The Tottenham Thread (Merged)

[Anonymous]

united have spent more than that surely.

 

[bluemoondays]

united have spent more than that surely.

Net spend, purchases minus sales

They are skewed hugely by the £80m Ronaldo sale, if you took that out they'd be 3rd highest spenders behind Chelsea and us. Wouldn't be accurate but that one sale equalled buying in 3 world class players or up to 8-12 "great prospects".

They really hit it lucky with Ronaldo but he wasn't "cheap", he cost them circa £12m in 2003/4 season. If you discount Anelka we didn't pay that much for an established player until the sheikh took over, let alone pay £12m for a "prospect".

 

[Anonymous]

united have spent more than that surely.

Net spend, purchases minus sales

They are skewed hugely by the £80m Ronaldo sale, if you took that out they'd be 3rd highest spenders behind Chelsea and us. Wouldn't be accurate but that one sale equalled buying in 3 world class players or up to 8-12 "great prospects".

They really hit it lucky with Ronaldo but he wasn't "cheap", he cost them circa £12m in 2003/4 season. If you discount Anelka we didn't pay that much for an established player until the sheikh took over, let alone pay £12m for a "prospect".

ahh i see now.

 

[Crouchinho]

Fans always seem obsessed with transfer fees.

While the likes of Arsenal haven't spent much they had double the wage bill for City and Spurs for 10 years.

While Everton don't spend much their wage bill is incredibly high still.

United were blowing everyone out the window with wages too until Roman came along

 

[MSP]

Suarez is definitely not normal, he should be banned for life.

 

[Speaker]

Well, again, I think it's pretty embarrassing that they can only attain that while being propped up by said Russian oligarch. Highly embarrassing in fact.

Although I doubt I'll find many City fans in agreement with me there seeing as you have had to spend more of other people’s money than anyone else in the history of the game just to be a competitive club.

Spending since Premier League inception to 2010;

Chelsea= £366m (3 PL, 3 CC, 5 FA Cup, 3 Charity Shields)

(City is second with just over £300m but its disproportional data considering the length of time they've been spending.)

Liverpool = £201m (1 CL, 3 FA Cups, 3 CC)

Tottenham = £176m (2 CC)

Manchester United = £139m (12 PL, 4 FA Cup, 4 CC, 9 Charity Shields, 2 CL)

Arsenal = £32m (3 PL, 5 FA Cup, 1 CC, 4 Charity Shields)


Spot the odd man out. The holier than though attitude and bitterness for clubs that actually use their resources well is what makes most of you a bunch of pricks. Sure, you're spending and wage plan is lower than a lot of us. And even taking out United, why has Arsenal outperformed you by such a massive margin while spending a fraction of what you have? I'd love to hear the excuse because that IS fucking embarrassing for anyone who wants to walk around spouting nonsense like that. For a club with the 4th highest net spend in the country (at least since the PL inception) you're pretty much living in a glass house.

I could swear that those figures are wrong, i've actually seen City top with Chelsea second, and UTD have spent more than us, unless you're doing it on net spend? And anyway when it comes to Arscum transfer fees do not paint the whole picture, their wage bill is about £20-30 million pounds a year more than ours. How it is that much more when i would even argue that we have more "high profile" players than they do is perplexing.

Going back to a previous comment of yours where you say that at least Torres is "ours", and aren't we angry that we don't own Ade. Of course not, what do you think Spurs fans feel about that? We're all going to go picket Levy's office screaming "Damn you Daniel, taking a striker that has scored twice as many goals as Torres this season with more assists and you didn't pay a penny for him! And we are only contributing half of his wages, which is probably half of Torres's wages. I've got half a mind to boycott all Tottenham games until Levy personally drives down to the Etihad and hands over a cheque for £50 million". In fact, i'm fucking ecstatic that we don't own Ade, i think that it is a sensational bit of business by Levy. In addition, i'm not entirely sure if we should sign him, he misses a lot of chances, but he is better than what we've got so loaning him for a season has done wonders.

On the Liverpool game, i'm slightly disappointed. Bale missed a great chance and Skrtel and Suarez should have seen red. But, when i saw that 'Arry wouldn't make the game, and we had no Kaboul, Lennon, VDV, or Sandro, i said before the game that i would accept a draw. A decent result, job done, but i do think that it puts the final nail in the coffin of any semblance of a title bid.

 

[Castiel]

I could swear that those figures are wrong, i've actually seen City top with Chelsea second, and UTD have spent more than us, unless you're doing it on net spend? And anyway when it comes to Arscum transfer fees do not paint the whole picture, their wage bill is about £20-30 million pounds a year more than ours. How it is that much more when i would even argue that we have more "high profile" players than they do is perplexing.

It is net spend, and as mentioned the Ronaldo and Torres transfers fuck with the numbers a bit. Without them it'd probably be City, Chelsea, United, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal. I imagine with the modern figures Liverpool would go back to third with their large spending over the last few years.

Arsenal's wage bill factored into total spending is not disproportionally higher to warrant the ridiculous success they've had over Spurs. Their structure is different. They pay youngsters more than most, and they pay their stars less. £20-£30m more on wages per annum (taking your word) is nothing against £144m of spending. Certainly not to justify why they've done infinitely better than you.

This is only relevant because Spurs like to bring up the "spending" argument all the time, like your players are all academy products and play for free. But its not so nice when your most hated rivals have sort of pissed all over you on that account. Finances is a huge part of the modern game, but efficient use of said resources is infinitely more important. When it comes to that point, nobody can begrudge Arsenal plaudits because they've outperformed us all and ONLY they have bragging rights in that regard.

Edit to add: The irony is, Arsenal fans don't often bring it up! Not in my experience anyway. So they've outclassed the Spuds as well. Now excuse me while I go take a shower for bigging them up.

 

[Speaker]

I could swear that those figures are wrong, i've actually seen City top with Chelsea second, and UTD have spent more than us, unless you're doing it on net spend? And anyway when it comes to Arscum transfer fees do not paint the whole picture, their wage bill is about £20-30 million pounds a year more than ours. How it is that much more when i would even argue that we have more "high profile" players than they do is perplexing.

It is net spend, and as mentioned the Ronaldo and Torres transfers fuck with the numbers a bit. Without them it'd probably be City, Chelsea, United, Liverpool, Spurs, Arsenal. I imagine with the modern figures Liverpool would go back to third with their large spending over the last few years.

Arsenal's wage bill factored into total spending is not disproportionally higher to warrant the ridiculous success they've had over Spurs. Their structure is different. They pay youngsters more than most, and they pay their stars less. £20-£30m more on wages per annum (taking your word) is nothing against £144m of spending. Certainly not to justify why they've done infinitely better than you.

This is only relevant because Spurs like to bring up the "spending" argument all the time, like your players are all academy products and play for free. But its not so nice when your most hated rivals have sort of pissed all over you on that account. Finances is a huge part of the modern game, but efficient use of said resources is infinitely more important. When it comes to that point, nobody can begrudge Arsenal plaudits because they've outperformed us all and ONLY they have bragging rights in that regard.

But if you take wages into account then that additional 20-30 ( I say 20-30 as i saw it in the times earlier this season but cannot remember the exact amount) million a season utterly dwarfs any transfer outlay. It is spending on the first team after all.

I personally never bring up the spending argument, what is the point? It's not like consternation changes anything about it, it is what it is. The only thing that really comes in to play is current results, where ours are much better than Arsenal's at the moment, ergo spurs have bragging rights. We play much better football than they do, and our manager doesn't whinge and make excuses every single time a result goes against us. Add in the delusional arsenal fans who still insist that "if everyone is fit then arsenal has the best 11 in the premier league" makes spurs a much more attractive team to the neutral.

Plus when Dein was in the FA Arsenal managed to get treatment from the refs and disciplinary boards that rivalled UTD's.

Anyway, back on track, i don't begrudge any team that comes into money as i would love it if a nice oil baron/sheikh came in and spent £1billion on spurs transfers.

 

[Castiel]

Add in the delusional arsenal fans who still insist that "if everyone is fit then arsenal has the best 11 in the premier league" makes spurs a much more attractive team to the neutral.

No more to say on the numbers, they speak for themselves I feel. But while we're on delusional.

Personally, I find the attraction overwhelming.

You are no better than anyone. The fact that you think you (I use "you" collectively) are, and still pull the same bullshit, is what pisses people off about Spurs. The media being in on it just amplifies it.

 

[Speaker]

Add in the delusional arsenal fans who still insist that "if everyone is fit then arsenal has the best 11 in the premier league" makes spurs a much more attractive team to the neutral.

No more to say on the numbers, they speak for themselves I feel. But while we're on delusional.

Personally, I find the attraction overwhelming.

You are no better than anyone. The fact that you think you (I use "you" collectively) are, and still pull the same bullshit, is what pisses people off about Spurs. The media being in on it just amplifies it.

And what Spurs fan constructed that comparison for sky? Just because the editing crew at a tv station knocked something together does not mean that all spurs fans (who had nothing to do with its creation) are delusional. Point out one quote of mine anywhere on this board that could be labelled as delusional.

Mind you, I've seen you post on theshedend and your unwarranted hatred for all things Spurs makes it utterly unsurprising that you would come on here to attack spurs without provocation. Perhaps i could take what you say about Spurs more seriously if you weren't so clearly biased. Nice one skipping the Torres question though, pretty stand-up of you to pick and choose what you respond to.