The ousting of Daniel (COYS)

chas vs dave said:

You'd think a respected journalist could actually quote Levy properly.

If I recall, levy said that tottenham are the biggest club in the world to him. That's a different context.

I will try and find his comment in the interview.

Click to expand...

Nowhere near as click-baity title though, is it.

I'm picturing him almost exploding with smugness at the moment - he gets to put the boot in, AND generate clicks, mainly from spurs fans, no less.

Cel said:

Nowhere near as click-baity title though, is it.

I'm picturing him almost exploding with smugness at the moment - he gets to put the boot in, AND generate clicks, mainly from spurs fans, no less.

Click to expand...

I know, however its gutter journalism. You don't expect this from the broadsheets.

chas vs dave said:

I know, however its gutter journalism. You don't expect this from the broadsheets.

Click to expand...

Oh, don't get me wrong, I agree fully, however all media has unfortunately slid that way. Ad revenue reigns supreme.

I doubt Matt Law even had final say on the headline, it will have been vetted/amended to get take advantage of algorithms etc.

For me this paragraph is the only one I took any notice of which really does lay down where the problem lies:
Over the past 20 years, Levy has hired 10 permanent coaches, who, between them, have won 61 trophies before and after managing Spurs. Between them all in that time, they have won one trophy at “the greatest club in the world.”

mil1lion said:

They're outspending us over the last 5 years as my graph clearly shows. Criminal given we've been playing CL in that time and the stadium was an investment that we were told didn't impact our ability to spend. Sorry but there is no excuse for us making 0 signings that summer either. It has taken years to claw back from that because we also only signed a few players the following summer.
The 50m I refer too is indeed from last year and it went back into the club according to itk. We chose not to spend it. So when you see the clear need to improve defence and we decide not to use 50m it really is frustrating.
We should have been more than capable to invest in the squad under Pochettino even in the old Stadium. We had CL football and we are one of the wealthiest clubs in the world playing in the richest league in the world. It's just lack of ambition whichever way you cut it. To not back Poch was criminal and has set us back years.

Click to expand...

You’re not reading or understanding what I’ve said so this is pointless. You’re wrong on multiple points and doing the blinkered ENICout thing. Enjoy the rest of the season.

Duke of Northumberland said:

You’re not reading or understanding what I’ve said so this is pointless. You’re wrong on multiple points and doing the blinkered ENICout thing. Enjoy the rest of the season.

Click to expand...

Jesus calm down, I'm not missing the point at all I just have different views of the situation. There's no 'one is wrong because they see different'. Yes we have spent well in the last year but not enough the previous few years. I'm not ENIC out for the sake of it, they've done a lot of good but the period around our time under Poch was a massive fail and the lack of on field ambition is clear as day. Good for you if you think different but the bottom line is we are playing catch up because of previous failings. What we've spent now the stadium is open is simply making up for lost time and the bare minimum of what is required for us to get back on track. They could very well keep spending like they did last year and that would be great but as it stands ENIC and Levy have a lot to make up for. The drop since making the CL final has been significant and they can't hide behind the new stadium or covid etc.

Scathing article on Levy by Matt Law in Telegraph.

Trees said:

Scathing article on Levy by Matt Law in Telegraph.

Click to expand...

Matt Law poops his pants.

PaulM said:

The strategy was clearly to get in a "winner" to get us over the line. It's failed twice at this point. But it was the strategy, signings have been made to fit the system of that "winner". Question now is, where do we go from here?

Click to expand...

some signings were made, but both "winners" are on record as making clear they didn't get what they needed to compete.

Some signings were clearly made without the approval of the "winners", and that money should have been spent instead on getting the players they did want in.

He was never going to be willing to give either what they wanted, so it was dumb to hire either. That neither play especially attractive football, and therefore not a good fit for the Club's DNA by his own admission, was also dumb.

Who knows where he goes from here?

Rocksuperstar said:

So, let's look at Chelsea...

How's that change of ownership going? We still keen to write off Levy? Would Todd be preferable to him for anyone wanting him out?

Or is that not the new owner you'd want? And do you think you/we would have any say whatsoever when a new owner comes along?

Click to expand...

Tell you what

I bet Chelsea will still win the next trophy before us

This thread gonna explode when Poch signs for Cheatski

I know levy has made some mistakes, but when you look at the potential alternatives I’m genuinely surprised by the levy/enic out movement.

Out of those who could afford to buy spurs there seems very little examples of something better.

Saudi blood money?
glazers leveraged buy out?
Todd boely?

please do mine point me in the direction of some examples that would be an improvement on enic, even with their faults.

everton? Leicester?

Liverpool owners probably the only ones who seem relatively competent and moral.

may least levy is well intentioned even if he doesn’t always make good decisions.
Better the devil you know…

THE SPURSBOY said:

This thread gonna explode when Poch signs for Cheatski

Click to expand...

I think it depends more on how he does. If he wins something there it's going to bring criticism for sure. If he fails maybe people will defend the choice to let him go (not good enough to take the next step etc). It also depends on who we get as that's where the focus should be but there will be comparisons between the managers and who does the better job.

cockerel downunder said:

I know levy has made some mistakes, but when you look at the potential alternatives I’m genuinely surprised by the levy/enic out movement.

Out of those who could afford to buy spurs there seems very little examples of something better.

Saudi blood money?
glazers leveraged buy out?
Todd boely?

please do mine point me in the direction of some examples that would be an improvement on enic, even with their faults.

everton? Leicester?

Liverpool owners probably the only ones who seem relatively competent and moral.

may least levy is well intentioned even if he doesn’t always make good decisions.
Better the devil you know…

Click to expand...

Honestly how is anyone going to really know who could invest? There are enough people who are capable. At the end of the day there will come a time when we are owned by someone else regardless. My preference is still for Levy to take a back step and for ENIC to put good money into the football side of things for Munn and co to work with. I think that's the best option but it's hard to trust Levy will keep out. I do feel people are more Levy out than ENIC out so if Levy out means him being out of the football side of things that's the more realistic outcome.

mil1lion said:

I think it depends more on how he does. If he wins something there it's going to bring criticism for sure. If he fails maybe people will defend the choice to let him go (not good enough to take the next step etc). It also depends on who we get as that's where the focus should be but there will be comparisons between the managers and who does the better job.

Click to expand...

Yeah levy has a big job on his hand get nagelsmann in and we can live with it but gets Rodgers in etc think there will be carnage

It’s almost the perfect time for Levy to let someone else run the foot side tbh. No manager, no DOF, put someone else in complete charge of that side of things (I know, Munn, but I’m dubious) and it’s a good clean slate to out together a manager, DOF and someone above them to really plan a new project and work collectively.

cockerel downunder said:

I know levy has made some mistakes, but when you look at the potential alternatives I’m genuinely surprised by the levy/enic out movement.

Out of those who could afford to buy spurs there seems very little examples of something better.

Saudi blood money?
glazers leveraged buy out?
Todd boely?

please do mine point me in the direction of some examples that would be an improvement on enic, even with their faults.

everton? Leicester?

Liverpool owners probably the only ones who seem relatively competent and moral.

may least levy is well intentioned even if he doesn’t always make good decisions.
Better the devil you know…

Click to expand...

I take my chances

23 years 1 trophy is more than enough for me

mil1lion said:

Jesus calm down, I'm not missing the point at all I just have different views of the situation. There's no 'one is wrong because they see different'. Yes we have spent well in the last year but not enough the previous few years. I'm not ENIC out for the sake of it, they've done a lot of good but the period around our time under Poch was a massive fail and the lack of on field ambition is clear as day. Good for you if you think different but the bottom line is we are playing catch up because of previous failings. What we've spent now the stadium is open is simply making up for lost time and the bare minimum of what is required for us to get back on track. They could very well keep spending like they did last year and that would be great but as it stands ENIC and Levy have a lot to make up for. The drop since making the CL final has been significant and they can't hide behind the new stadium or covid etc.

Click to expand...

It’s in the analysis- it’s not that one opinion is worth another. It’s not good analysis to compare spending during the escalating incomplete building project. It makes more sense once the strategy/ business model is operating, and during that time we are about the same as Arsenal and higher than Liverpool for their fans on here.

Duke of Northumberland said:

It’s in the analysis- it’s not that one opinion is worth another. It’s not good analysis to compare spending during the escalating incomplete building project. It makes more sense once the strategy/ business model is operating, and during that time we are about the same as Arsenal and higher than Liverpool for their fans on here.

Click to expand...

Sorry but the stadium was an investment separate from the transfer policy and that's what we were told. Besides it's paid over many years so it's not like we had this massive outlay stopping us spending at the time. It's also not like we didn't have Wembley gate receipts and CL football income to help. You make it sound like we had no money until the stadium was fully open.
Even if we go along with your idea that it impacted our ability to spend we still didn't do enough under Poch. We could have at least sold and signed players with the money, loaned in players and got free transfers with little net spend. To sign 0 players was a joke, then to still only sign 3 senior players the following summer when we needed a rebuild by that point set us back years.
If the plan was to let the squad decline over 3 or 4 years until the stadium was open and then build the squad back up then it's a bad approach. It just leaves us with much more work to do in a shorter space of time. For an investment company it would surely make sense to keep investing into the squad each year and spread the investment cost over time. Keep the squad competing and have better chance of CL football and income (rather than the Europa and Conference that followed).
If we just pushed at the time when we were at the top under Poch then the long term gain would pay off anything we spent on the squad during the stadium build. Instead the squad went into a downward spiral, we went from 2nd to 3rd to 4th and didn't react to it. We ended up with Europa and Conference, didn't even go that far in either and ended up paying high wages for 2 high profile managers.
So now we're just spending enough for a summer when we need 2 or 3 summers worth of signings for the squad to make up ground. So it does matter for example if we only start to match Arsenal in 1 window when they've rebuilt over the past few windows. A team we've just scraped ahead of the last few seasons who are spending what we spend now without the decline in squad we have. They're closer to a point where they will only need 2 or 3 important signings a year similar to what City and Liverpool have been doing. We still need about 2 summer windows before we get to that point.

We obviously got financial challenges during the building that wasn't planned. Spiraling costs both in materials and the ambition of the project.
The years we didn't spend came as we posted world record profit levels for a football club, which gave us the financial standing needed to convince the banks to refinance our debt long term at a ridiculous low rate. In hindsight a move that might have saved us as we could have crumbled during Covid shut down if we were sitting with the largest debt football has ever seen on short term.

Pochettino was given options in the windows without transfers, we could of course have sold players and reinvested.
His decision was to rather hold onto his players, which led everything to go stale - not that I blame him, it was challenging process, I'm however a bit disappointed that he lost faith and commitment to see it through.
Purely sporting wise it was the moment to push on, but you could also sit here today with a non league club without a ground if clowns had ran the club in stead of Levy.

The blame against Levy for not getting everything 100% with the stadium knowing what the nation and the world went through in those years is very unfair.