamed, call it what you will, that we went down into the third tier of English football, the fact is, at that time, we deserved to be there, simple as, but from that we showed truly, exactly what kind of club and fans we were and stuck by each other.

Absolutely DH. The CPR we dispensed as fans that season means we can all take a little ownership of where we find ourselves today. You could even say that it was part of our history ;-) That is what makes this so enjoyable, for me at least.

Stories with happy endings are all too rare in real life, but I've got a feeling this might have one.

 

[mcmanus]

!?!?!?!?!?!?

350 million pound losses over a two year period would suggest that quite the opposite is true!

How is that relevant? City have spent the money and now they're getting the status. Like Chelsea did. Like Blackburn did. Though Blackburn couldn't sustain it and stabilise. Their global fan base will grow and the losses will lessen, like Chelsea's now compared to 2003.

How is that relevant? Are you serious here?

You accuse a self sustaining club of punching above their weight while a club who lost 350 mill over their two most successful years in a generation apparently aren’t? Surely hemorrhaging that amount of money just to compete at a higher level is the very definition of ‘punching above your weight’?

You make the point re Chelsea...they thought they'd be self-sustaining within five years and they're no-where near that.

The difference between you and Chelsea is that they have had time on their side. You don’t. Financial Fair Play is clearly being taken seriously at City and as you’re kidding yourself if you think you can continue to operate with your current level of losses.

Ah well fuck it. I'm phoning Abu Dhabi tonight tell them to forget it and to pull out now because a spurs fan reckons FFP is going to fuck us right over. Sack those financial experts who's underlings studied at Yale or Harvard. We have it concrete now, 'yido in briefs' has spent three minutes a 'whole' day reading tabloids regards how we as a club are doomed.

Doomed I tell thee

 

[samharris]

Well, mate, that is kind of my point. You can't for one second claim that City have a bigger profile than AC Milan, I would have thought that would be a given when one team has won seven Champs League's and the other team has won none.....

If you accept that fact you also have to accept that Google results do not tell the whole story, or even part of the story, when it comes to determining worldwide appeal.

Are you sure you're not a Scouser ? You seem to confusing history with profile. I doubt there are many clubs in the world with our profile. Everything we do is news, every time someone at City farts, there are tabloid journolists waiting to record the sound and describe the smell in the next super soar-away edition. We even get mentioned in the House FFS.
We're big news and have been since the takeover. Nothing to do with history or what we've won or worldwide appeal. We are talking about profile and ours is about as high as it gets.
We even get insecure fans of other clubs coming on here to plead their case. Ask yourself why you are here and why we're not all on glory glory, telling everyone who will listen that we are just as big as you. The simple answer, is that we don't need to.

we seem to have two entirely concepts of 'profile' here. I thought we were talking about worldwide appeal but you seemed concerned with what English tabloids are saying.

According to most on here Spurs are 'media darlings' and are always getting praised at city's expense so I guess our profile must be pretty big after all.

I'm not on GG or any other Spurs site because I like the disinterested opinions of rival fans. We have been directly competing with you over the last couple of years so I guess that's why I'm here.

-- Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:44 pm --

You'd think WHL would be sold out every week.

It is pal.

Even Wigan at home on a Tuesday night is sold out weeks in advance

All our games are sold out weeks in advance.

The proof is in the pudding

http://tottenhamhotspur.com/spurs/Tickets/ticket-news.page

Right..we have now discussed,Profiles,spending power,attendances and history.

where shall we go next ?? pitch size,grass length or location to north pole ??

 

[stony]

Well, mate, that is kind of my point. You can't for one second claim that City have a bigger profile than AC Milan, I would have thought that would be a given when one team has won seven Champs League's and the other team has won none.....

If you accept that fact you also have to accept that Google results do not tell the whole story, or even part of the story, when it comes to determining worldwide appeal.

Are you sure you're not a Scouser ? You seem to confusing history with profile. I doubt there are many clubs in the world with our profile. Everything we do is news, every time someone at City farts, there are tabloid journolists waiting to record the sound and describe the smell in the next super soar-away edition. We even get mentioned in the House FFS.
We're big news and have been since the takeover. Nothing to do with history or what we've won or worldwide appeal. We are talking about profile and ours is about as high as it gets.
We even get insecure fans of other clubs coming on here to plead their case. Ask yourself why you are here and why we're not all on glory glory, telling everyone who will listen that we are just as big as you. The simple answer, is that we don't need to.

we seem to have two entirely concepts of 'profile' here. I thought we were talking about worldwide appeal but you seemed concerned with what English tabloids are saying.

According to most on here Spurs are 'media darlings' and are always getting praised at city's expense so I guess our profile must be pretty big after all.

I'm not on GG or any other Spurs site because I like the disinterested opinions of rival fans. We have been directly competing with you over the last couple of years so I guess that's why I'm here.

How can you get worldwide appeal if no one knows who you are ? You need exposure and publicity to raise your "profile". There's that word again, and that is exactly what we have at the moment. World wide publicity and a raising of our profile. The increase in a world wide fan base will come with that, combined with success on the pitch.

As for the praise Spurs get? That's pretty much the London based media supporting a London club. It's not exactly hard to work out.

Castiel is a Chelsea fan btw, so I've only just realised that some of your jibes were actually meant for us and not them.

We will be self sustaining in a few years. The vision our owners have is still beyond the comprehension of most of the British media. They are not just another Abramovich. There are going to be plenty of people in the press and at other clubs left with egg all over their faces in the years to come.

 

[yido in briefs]

No not at all. But you must recognize that it is a problem?

If it wasn't then why didn't the Sheikh stump up the small change required to cover for the African nations players?

If you didn't have to worry about your losses why did you loan at Ade to Spurs?

If you weren't worried about bringing in money to level up the books in time for FFP then why wouldn't you let the disruptive little scrote Tevez go for 10 mill to AC Milan?

I'm not saying you're going to collapse, but it is quite clear that things are going to have to slow down considerably for you to become self-sustaining.

 

[Castiel]

How is that relevant? Are you serious here?

You accuse a self sustaining club of punching above their weight while a club who lost 350 mill over their two most successful years in a generation apparently aren’t? Surely hemorrhaging that amount of money just to compete at a higher level is the very definition of ‘punching above your weight’?

You make the point re Chelsea...they thought they'd be self-sustaining within five years and they're no-where near that.

The difference between you and Chelsea is that they have had time on their side. You don’t. Financial Fair Play is clearly being taken seriously at City and as you’re kidding yourself if you think you can continue to operate with your current level of losses.

I'm not a City fan by the way.

The point you're missing is that since the new premier league format came in, it takes money to achieve success. You can thank Sky for that one. Chelsea couldn't break up the United, Arsenal and Liverpool cartel until Abramovich came in. Neither could Newcastle. It takes a big financial injection to raise a team to that level and sustain it. Spurs, while their self sustaining model is lovely, can not compete with the traditional Sky 4 or City. In fact the one member of the Sky 4 that opted to be self sustaining is seriously struggling to hang onto their position.

The one player to transform your side form last season, is a City reject they needed to keep fit. That in itself is telling. You are punching above your weight as last season proved. Just like Newcastle were, and Chelsea were before Abramovich. As long as the league (and CL) works like this, we're always going to have a cartel at the top, City are just the newest member to the boys club.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

They are not just another Abramovich.

I think, until the penny drops with regards to this, people are going to fail to realise just how far this 'project' will take this football club.

 

[yido in briefs]

How is that relevant? Are you serious here?

You accuse a self sustaining club of punching above their weight while a club who lost 350 mill over their two most successful years in a generation apparently aren’t? Surely hemorrhaging that amount of money just to compete at a higher level is the very definition of ‘punching above your weight’?

You make the point re Chelsea...they thought they'd be self-sustaining within five years and they're no-where near that.

The difference between you and Chelsea is that they have had time on their side. You don’t. Financial Fair Play is clearly being taken seriously at City and as you’re kidding yourself if you think you can continue to operate with your current level of losses.

I'm not a City fan by the way.

The point you're missing is that since the new premier league format came in, it takes money to achieve success. You can thank Sky for that one. Chelsea couldn't break up the United, Arsenal and Liverpool cartel until Abramovich came in. Neither could Newcastle. It takes a big financial injection to raise a team to that level and sustain it. Spurs, while their self sustaining model is lovely, can not compete with the traditional Sky 4 or City. In fact the one member of the Sky 4 that opted to be self sustaining is seriously struggling to hang onto their position.

Well Spurs have had no 'huge cash injection' and we're doing ok.

I think FFP will vindicate clubs like Spurs, Liverpool and Arsenal.

You think the opposite because you're a Chelsea fan who obviously has sympathy with the 'lose hundreds of millions a year' model.

I guess we'll have to wait and see who's right.

I think if City had some masterly plan up their sleeve to meet FFP guidelines then they would spening left right and centre right now to secure the championship.

But they aren't spending. Because they know they can't afford to continue doing that.

 

[LoveCity]

I think if City had some masterly plan up their sleeve to meet FFP guidelines then they would spening left right and centre right now to secure the championship.

But they aren't spending. Because they know they can't afford to continue doing that.

But that was the plan, accelerated spending before a certain point then prudence. We now have a squad that can compete with the best and are ready to tackle FFP. Yes we do still need additions, our "squad depth" is overhyped by the media but those will be added prudently, most probably in summer when we raise over £60million from the sales of Adebayor, Tevez, De Jong, Kolarov, and some others.

 

[Bobby Taylor's Pub Team]

But are they (Anzhi)? Of course they're not, which leaves your point mostly pointless. As for the UEFA XI comment, that's about as relevant as top trumps.

Again, this is the point I'm trying to make.

It's called logical deduction.

You made the point that because you're linked with big players that means you have a bigger profile than Spurs.

I made the point re Anzhi and asked does that mean they have a bigger profile too since they also are linked with big players.

If the answer is no then it follows as a consequence that being linked with big players does necessarily equal a global profile.

-- Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:27 pm --

What galls a lot of City fans, myself included, is the way that Spurs fans sneer at what a small club we were before the takeover.

Not me mate. Spurs and City were very similar even before the takeover. You spent some time in the third division which is a bit of a blot on your copybook but we haven't won the league in 50 years which is a considerable blot on ours...

You misunderstand. What I said, perhaps not so clearly, was Anzhi are not linked with heavyweight players and management, mainly old players past their sell by date. Players that Spurs might be interested in, but not us.

 

[yido in briefs]

I think a lot of people underestimate just how hard to it is to organically grow the size of your football club.

You've seen this season that City are a better team than any of you could ever of dreamed of yet you couldn't sell out a cup semi against Liverpool...

Same goes for Chelsea. They have to resort to advertising Champions League tickets on Talksport years after Roman took over. They thought they'd be this London super but the truth is, that apart from the money, they are pretty much the same club they were before.

If City can't sell out a cup semi in this season when you have Aguero, Silva, etc. then why do you think you’re going to become this super, monster income generating club all of a sudden?

A club able to sustain wages that even Utd and Madrid can't afford?

It doesn't stack up I'm afraid. City will still be a big force but FFP will considerably lessen your ability to financially outmuscle those types of clubs.

 

[samharris]

They are not just another Abramovich.

I think, until the penny drops with regards to this, people are going to fail to realise just how far this 'project' will take this football club.

Abramovich -Chelsea-training facility- cobham.

Mansour - City- training facility- Etihad campus.

One day my brothers....the penny will drop.

 

[LoveCity]

You've seen this season that City are a better team than any of you could ever of dreamed of yet you couldn't sell out a cup semi against Liverpool...

Poor example and being very selective there.

The Carling Cup semi came a couple of days after the FA Cup 3rd round clash with United so for many of our largely working class fanbase it would be £40 + £40 after Christmas and during another economic problem. The Carling Cup has been #4 priority as it is for most clubs, United had 30,000 empty seats one round earlier with the alleged biggest fanbase on the planet.

We have sold every single league game out this season for the first time in club history at this stadium. We've broken the attendance record twice by cramming people in corners. We sold out 2 of our 3 Champions League games and the third wasn't far off. We sold out our FA Cup game with United of course a couple of days before the Liverpool clash. The only games we haven't sold out consistently are Carling Cup, again the bottom of everyone's priority list and the same at almost every club - United, Chelsea, and Arsenal all spring to mind as having had lots of empty seats in this competition.

We're now at a stage where we could fill a 50-55,000 seat stadium for most of our league games and this is still with a largely local fanbase, it just seems to be a case of City fans who stopped going coming back. I do see tourists here and there at the ground but not a massive amount of them (more on Champions League nights), but they will be here soon enough.

The City brand is growing at a very fast pace around the world, just look at all the stupid comments on our Facebook by hordes of new African and Asian fans.

 

[FrostyNRG]

It somewhat astounds me that people can't have a (actually quite interesting) discussion without resorting to snide retorts and point scoring. Actually, it doesn't astound me at all, that's what football fans do of course - blindly argue and always think their club and everything about it is right.

It would just be nice to see rational discussion with people taking their blinkers off to be honest.

As a Spurs fan on a MCFC forum, I'll start with a point that backs up what *some* of the City fans have been saying here. There is absolutely no comparison between (IMO) between what Abramovic did/does at Chelsea and what the MC owners have done/are doing at City. Chelsea was a play thing for Roman, and there seemed to be a genuine belief that some success (that may be prolonged, but equally may be relatively short term) would greatly increase the profile/worldwide attraction/fanbase of the club. There is no doubt that Chelsea have more fans now than they had pre Roman but it is fair to say there is a massive doubt as to whether those fans stick around if the club stops experiencing success. Which, of course, is very true for any club. The longer you have sustained success for, the longer the fans will stick around (see Liverpool) but ultimately, successful clubs breed fans in the long run. Chelsea have nowhere near the worldwide appeal of MUFC or LFC and won't unless they can dominate the English game for a prolonged period. Some clubs have a history that is still prevalent and that "earns" them a profile around the world.


MCFC equally have nothing like the worldwide profile of those clubs mentioned (and please take profile in the sense that really matters, forget about the fact that the club is being talked about a lot because of what is going on there). And, of course, nor do Tottenham. There has always been a certain something about the club that attracts people despite the relative lack of success but that is relatively small scale in the grand scheme of things. However, if one was to (objectively) compare what the owners of MCFC *appear* to have planned for the club, it is with a far more long term view than CFC ever had. Whether it ends up being successful is anyones guess, but give me the Sheikh (and his advisors) over Roman any day of the week. FFP is clearly a consideration for MCFC - and I don't think anyone would deny they can't continue to do what they've done in the last couple of years - but they seem to have considered that, hence the rapid investment in a short period rather than trying to do it more slowly. They've put the money in, they've got some work to do to make the club self sustaining but they do at least appear to have plans to do so. Personally, I think the OWNERS (not necessarily by association the fans) deserve at least a modicum of respect. For me, the MCFC fans (well a good chunk of them at least) earned some respect for their loyalty/attitude when they suffered their drop through the divisions. I don't begrudge them what they have, and can openly admit I wish we were top of the league right now!

Equally, I don't any MCFC fan should disregard the notion that fans of another team (such as Spurs) are proud of the way they have kept vaguely in contention without massive external investment. The fact that I'm proud of Spurs performance (so far) this season, doesn't automatically make me a bitter fan that is resentful of what MCFC has achieved (and yes, it is an achievement so far) and how they have done it. Give me the choice between second place with a self sustaining model and first place with external investment and I'll take first place thanks very much. I defy the fan of any club to say "thanks, but no thanks" to someone willing to improve the playing staff, management and infrastructure of their club. It is not "cheating" - it's just bloody annoying. I wish MCFC hadn't been bought out because (all other things being equal) we'd have been in the CL this year and would be genuine title contenders right now. We're not either and we have to deal with it. I'm still proud of my club, and I still yearn for more.

So much more to say, but that's far too long a post anyway!

 

[samharris]

Good honest post mate..

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Good honest post mate..

I was just going to post the very same.