ENIC...

[Metalhead]

Yes Sugar fucked it at the formation of the premier league while Arsenal appointed Wenger, Man U had Ferguson, Liverpool we’re still we’re still considered the biggest club in England so we’re bringing in the revenues to sign big players, and Chelsea came out of no where and made some smart signings in Gullit, Vialli etc… and then got took over by a dodgy Russian

True. They got a bit lucky as they were in financial trouble before Roman took over.

 

[the yid]

Has it been confirmed yet that ultimateloner is Levy yet?

 

[davidmatzdorf]

But there was a “Big 5” who were the original breakaway contingent that formed the premier league in the first place

We just dropped out of it because of a different form of mis-management...

Yes. Before the Premiership started, the five big clubs were Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton, probably in that order. But that period so far predates the current "Big Six" that I felt including it would just add unnecessary complication.

It's noticeable that they were by no means the only clubs who won titles (Villa, Ipswich, Spurs, Blackburn, Derby, Forest...). The restriction of titles to rich clubs started with the concentration of money caused by the advent of the Premiership.

Some people who have the kind of impatience and lack of perspective of the post to which I originally replied are just young. They weren't there for the perennial control of the top 4 places by the same clubs, never mind before the Premiership.

But a lot of people just have memories that don't work reliably. Their memories of an event change over time, depending on what came afterwards. They rewrite even what happened last week ("we were shit in the first half against Villa"), because we lost the game and they were pissed off, so we must have been shit.

One of the ways I take pride in being so fucking annoying is that my memory doesn't do that. It never has. I'm just born that way. I have a long-term memory that simply never forgets anything and never changes the original set of events.

So I find myself repeatedly having to post the history of Spurs from 2001, when ENIC took over and we started our slow and erratic climb back from mediocrity a year later, because people who have an ingrained hate for ENIC keep misremembering nearly everything. It's not a matter of whether they are right or wrong in wanting new owners. It's that their desire for new owners directly causes their brains to get all the facts wrong. A bit like Republicans in the USA.

 

[Cavehillspur]

So true. When we last won it in 1991, we became the team that won it the most (8) at the time. This is after we equalled Villa’s 7 in 82, a record they held for something like 25 years if I remember correctly.

Our first major honours as a non-league club in 1901, THAT Ricky Villa goal was scored in 1981 and Ossie’s famous song all indicate how important this trophy is in our history. Shame we haven’t been beyond a semi-final coming up to 32 years…

Yep, not even been in another FA Cup final since 91 either, absolutely shocking stuff.

 

[longtimespur]

Yes. Before the Premiership started, the five big clubs were Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton, probably in that order. But that period so far predates the current "Big Six" that I felt including it would just add unnecessary complication.

It's noticeable that they were by no means the only clubs who won titles (Villa, Ipswich, Spurs, Blackburn, Derby, Forest...). The restriction of titles to rich clubs started with the concentration of money caused by the advent of the Premiership.

Some people who have the kind of impatience and lack of perspective of the post to which I originally replied are just young. They weren't there for the perennial control of the top 4 places by the same clubs, never mind before the Premiership.

But a lot of people just have memories that don't work reliably. Their memories of an event change over time, depending on what came afterwards. They rewrite even what happened last week ("we were shit in the first half against Villa"), because we lost the game and they were pissed off, so we must have been shit.

One of the ways I take pride in being so fucking annoying is that my memory doesn't do that. It never has. I'm just born that way. I have a long-term memory that simply never forgets anything and never changes the original set of events.

So I find myself repeatedly having to post the history of Spurs from 2001, when ENIC took over and we started our slow and erratic climb back from mediocrity a year later, because people who have an ingrained hate for ENIC keep misremembering nearly everything. It's not a matter of whether they are right or wrong in wanting new owners. It's that their desire for new owners directly causes their brains to get all the facts wrong. A bit like Republicans in the USA.

You can't be as old as I then. Mine is absolutely shot. My missus leaves me notes to remind me of things. ?

 

[IamSpurtacus]

the five big clubs were Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton, probably in that order.....But a lot of people just have memories that don't work reliably. Their memories of an event change over time, depending on what came afterwards. They rewrite even what happened last week

Actually, United were in the duldrums in the 70s & 80s, winning the FA Cup four times in 20 years....and the club to win the second most major trophies in the 80s - after Liverpool - was Spurs

I would say the in the immediate period pre the PL, Spurs were considered a "bigger" club than they are now - as were Everton.

The distinction between the clubs below Liverpool - who at the time were rampant domestically and in Europe - wasn't as big as it is now.

From 1979 - 1992, when the old Division 1 finished, Villa and Leeds won one title, Arsenal and Everton each won two - with the rest going to Liverpool (8) - so the PL wasn't solely responsible for dominance by "legacy" teams.

Perhaps you should check your memory?

 

[Jemster]

…
Some people who have the kind of impatience and lack of perspective of the post to which I originally replied are just young. They weren't there for the perennial control of the top 4 places by the same clubs, never mind before the Premiership.

I’ll take the young comment as a compliment and not one full of assumption and a tad patronising. Without giving my age away, I can tell you that I’ve been following Spurs a very long time. My comments are not one of an erratic youngster wanting success. I’ve been lucky enough to see Spurs lift 3 FA cups, a UEFA cup and a couple of League cups. My sons on the other hand have not been as fortune. One was 5 when we won our last league cup so he can’t really remember and the other hasn’t seen anything in his almost 12 years. That said, they take their regular seat at every home game with their old man…

As the song goes, “My eyes have seen the glory…” so allow me to have an opinion on how ENIC are failing in the trophy stakes.

 

[Albertbarich]

Just on break at work and have listened to view from the lane ( wish I hadn't thanks to Danny Kelly's patronising waffling), the fighting cock and now Gold and Guest

Nothing new but has got me thinking

If we have a decent window , and by decent I mean we strengthen key areas and Conte is clearly happy and then afterwards the chairman does a sit down, admits we have got things wrong and maybe even explains what the vision is going forward, would that then be enough to unite us all?

I know it's against their policy but I think a good window, happy Conte and some communication could settle a lot of people down

 

[Russ1201]

Just on break at work and have listened to view from the lane ( wish I hadn't thanks to Danny Kelly's patronising waffling), the fighting cock and now Gold and Guest

Nothing new but has got me thinking

If we have a decent window , and by decent I mean we strengthen key areas and Conte is clearly happy and then afterwards the chairman does a sit down, admits we have got things wrong and maybe even explains what the vision is going forward, would that then be enough to unite us all?

I know it's against their policy but I think a good window, happy Conte and some communication could settle a lot of people down

Probably would but think that is very unlikely. Not confident on either fronts but we will see soon enough.

 

[YB123]

Just on break at work and have listened to view from the lane ( wish I hadn't thanks to Danny Kelly's patronising waffling), the fighting cock and now Gold and Guest

Nothing new but has got me thinking

If we have a decent window , and by decent I mean we strengthen key areas and Conte is clearly happy and then afterwards the chairman does a sit down, admits we have got things wrong and maybe even explains what the vision is going forward, would that then be enough to unite us all?

I know it's against their policy but I think a good window, happy Conte and some communication could settle a lot of people down

.If the significant backing leads to more than 1 trophy under Conte, yes.

But its a broken record.

 

[Cornpattbuck]

True. They got a bit lucky as they were in financial trouble before Roman took over.

They were literally Leeds-ing then, which sounds a bit weird with Leeds back in the PL now but still. Been continually jammy bastards ever since too.

 

[13VanDerBale13]

Hoping to hear more chants tomorrow ??

 

[ohtottenham!]

Yes. Before the Premiership started, the five big clubs were Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton, probably in that order. But that period so far predates the current "Big Six" that I felt including it would just add unnecessary complication.

It's noticeable that they were by no means the only clubs who won titles (Villa, Ipswich, Spurs, Blackburn, Derby, Forest...). The restriction of titles to rich clubs started with the concentration of money caused by the advent of the Premiership.

Some people who have the kind of impatience and lack of perspective of the post to which I originally replied are just young. They weren't there for the perennial control of the top 4 places by the same clubs, never mind before the Premiership.

But a lot of people just have memories that don't work reliably. Their memories of an event change over time, depending on what came afterwards. They rewrite even what happened last week ("we were shit in the first half against Villa"), because we lost the game and they were pissed off, so we must have been shit.

One of the ways I take pride in being so fucking annoying is that my memory doesn't do that. It never has. I'm just born that way. I have a long-term memory that simply never forgets anything and never changes the original set of events.

So I find myself repeatedly having to post the history of Spurs from 2001, when ENIC took over and we started our slow and erratic climb back from mediocrity a year later, because people who have an ingrained hate for ENIC keep misremembering nearly everything. It's not a matter of whether they are right or wrong in wanting new owners. It's that their desire for new owners directly causes their brains to get all the facts wrong. A bit like Republicans in the USA.

Yet, you did include it with your time reference of "for decades" before ENIC with a clearly inaccurate statement about Chelsea being at the top table of clubs during that long period. Their time at the top table, for any sustained period, began with Abramovich's money.

Let's not give that club any "credit" for a history of footballing success they simply didn't have until Roman came along.

 

[Trent Crimm]

Hoping to hear more chants tomorrow ??

Levy chants back “I got £40m for Dele, got £40m for Dele”

 

[davidmatzdorf]

Actually, United were in the duldrums in the 70s & 80s, winning the FA Cup four times in 20 years....and the club to win the second most major trophies in the 80s - after Liverpool - was Spurs

I would say the in the immediate period pre the PL, Spurs were considered a "bigger" club than they are now - as were Everton.

The distinction between the clubs below Liverpool - who at the time were rampant domestically and in Europe - wasn't as big as it is now.

From 1979 - 1992, when the old Division 1 finished, Villa and Leeds won one title, Arsenal and Everton each won two - with the rest going to Liverpool (8) - so the PL wasn't solely responsible for dominance by "legacy" teams.

Perhaps you should check your memory?

We’re at cross purposes. You’re talking about who won titles, which of course changed from decade to decade - the inevitable rise and fall of dynasties.

I was talking about which were seen as “big clubs”, not which happened to be successful in the medium term.

There were five big clubs, not because they were better, but because they were bigger and richer. In the voice of the press and the eyes of fans, they were the ones I listed: Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton. Since I started following football in the early 70s and for some time before.

 

[cliff jones]

Yes. Before the Premiership started, the five big clubs were Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs and Everton, probably in that order. But that period so far predates the current "Big Six" that I felt including it would just add unnecessary complication.

It's noticeable that they were by no means the only clubs who won titles (Villa, Ipswich, Spurs, Blackburn, Derby, Forest...). The restriction of titles to rich clubs started with the concentration of money caused by the advent of the Premiership.

Some people who have the kind of impatience and lack of perspective of the post to which I originally replied are just young. They weren't there for the perennial control of the top 4 places by the same clubs, never mind before the Premiership.

But a lot of people just have memories that don't work reliably. Their memories of an event change over time, depending on what came afterwards. They rewrite even what happened last week ("we were shit in the first half against Villa"), because we lost the game and they were pissed off, so we must have been shit.

One of the ways I take pride in being so fucking annoying is that my memory doesn't do that. It never has. I'm just born that way. I have a long-term memory that simply never forgets anything and never changes the original set of events.

So I find myself repeatedly having to post the history of Spurs from 2001, when ENIC took over and we started our slow and erratic climb back from mediocrity a year later, because people who have an ingrained hate for ENIC keep misremembering nearly everything. It's not a matter of whether they are right or wrong in wanting new owners. It's that their desire for new owners directly causes their brains to get all the facts wrong. A bit like Republicans in the USA.

we have history books to tell us what successive owners have actually achieved, on the field. I can see where we finished in the league each season, what stage we got to in the Cups, and in Europe if we qualified. But thanks anyway.

How much ENIC has or hasn't spent, gross or net, on fees or wages, prioritised infra or players, deployed successful decision making structures and managers/coaches- relative to our perceived competitors- will remain opinion.

As for comparing fans who often think ENIC can do better, or we can do better than them, with the followers of a political party in another country, well that's just fkin pointless and irrelevant. Literally.

 

[bubble07]

When will Enic release world record profits?

 

[Whitey]

Sad state of affairs though, if they only want to spend money to save their own necks rather than genuinely wanting to do it of their own volition and a genuine desire rather than being pressured.

Nothing will change. Smoke and Mirrors Levy, short term fix. Been here a million’s times.

Agree. ENIC are always reactive with the illusion of being proactive!

 

[Wheeler Dealer]

But there was a “Big 5” who were the original breakaway contingent that formed the premier league in the first place

We just dropped out of it because of a different form of mis-management...

Correct.. The Sugar era was a disaster from start to finish. It set us back years. We got truly left behind by a man who's objective for buying the club was to gate-crash the SKY revolution with a lorry loads of satellite dishes.

 

[southlondonyiddo]

Correct.. The Sugar era was a disaster from start to finish. It set us back years. We got truly left behind by a man who's objective for buying the club was to gate-crash the SKY revolution with a lorry loads of satellite dishes.

WD You’re Fired!