Jose Mourinho - SACKED

[Finney Is Back]

Where is that 17th highest spend from??

I searched 5 year net spend on the interwangle and various sites came up. One of them showed us 15th of clubs in the PL right now and when I looked that championship clubs Stoke and Fulham had also invested more than us. I actually think I might've under-estimated though as looking at this we're 17th not including Stoke and Fulham.....

https://www.transferleague.co.uk/pr...tables/premier-league-table-last-five-seasons

 

[Finney Is Back]

You started talking about clubs record transfers to knock the idea that clubs highest cost played normally are the attackers
My earlier point was we didn’t have to buy a striker and strikers are normally the most expensive players to buy
Kane saved us in excess of £100m minimum and would cost £200m for someone to buy
It meant the money could be spent elsewhere in the squad and proportionality a CB cost much much less than a striker or forward for example

So why were you then listing a bunch of players who weren't strikers?
Also I'm not sure that proportionally players other than strikers do cost less. As I pointed out earlier only one of the top 10 transfer fees in the PL is for a striker. If you expand it out to the top 20 then I think there are only two strikers. The positions played by the most expensive players in the PL is actually reasonably well distributed around the positions, with there being just as many wingers, central midfield players and even fullbacks as there are strikers in the top 30.

And still my point remains that we have spent less over the last five years than all of our rivals (and even most of the clubs that we don't consider to be rivals). Maybe it shouldn't be a surprise that Leicester have moved in front of us this season seeing as they have invested more in their squad than we have in recent years?

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I searched 5 year net spend on the interwangle and various sites came up. One of them showed us 15th of clubs in the PL right now and when I looked that championship clubs Stoke and Fulham had also invested more than us. I actually think I might've under-estimated though as looking at this we're 17th not including Stoke and Fulham.....

https://www.transferleague.co.uk/pr...tables/premier-league-table-last-five-seasons

Ah the old net spend argument..
I guessed it was that
So because we sold some players brought in before Poch for a profit and took the loss on the players brought under Poch (other than Trippier)...
Imagine how that net spend could have looked
We may have been bottom of it
Poch was a great manager but IMO a really poor judge of a player in hindsight
Hence why most he brought failed (and how your gonna argue it’s because they didn’t cost as much as other but they still cost £m’s)

 

[Bedfordspurs]

So why were you then listing a bunch of players who weren't strikers?
Also I'm not sure that proportionally players other than strikers do cost less. As I pointed out earlier only one of the top 10 transfer fees in the PL is for a striker. If you expand it out to the top 20 then I think there are only two strikers. The positions played by the most expensive players in the PL is actually reasonably well distributed around the positions, with there being just as many wingers, central midfield players and even fullbacks as there are strikers in the top 30.

And still my point remains that we have spent less over the last five years than all of our rivals (and even most of the clubs that we don't consider to be rivals). Maybe it shouldn't be a surprise that Leicester have moved in front of us this season seeing as they have invested more in their squad than we have in recent years?

but we committed to spend £160m in the summer which I think is more than Leicester have spent cumulatively for a few seasons

and I’m including strikers or WF or what we we call players like Salad and Jota and Son now... as their the attacking players

 

[Pirate55]

I just cannot see how those figures are arrived at? Maybe he is adding on agents fees, pay offs to players leaving and signing on bonuses as the transfer fee differentials are about £100 million short of that!

It was Levy himself who said it! If there is anyone who surely knows the correct number, then it is him.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

It was Levy himself who said it! If there is anyone who surely knows the correct number, then it is him.

He said in the last 2 seasons didn’t he?

 

[Pirate55]

He said in the last 2 seasons didn’t he?

No, he said it was the total net spend under Poch.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

No, he said it was the total net spend under Poch.

Sorry I meant Levy to THST

 

[billyiddo]

No, he said it was the total net spend under Poch.

Where did he say that? as from what i can see our net spend over the period 14/15 - 19/20 is around 100m (see below) including last summer where we had a net spend of 130m, which means prior to that Poch had been working on a negative spend budget for the 5 full seasons that he worked here.


ARRIVALS 19/20
-£133.65m
DEPARTURES 19/20
£51.30m
ARRIVALS 18/19
-0
DEPARTURES 18/19
£4.82m
ARRIVALS 17/18
-£109.35m
DEPARTURES 17/18
£93.42m
ARRIVALS 16/17
-£75.15m
DEPARTURES 16/17
£47.07m
ARRIVALS 15/16
-£63.90m
DEPARTURES 15/16
£78.82m
ARRIVALS 14/15
-£43.63m
DEPARTURES 14/15
£39.74m

*figures from transfermarkt

 

[Raziel]

fudge .. we are back to Net Spend again .. total bs .. can be completely skewed by one overpriced player sell (Pool selling Coutinho as example)

If you really want to measure spend, the best indicator is wages ...

 

[parklane1]

I searched 5 year net spend on the interwangle and various sites came up. One of them showed us 15th of clubs in the PL right now and when I looked that championship clubs Stoke and Fulham had also invested more than us. I actually think I might've under-estimated though as looking at this we're 17th not including Stoke and Fulham.....

https://www.transferleague.co.uk/pr...tables/premier-league-table-last-five-seasons

And it just goes to show what your agenda is by reporting it that way, as with most charts it can be seen both ways and that shows we were 7th in that table on money spent with 322 million. Just because we were able to sell players at good prices ( which you ignored) brings your point across at just ANOTHER dig at Levy.

 

[billyiddo]

fudge .. we are back to Net Spend again .. total bs .. can be completely skewed by one overpriced player sell (Pool selling Coutinho as example)

If you really want to measure spend, the best indicator is wages ...

Depends how you are using it with regards to whatever point you are making tbf and with regards to my previous post im drawing no conclusions and just disputing Pirates 200m figure, as it seems way off with the available info

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Depends how you are using it with regards to whatever point you are making tbf and with regards to my previous post im drawing no conclusions and just disputing Pirates 200m figure, as it seems way off with the available info

I’ve just done a very wordy piece in that in the Poch thread
And I’d say that the big outlier with any judgement of any manager is net spend
Klopps spend looks great because they sold Coutinho... forgetting the looses they took on players like Carroll and benteke plus others that he sold too (I think)
Any manager following AVB after we sold bale for silly £ and brought 7 players would look good with that many to shift
Surely the way to judge a manager is what he spends and what he sells from the ones he buys e.g. how much he makes or loses form his decisions in the market
And Poch as ive said loads of times in this thread lately gained so much from having a Kane here which saved him a fortune and of course walker who helps that net spend look good too with his sale

 

[Raziel]

Depends how you are using it with regards to whatever point you are making tbf and with regards to my previous post im drawing no conclusions and just disputing Pirates 200m figure, as it seems way off with the available info

It's too easily skewed by one or two sales and/or one or two home grown players coming through as a measurement of quality/expectations of side (i.e. statement about 17th level net spend)

Wages show where you really stand, e.g. Forbes article last year had Pool outspending everyone except United which counters their "net spend" view, hence their results are no surprise (with 2nd highest wages, they came 2nd .. interesting)

Spurs bill sits in the 6th-8th range (not 17th) and if a more fair reflection of the investment, what has happened in the last 3 years is our revenue has increased considerably faster than wages so we sit around 40% of turnover on wages (Pool at 58%, Leicester at 75%, safe is considered under 60%)

The question will be as we get over the stadium investment (and the need to plan for contingencies), and when we get over the income loss of Covid-19, will we lift that number to 45-50%?

 

[Modric THFC]

Remember when he said he wanted to be judged after he got a pre season with the squad.

Well it's looks like he will get that before the season is out.
If when we start back up we still look like a mess with no idea how to defend he can do one.

 

[DeanoAustin]

Remember when he said he wanted to be judged after he got a pre season with the squad.

Well it's looks like he will get that before the season is out.
If when we start back up we still look like a mess with no idea how to defend he can do one.

It's hardly the equivalent of a pre-season he's getting at the moment.

 

[Raziel]

It's hardly the equivalent of a pre-season he's getting at the moment.

This ...

He will get a full squad of rested, uninjured players (a fudging miracle when it comes to Spurs), but not match fit, nor tactically drilled

Hopefully he has them watching games, looking at positioning, as much of the mental side of game as you can do without being on pitch.

 

[spurspinter1]

Remember when he said he wanted to be judged after he got a pre season with the squad.

Well it's looks like he will get that before the season is out.
If when we start back up we still look like a mess with no idea how to defend he can do one.

Oh hey Red Bull buddy, I'm not sure what to do in this circumstance, feels like the two town's lepers have bumped in to each other.

Does this mean we should make love or just hang our heads in shame?

Edit - I should add that the logo by itself is a lot cooler than an actual can of the demon juice. Which is pretty harsh seeing as I only f&cked the 1st leg but hey ho.*

*Continues to mutter bitterly whilst going back in to cave.....

 

[Finney Is Back]

And it just goes to show what your agenda is by reporting it that way, as with most charts it can be seen both ways and that shows we were 7th in that table on money spent with 322 million. Just because we were able to sell players at good prices ( which you ignored) brings your point across at just ANOTHER dig at Levy.

So if we sold our entire first team squad for £500 million but spent £200 million buying 20 new players then that would count as us spending a lot of money and you’d expect us to do better than a team who had spent more than they brought in?

oh and by the way if looking at gross spend only then we’re 8th, not 7th.

 

[Finney Is Back]

but we committed to spend £160m in the summer which I think is more than Leicester have spent cumulatively for a few seasons

and I’m including strikers or WF or what we we call players like Salad and Jota and Son now... as their the attacking players

Yep and that was good to see. Then after finally allowing our manger to spend at a level commensurate with our status, we got rid of him before he could work with the players he signed.