Are Spurs on the Back Foot?

[riversmonkey]

It's very early, with many big transfers to be made. But here's what I think about our rivals in the top six.

United signings are interesting. How will De Gea cope with the more direct, set piece orientated attacks? Will Ashley Young handle playing at the highest level. I think it's easy to look good for a mediocre team like Villa, but can he perform well in the Champions League? Will Phil Jones even get a game? Despite this I still see them in the top two.

Arsenal look very much in transition. Though Wenger must take some of the blame for this trophyless run, you've also got to look at the underachieving playing staff. It's hard to see them challenging for the title.

City look quite stable at the moment. Mancini is doing a decent job, completing the objectives by winning a trophy and qualifying for the Champions League last season. With further strengthening I think they can be big contenders this season.

Chelsea again are in transition. Many expect Villas-boas to be the next Mourinho, but I think his expansive approach will get found out a little in the Premier League. I don't think Stamford Bridge will be a fortress next season.

Liverpool have made some bizarre signings. The twenty million for Henderson, and the possibility of letting Meireles go seems crazy. I think they can push Arsenal and Chelsea for fourth spot.

Next season I see it being a toss-up between the two Manchester clubs for the title. With us amongst the fight for fourth.

 

[StartingPrice]

Of course you're wrong, SP. You should know that by now. :grin:

It's The Guardian, not Pravda! :lol:

The Chairman of a board makes a PR statement, an unbiased journalist writes a story in an independent newspaper in a country where the press is open and free. Which one do you believe?

Come on, this is the sort of conversation you'd expect to see in the KGB or something. He's really not criticising but sharing his understanding of a situation - which, SP, other ITK (why you'd choose them as Validators-in-Chief, I don't know but there's enough conflicting reports to make them inadmissable anyway) suggest is not completely inaccurate.

And besides, the basic common sense shows he's not completely wrong.

Of the top six sides in England which has the smallest attendance? CL funds this season (whether budgeted or not is regardless on his analysis. All it shows is we are not going to "do a Leeds". Scott never suggests we are).

And we have the fifth rated squad.

Ask yourselves whether the current squad is good enough to finish top four. If you are stopping yourself saying "Well, if we just sign..." then you are admitting that there is a lot of truth to what Scott is saying - we have to do a lot of work/forward momentum/get on the front foot/whatever you want to call it. The other sides bar Liverpool are already ahead of us and even they are spending to try to close the gap.

It seems we are taking this far too personally when it's a fair comment and one that I am convinced Levy and Harry actually agree with and will do everything in their power to solve. Which is all that matters.

The days when I respected the Guardian as a newspaper are long since gone, Bill...so appealing to its levity and kudos fails, I'm afraid.

I agree (as in my answer to Sloth), that we have the smallest stadium, and attendances, etc...to otherwise would be rather foolish.

All I did was draw attention to a serious flaw in his argument - namely, that failing to qualify for the CL has seriously weakened our financial planning. I made a statement of fact, that Levy stated he had budgeted for the coming year excluding requalifying for the CL, and that he made that statement before the season started (so, of course, as I stated explicitly) he has an agenda, but it not the one you imply.

Suggesting I am confusing Pravda with the Guardian is trite and inflammatory, I did no such thing. I questioned one of a football journalists' statements, upon which a lot of his argeument rests, based on a prior statement by THFC Chairman Daniel Levy. I stated that I chose to believe that Levy understands the financial state of the club better than this journalist. That is my choice. But, if you want me to accept that I have this the wrong way round you are going to have to do better than to state that Levy obviously had an agenda at the start of the season, even though I had already accepted that. I am sure part of the agenda was to not too much pressure on Redknapp and the players, but there has to be more to it than that. Like, just maybe, he was telling the truth:shrug:

As for the 'fifth best squad' thing, I have already answered that with Sloth...my understanding of this goes somewhat beyond basic deductive reasoning (Spurs finished fifth, therefore, Spurs have the fifth best squad). As long as we can keep ourt star names (all of whom are young and improving), we all know we could make one vital (striking) purchase and be considerably better. Can we say that of any of our competitors? See my response to Sloth.

So, aside from believing that Daniel Levy was telling a porky and failing to qualify for CL has fooked us and left us threadbare, and that our squad is and will remain somehow mythically fifth best in the league (at best) by a flawed process of deductive reasoning, what do you have? Their stadium is smaller:shrug:

 

[Bill_Oddie]

The days when I respected the Guardian as a newspaper are long since gone, Bill...so appealing to its levity and kudos fails, I'm afraid.

I agree (as in my answer to Sloth), that we have the smallest stadium, and attendances, etc...to otherwise would be rather foolish.

All I did was draw attention to a serious flaw in his argument - namely, that failing to qualify for the CL has seriously weakened our financial planning. I made a statement of fact, that Levy stated he had budgeted for the coming year excluding requalifying for the CL, and that he made that statement before the season started (so, of course, as I stated explicitly) he has an agenda, but it not the one you imply.

Suggesting I am confusing Pravda with the Guardian is trite and inflammatory, I did no such thing. I questioned one of a football journalists' statements, upon which a lot of his argeument rests, based on a prior statement by THFC Chairman Daniel Levy. I stated that I chose to believe that Levy understands the financial state of the club better than this journalist. That is my choice. But, if you want me to accept that I have this the wrong way round you are going to have to do better than to state that Levy obviously had an agenda at the start of the season, even though I had already accepted that. I am sure part of the agenda was to not too much pressure on Redknapp and the players, but there has to be more to it than that. Like, just maybe, he was telling the truth:shrug:

As for the 'fifth best squad' thing, I have already answered that with Sloth...my understanding of this goes somewhat beyond basic deductive reasoning (Spurs finished fifth, therefore, Spurs have the fifth best squad). As long as we can keep ourt star names (all of whom are young and improving), we all know we could make one vital (striking) purchase and be considerably better. Can we say that of any of our competitors? See my response to Sloth.

So, aside from believing that Daniel Levy was telling a porky and failing to qualify for CL has fooked us and left us threadbare, and that our squad is and will remain somehow mythically fifth best in the league (at best) by a flawed process of deductive reasoning, what do you have? Their stadium is smaller:shrug:

Two of my most admirable qualities, as well you know. :wink:

 

[StartingPrice]

Two of my most admirable qualities, as well you know. :wink:

:grin:

 

[TheGreenLily]

No, we are not on the backfoot, but we will be if we don't invest in some decent strikes and a couple of other key players to take us forward.

 

[Archie77]

Weve got tonnes of cash. We negotiated 2 shirt sponsorships, got to the qtrs of the CL and have spent next to nothing.

Where has all the money gone? Where has all the money gone?

 

[StartingPrice]

Weve got tonnes of cash. We negotiated 2 shirt sponsorships, got to the qtrs of the CL and have spent next to nothing.

Where has all the money gone? Where has all the money gone?

Archie's question, Archie's question - so good they named it twice:grin:

 

[Bingy]

First of all lets see how our squad is looking come the start of the season, a lot can change between now and then.

Second of all I think we'll be in a stronger position than Liverpool and on a par with Arsenal - particularly if the lose Fabregas etc and we keep hold of our star players, and that looks a pretty safe bet.

Well said.....Y
First of all lets see how our squad is looking come the start of the season, a lot can change between now and then.

Second of all I think we'll be in a stronger position than Liverpool and on a par with Arsenal - particularly if the lose Fabregas etc and we keep hold of our star players, and that looks a pretty safe bet.
ou hit the nail on the head...COYS!

 

[Chimbo!]

Chimbo...I hate quoting myself shifty, but here's one I mae earlier ^^^...:grin:

The important point being that Levy stated at the start of the season that he had budgeted for us not requalifying, and that therefore not requalifying would have do no harm whatsoever to our plans...which (allegedly) included having a shi'ite load of money to spend in January, to which can be added some kind of usual 'Summer warchest' + CL money + player sales/wages recouped.
ITK has already said there is money there, backing up Levy's statement, made before a ball had been kicked (so any agenda he had would be entirely different to the one you are envisaging).
So, do you believe the Chairman in a statement made before the season started, backed by ITK recently, or do you believe a journo, who is not on the inside, who is making a lot of suppositions, and who, more than likely, has the journo-disease agenda thang (Eek) :shrug:

I don't think the ITK adds strength to your position, as it most probably originates from Levy and those around him.

The point about the journo may be true but we do not know whether or not he really has inside knowledge.

I think this is a debate best revisited in September because then we will know. If Modric stays and we have a few shiny new high quality strikers then the journo was wrong. If, however, Modric leaves or we do not have any new quality strikers then it appears he would be correct.

Nobody is saying that the club's finances are in jeopardy but what has been suggested is that the financial commitments of the club need trimming. If shipping the deadwood is not enough to do that then key players may have to go. It does, however, seem that we are in a weaker position this transfer window compared to previous ones. That does not mean we are in trouble but it means we face an increasing uphill struggle to get into the top 4. I can see where Matt Scott is coming from.

 

[bilburger]

I know Matt Scott personally. He's a dyed in the wool Arsenal supporter. I take his Spurs articles with a pinch of salt

 

[StartingPrice]

I don't think the ITK adds strength to your position, as it most probably originates from Levy and those around him.

The point about the journo may be true but we do not know whether or not he really has inside knowledge.

I think this is a debate best revisited in September because then we will know. If Modric stays and we have a few shiny new high quality strikers then the journo was wrong. If, however, Modric leaves or we do not have any new quality strikers then it appears he would be correct.

Nobody is saying that the club's finances are in jeopardy but what has been suggested is that the financial commitments of the club need trimming. If shipping the deadwood is not enough to do that then key players may have to go. It does, however, seem that we are in a weaker position this transfer window compared to previous ones. That does not mean we are in trouble but it means we face an increasing uphill struggle to get into the top 4. I can see where Matt Scott is coming from.

Bill has said that the ITK swings both ways - I meant to concede that that is so. But I don't see why Levy and his close associates would leak information that we have money to spend, especially if it isn't true. That just doesn't really make much sense, I'm afraid.

No we don't really know if the journo has inside knowledge - but that was my point, really wasn't it: I'm more prepared to accept that Levy has inside knowledge than that a journalsit does. If Levy says, as he did a the start of the season, that his budgets had been drawn up to cope with failing to qualify for CL, and then we don't, and then a journalist says (seemingly in a general sense), that we have failed to get CL and therefore it will harm our financial planning the most logical explanation I can thnk is that he either never heard Levy's comment at the start of the season, or he has forgotten about it, and he is surmising. I don't know any of this, I'm surmising too.

I think the debate you want to revisit isn't the one we are having here. I showed a flaw in this journalsists argument, it's that simple. The bottom line is whether you want to believe that Levy's statement made before the seaosn began and therefore (obviously) before he knew whether we would qualify for the CL or not, you be given precedence over a seemingly surmised statement by a jounralist he may not even be aware that Levy has said this. I choose to consider Levy's statement as the more trustworthy, therefore I do not consider the journalist's calculations to have much bearing.

I may be wrong.

I don't see where the discussion of trimming the squad of dead wood comes into that argument - we all know that is so, and I would see it as a positive rather than a negative.

Why would shipping the dead wood not be enough. We seemingly had upwards of £35 million to spend in January + there will be some money earmarked for Summer transfers + CL monmey + money from Deadwood, and all, once we have shipped out about 8 or 9 players, to get two or three in. I really can't see us not having the money to do that.

On that basis, we really do not seem to be in a weaker position in regard to transfers than in previous seasons, and I cannot see where he is coming from. Aside form the analysis I have given, above, I should add that to take last Summer, as but one example, we got Gallas on a free, and VDV and Sandro for about £14 mill. combined. Are you saying we will have less than that to spend?

Matt Scott has hung his whole argument on one thing and one thing only: the supposition that failing to qualify for the CL this season means we must be in a worse off position than last Summer. I have offered a statement by the Chairman of the club, made before the season even started that renders that supposition exrtremely suspect, at least to hang such a substantial argument on. Short of calling Levy a liar, or saying he has totally miscaluated and is hugely incompetent, I don't see where you have left to go.

 

[StartingPrice]

I know Matt Scott personally. He's a tied in the wool Arsenal supporter. I take his Spurs articles with a pinch of salt

:think: So, Gooner claims unfounded supposition shows Spurs weakest of CL contenders...and Spurs fans rush to show how that supposition could be correct against all the evidence :shrug:

 

[Chimbo!]

Bill has said that the ITK swings both ways - I meant to concede that that is so. But I don't see why Levy and his close associates would leak information that we have money to spend, especially if it isn't true. That just doesn't really make much sense, I'm afraid.

No we don't really know if the journo has inside knowledge - but that was my point, really wasn't it: I'm more prepared to accept that Levy has inside knowledge than that a journalsit does. If Levy says, as he did a the start of the season, that his budgets had been drawn up to cope with failing to qualify for CL, and then we don't, and then a journalist says (seemingly in a general sense), that we have failed to get CL and therefore it will harm our financial planning the most logical explanation I can thnk is that he either never heard Levy's comment at the start of the season, or he has forgotten about it, and he is surmising. I don't know any of this, I'm surmising too.

I think the debate you want to revisit isn't the one we are having here. I showed a flaw in this journalsists argument, it's that simple. The bottom line is whether you want to believe that Levy's statement made before the seaosn began and therefore (obviously) before he knew whether we would qualify for the CL or not, you be given precedence over a seemingly surmised statement by a jounralist he may not even be aware that Levy has said this. I choose to consider Levy's statement as the more trustworthy, therefore I do not consider the journalist's calculations to have much bearing.

I may be wrong.

I don't see where the discussion of trimming the squad of dead wood comes into that argument - we all know that is so, and I would see it as a positive rather than a negative.

Why would shipping the dead wood not be enough. We seemingly had upwards of £35 million to spend in January + there will be some money earmarked for Summer transfers + CL monmey + money from Deadwood, and all, once we have shipped out about 8 or 9 players, to get two or three in. I really can't see us not having the money to do that.

On that basis, we really do not seem to be in a weaker position in regard to transfers than in previous seasons, and I cannot see where he is coming from. Aside form the analysis I have given, above, I should add that to take last Summer, as but one example, we got Gallas on a free, and VDV and Sandro for about £14 mill. combined. Are you saying we will have less than that to spend?

Matt Scott has hung his whole argument on one thing and one thing only: the supposition that failing to qualify for the CL this season means we must be in a worse off position than last Summer. I have offered a statement by the Chairman of the club, made before the season even started that renders that supposition exrtremely suspect, at least to hang such a substantial argument on. Short of calling Levy a liar, or saying he has totally miscaluated and is hugely incompetent, I don't see where you have left to go.

I accept everything you say except the bit in bold. If we believe what Levy says (i.e. we need to streamline our squad meaning our fringe players) to reduce the wage bill then if it goes to plan then all well and good; we have no financial issues.

The problem with that strategy, however, stems from the possibility of not being able to sell those fringe players. Perhaps no club wants to pay the transfer fee we demand or the wages the player demands. The likes of Keane, Defoe and Jenas may have to take pay cuts to move. This may be problematic.

If we cannot ship them then either we take the financial hit or sell a better player to alleviate the financial strain. This may be unlikely but it makes our transfer strategy defensive. We want to ship a lot of fringe players, we need to reduce our wage bill, we want to keep our best players and we want to add quality to our squad. Balancing all those things is difficult.

Moreover, having to sell before we buy means we still have to sort ourselves out financially to get the players we want. The likes of Liverpool, City, United, Chelsea and Arsenal do not have to do this. Hence, we are on the back foot compared to our competitors.

 

[Bingy]

It is pure 'idle speculation' to say that we are worse off than Liverpool, Arsenal...or any of the other top 6. Nobody, (not even Levi) can plan when the 'money bags' of the Man Utd/City/Chelski...and whoever else over invests in the EPL! Tyat said, we are, structurly, MUCH better off when we look at the dept and confusion that exists in the Top League in England.
There is every possibility that we are going to have the 3rd or 4th best squad in the EPL...and, IF we cut out our traditional 'weaknesses' we can hold our own? COYS!

 

[StartingPrice]

I accept everything you say except the bit in bold. If we believe what Levy says (i.e. we need to streamline our squad meaning our fringe players) to reduce the wage bill then if it goes to plan then all well and good; we have no financial issues.

The problem with that strategy, however, stems from the possibility of not being able to sell those fringe players. Perhaps no club wants to pay the transfer fee we demand or the wages the player demands. The likes of Keane, Defoe and Jenas may have to take pay cuts to move. This may be problematic.

If we cannot ship them then either we take the financial hit or sell a better player to alleviate the financial strain. This may be unlikely but it makes our transfer strategy defensive. We want to ship a lot of fringe players, we need to reduce our wage bill, we want to keep our best players and we want to add quality to our squad. Balancing all those things is difficult.

Moreover, having to sell before we buy means we still have to sort ourselves out financially to get the players we want. The likes of Liverpool, City, United, Chelsea and Arsenal do not have to do this. Hence, we are on the back foot compared to our competitors.

Firstly, you are just getting totally away from the central tenet - that Scott based a whole article on one supposition that, if you accept Levy's statement from before the start of the season, when he had no way of knowing whether we would qualify for the CL or not, and therefore no ostensible reason to make the statement, is wholly unreliable as a basis for framing an arguement the way he has. Basically he has said 2 + 2 = 5, failing to recall or be aware of Levy having already stipulated that our budgets would be based on failure to qualify for CL, and so reaching the conclusion that failure to qualify for CL = less money, therefore the club are in a worse position. Everything else is irrelevant. He made a statement which would only be justified if Levy had based his budgets on qualifying for the CL again, which he had not. And that is the end of it, no matter how much you attempt to twist the issue into a different one.

Secondly, not only does the debate of whether we can shift all of our dead wood have no relevance to this, but it is, in itself, based entirely on a doom-laden Null Hypothesis which is, itself, riddled with suppoisitons. I personally hold very few fears that we will be able to sell our dead wood. Nor amI particularly worried that Levy will struggle to negotiate beneficial deals, as he has shown time and again his mastery in doing just this. In any case, as I have stated twice now, I do not belieef that selling our dead wood is the only source of funding for new signings this Summer.

Thirdly, because I do not believe that selling the dead wood is our only source of funding, and I don't believe we will have that much trouble selling them, I don't see any reason to introduce a notion of selling our better players to relieve financial strain (which doesn't in any case exist), other than panic-mongering.

Fourthly, I do not accept your toruous argument to show that this puts us into a weaker position viz. transfers and therefore on the back food comparative to our competitors, because that is clearly not the only factor involved. If we accept the case for United, Chelsea and Citeh (even though I could make a case that we are closer to them than you are allowing): Liverpool are only able to go out and spend on players immediately as their squad was comparatively poorer than ours in the first place, and even so, for all of their spending I still don't thnk they are on a level with us. The ArseScum will need to sort their goal keeping and central defensive problems out (if Whinger has finally recognised the latter), while coping with the potential loss of Fabregas, Arshavin and Nasri, when, IMHO, he has shown over and again that he is good at finding young players and bringing them through to adapt to his system, but not in buying experienced, quality players to come in and adapt straight away. Now he also has to concentrate more on buying English players, as well. Just saying we have more dead wood to shift and therefore our position is weaker, is a pretty facile argument.

Fifthly, I feel I need to point out to you that you are now jumping through hoops to show that a Gooner's conclusion was right, even though it isn't, when my original contention that you disagreed with was that his central supposition was unsupportable, adn you are no longer wven arguing this, but relying on a wholly seperate argument to continue upholding his conclusion (that, given he is a Gooner, may be just a little biased).

It is pure 'idle speculation' to say that we are worse off than Liverpool, Arsenal...or any of the other top 6. Nobody, (not even Levi) can plan when the 'money bags' of the Man Utd/City/Chelski...and whoever else over invests in the EPL! Tyat said, we are, structurly, MUCH better off when we look at the dept and confusion that exists in the Top League in England.
There is every possibility that we are going to have the 3rd or 4th best squad in the EPL...and, IF we cut out our traditional 'weaknesses' we can hold our own? COYS!

:clap: For bringing back to centre stage the fact that we are structurally better off than any of our rivals, in terms of squad regualation anf financial fair play, and also the blindingly obvious reality that all we need to do is keep our best players and buy a striker than can play 4-5-1 AND score pray:ray:rayin order to have a highly competitive squad and possibly the 3rd or 4th best in the league.

 

[guate]

I tend to agree with much of what S.P. has said, particularly regarding our supposed transfer policy that he's clearly explained above, however provided we bring in the super striker we all know we need, and not loose any of our key players then IMHO we will have one of the strongest and more importantly, most united, teams of the current top 6 so I'm forecasting top 4 again.
As others have said, Untd being Untd, at least while red nose is there, will always be at or around the top 2 or 3 teams in the land. Chelski........interesting one as although they have a tried and trusted squad may have real issues with the appointment of a perceived under age coach through player dispute. Arse anal have three obstacles to overcome a) replacing those players that seem on the way out (Fabregas, Clichy and Nasri) b) strengthening a suspect defense and c) getting them all to gel while installing a winning ethic, something that Arse wipe has been having real problems with. Citeh now have the squad and will surely add a few more "record" signings, basically to stop these same players going to their competition as they prepare themselves for their first outing in the Champions League. However, for all their enormous squad I truly believe they'll find handling the league and Champions more than they're capable of and Mancini's negative tactics will be found out this time round. The bin dippers........give me a break, yes they did well under Kenny but they're still way short of us in overall quality and that will be their downfall as the season progresses.