FORMER Manager Watch: Nuno Espírito Santo

rossdapep said:

100%

It's pointless criticising Nuno.

He wasn't supposed to be here. He doesn't even have all of the necessary tools in his squad.

That falls squarely at the feet of Paratici and Levy.

However, considering Levy's summer statement and full well knowing the amount of pressure he was under. He once again has probably made a bad call.

Therefore Levy should take the fall.

Click to expand...

arunspurs said:

Why would Levy sack himself ?

Click to expand...

rez9000 said:

It's not Nuno that's the problem, even if he isn't the right man for the Spurs job.

I've been saying it for months - ANY manager would be unable to make this club work because of issues within the squad. It could be Conte; it could be Nagelsmann, it could be Potter, it could be Tuchel, it could be God him/her/itself.

What's needed is a proper clear-the-decks rebuild, with players who have no future at Spurs not even training with the first squad. But that's not going to come about because of what I observe around the way we operate when it comes to spending. It won't matter who the manager is because of the spending restrictions set by the chairman.

The issue here isn't a 'transfer budget'. That's a myth. It doesn't exist. I've seen countless posts that say something like:

"Sell Dele for £40m, sell Winks for £10m, sell Aurier for £2 and spend that money on Vlahovic"

It doesn't work that way.

The cost of a player's acquisition is always spread out on the buying club's finances across the length of the player's contract and that cost will also include that player's wages.

Therefore, the real indicator of a club's operating procedure is the wages-to-turnover ratio - that's the true sign of how much money a club spends on its playing staff. And the key point around that is this:

As a club, we have the lowest wages-to-turnover ratio in the Premier League. The last figures I could find (by SwissRamble) showed our ratio at 46% - rock bottom of the League. The club in 19th position (i.e. the club that spent the 19th lowest) was Sheffield United, who spent 54%. And that 8% difference was the biggest single step difference apart from the one between Brighton and Everton (Brighton spent 78% of their turnover, Everton 89%). These figures change each year of course, but one thing never changes - Spurs being the lowest on the list.

Now, we're a football club. Other than players, what other significant outlay is there for us? Obviously, things like maintenance costs, non-playing staff wages, things of that nature, of course. But then, the other clubs have those costs too. So, why are we spending significantly less of our turnover than the rest of the League (and who knows which other clubs in the lower divisions - remember, wages-to-turnover is a proportion, not an absolute figure).

The only answer I can think of is that we're using it to service debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing for a business to do. But I think we're servicing our debt faster than we need to and that revenue is being devoted to that as opposed to playing staff. The thing there is that there's no reason for the club to do that except if it's in preparation for sale.

Now that, also, is not a bad thing. The club will still be here if it's sold to someone else. And I have no issue with ENIC making a killing from it per se.

Unfortunately, I can't see any other explanation. And it means (if it's the fact of the matter) that Nuno, whether he's shite or whether he's amazing, will never be given the tools needed. In essence he's shackled from the get-go. And that would apply to any other manager we appoint as well.

(Plus, there's a cultural problem that exists also, although I think that too stems from the financial modus operandi.)

Click to expand...

rossdapep said:

100%

It's pointless criticising Nuno.

He wasn't supposed to be here. He doesn't even have all of the necessary tools in his squad.

That falls squarely at the feet of Paratici and Levy.

However, considering Levy's summer statement and full well knowing the amount of pressure he was under. He once again has probably made a bad call.

Therefore Levy should take the fall.

Click to expand...

arunspurs said:

Why would Levy sack himself ?

Click to expand...

rez9000 said:

It's not Nuno that's the problem, even if he isn't the right man for the Spurs job.

I've been saying it for months - ANY manager would be unable to make this club work because of issues within the squad. It could be Conte; it could be Nagelsmann, it could be Potter, it could be Tuchel, it could be God him/her/itself.

What's needed is a proper clear-the-decks rebuild, with players who have no future at Spurs not even training with the first squad. But that's not going to come about because of what I observe around the way we operate when it comes to spending. It won't matter who the manager is because of the spending restrictions set by the chairman.

The issue here isn't a 'transfer budget'. That's a myth. It doesn't exist. I've seen countless posts that say something like:

"Sell Dele for £40m, sell Winks for £10m, sell Aurier for £2 and spend that money on Vlahovic"

It doesn't work that way.

The cost of a player's acquisition is always spread out on the buying club's finances across the length of the player's contract and that cost will also include that player's wages.

Therefore, the real indicator of a club's operating procedure is the wages-to-turnover ratio - that's the true sign of how much money a club spends on its playing staff. And the key point around that is this:

As a club, we have the lowest wages-to-turnover ratio in the Premier League. The last figures I could find (by SwissRamble) showed our ratio at 46% - rock bottom of the League. The club in 19th position (i.e. the club that spent the 19th lowest) was Sheffield United, who spent 54%. And that 8% difference was the biggest single step difference apart from the one between Brighton and Everton (Brighton spent 78% of their turnover, Everton 89%). These figures change each year of course, but one thing never changes - Spurs being the lowest on the list.

Now, we're a football club. Other than players, what other significant outlay is there for us? Obviously, things like maintenance costs, non-playing staff wages, things of that nature, of course. But then, the other clubs have those costs too. So, why are we spending significantly less of our turnover than the rest of the League (and who knows which other clubs in the lower divisions - remember, wages-to-turnover is a proportion, not an absolute figure).

The only answer I can think of is that we're using it to service debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing for a business to do. But I think we're servicing our debt faster than we need to and that revenue is being devoted to that as opposed to playing staff. The thing there is that there's no reason for the club to do that except if it's in preparation for sale.

Now that, also, is not a bad thing. The club will still be here if it's sold to someone else. And I have no issue with ENIC making a killing from it per se.

Unfortunately, I can't see any other explanation. And it means (if it's the fact of the matter) that Nuno, whether he's shite or whether he's amazing, will never be given the tools needed. In essence he's shackled from the get-go. And that would apply to any other manager we appoint as well.

(Plus, there's a cultural problem that exists also, although I think that too stems from the financial modus operandi.)

Click to expand...

rossdapep said:

I think we have a first team capable of challenging for top 4 but probably just falling short.

The issue is the depth. Once we lose Kane, Son, Ndombele or Lo Celso, we suddenly start to look very average in these core areas

I say Lo Celso and Ndombele as there's no questioning their quality, it's their consistency.

Click to expand...

yidboy123 said:

Not sure if you are serious or not but we've played 5 league games, 2 of them being against the best 2 teams in the league.

Our fan base is embarrassing at times with situations like this.

Click to expand...

13VanDerBale13 said:

Tbf those statistics were pretty embarrassing too, we still played 3 other games against inferior opposition.

Click to expand...

THE SPURSBOY said:

Capable Challenging for top four which of our players would get near the fist eleven of the top fours now. Maybe Kane and son. That would be it

Click to expand...

rez9000 said:

It's not Nuno that's the problem, even if he isn't the right man for the Spurs job.

I've been saying it for months - ANY manager would be unable to make this club work because of issues within the squad. It could be Conte; it could be Nagelsmann, it could be Potter, it could be Tuchel, it could be God him/her/itself.

What's needed is a proper clear-the-decks rebuild, with players who have no future at Spurs not even training with the first squad. But that's not going to come about because of what I observe around the way we operate when it comes to spending. It won't matter who the manager is because of the spending restrictions set by the chairman.

The issue here isn't a 'transfer budget'. That's a myth. It doesn't exist. I've seen countless posts that say something like:

"Sell Dele for £40m, sell Winks for £10m, sell Aurier for £2 and spend that money on Vlahovic"

It doesn't work that way.

The cost of a player's acquisition is always spread out on the buying club's finances across the length of the player's contract and that cost will also include that player's wages.

Therefore, the real indicator of a club's operating procedure is the wages-to-turnover ratio - that's the true sign of how much money a club spends on its playing staff. And the key point around that is this:

As a club, we have the lowest wages-to-turnover ratio in the Premier League. The last figures I could find (by SwissRamble) showed our ratio at 46% - rock bottom of the League. The club in 19th position (i.e. the club that spent the 19th lowest) was Sheffield United, who spent 54%. And that 8% difference was the biggest single step difference apart from the one between Brighton and Everton (Brighton spent 78% of their turnover, Everton 89%). These figures change each year of course, but one thing never changes - Spurs being the lowest on the list.

Now, we're a football club. Other than players, what other significant outlay is there for us? Obviously, things like maintenance costs, non-playing staff wages, things of that nature, of course. But then, the other clubs have those costs too. So, why are we spending significantly less of our turnover than the rest of the League (and who knows which other clubs in the lower divisions - remember, wages-to-turnover is a proportion, not an absolute figure).

The only answer I can think of is that we're using it to service debt. That's not necessarily a bad thing for a business to do. But I think we're servicing our debt faster than we need to and that revenue is being devoted to that as opposed to playing staff. The thing there is that there's no reason for the club to do that except if it's in preparation for sale.

Now that, also, is not a bad thing. The club will still be here if it's sold to someone else. And I have no issue with ENIC making a killing from it per se.

Unfortunately, I can't see any other explanation. And it means (if it's the fact of the matter) that Nuno, whether he's shite or whether he's amazing, will never be given the tools needed. In essence he's shackled from the get-go. And that would apply to any other manager we appoint as well.

(Plus, there's a cultural problem that exists also, although I think that too stems from the financial modus operandi.)

Click to expand...

AJW said:

Normally I would disagree and believe we will give any manager a year but we have a stinking run now:

Wolves away in the cup
Arsenal away
Villa at home after Europe
Newcastle away
West Ham away after Europe
Man United at home
Everton away after Europe
Leeds at home
Burnley away after Europe

Obviously we may win them all but personally I can’t see many points there…. Could be in a tough position by December

Click to expand...

Monkey boy said:

Im not sticking up for Enic but

Bergwyn - £30m
Ndombele - £58m
Lo Celso - £40m
Sessegnon - £25m
Romero - £45m
Reguillon - £30m
Bale - £10m
Gil - £20m
Rodon - £14m
Royal - £25m
Doherty - £12m


You cant say that Enic havent invested. We've recruited so poorly but definitely havent not invested. Im sure theres others that ive missed off that list but its pretty damning all the same. Not one of those players can be looked at as being anything close to a success.

Click to expand...

13VanDerBale13 said:

Tbf those statistics were pretty embarrassing too, we still played 3 other games against inferior opposition.

Click to expand...

yidboy123 said:

2 games we won and the other we had how many players unavailable and went down to 10men. Some perspective.

Click to expand...

ajspurs said:

Yeah definitely doesn't deserve sacking at all but I'm also not going to act like those statistics aren't poor irrespective of the circumstances and turn a complete blind eye to them because I don't think we played near well enough in the Wolves, Watford and Palace games and to me those numbers do highlight a problem, even if it is after so many games, but it doesn't mean it will be a recurring problem. For instance today our approach was different than it was in any of those games and if we continue trying to play as such I think the outcome on the pitch will improve. If we continue to play in our shell as we had done before today though I don't think those numbers will go up much.

Click to expand...