• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Next Manager?

harr1984 said:
This ‘we have a higher ceiling than Leicester’ thing is nonsense. They have a better balanced squad than us, they consistently buy well,sure they might not be able to emulate winning the PL again but at least they won it and we aren’t going to be challenging for the title and are very much competing for a top 4 place, just like Leicester. non-figuratively the only thing we have over them is a shiny new stadium that has put us in massive debt and is going to restrict our spending for a good period yet. Sure maybe in ten years or something we might be generating a lot more revenue because of it, but any potential manager isn’t going to be thinking about that far ahead as manager don’t tend to last for longer than 3-5 years anymore. We are at best a challenging for top 4 club - This forum tends to have a higher opinion of our players and club in general than what I’ve seen anywhere else....
Click to expand...

You think a club that generates a revenue that puts them in the top 10 clubs in Europe doesn't have a higher ceiling that one that's nowhere to be seen in the top 20? Interesting

We've underperformed this season, hence why our manager was sacked and the majority of fans wanted him gone yet a good end to the season and we're within spitting distances of super Leicester City? Take off your self depreciating Spurs fan goggles and try to look at things from a neutral perspective - we're a bigger richer club, bigger richer clubs tend to do better over the medium to long term (as shown in the Levy thread when i looked over the last 20 years) therefore our higher ceiling is entirely justified.

Question, if Rodgers left Leicester for a different club this summer and we were both looking for new managers do you not think we'd have the pick of them?
 
glorygloryeze said:
Perhaps in terms of revenues (though that isn't always clear with how we actually operate and who we buy in the market), but again they win trophies, we give off a vibe that we either don't care about them ("Trophies are for egos", i'm sure Poch was speaking on behalf of the board there) or we are incapable...

Notice that we've lost finals/semi-finals to the 'big boys', yet Arsenal have often beaten those same teams in winning their recent trophies...so again, if we are going to claim we have a 'higher ceiling' than Leicester, Arsenal can claim the same over us...
Click to expand...

None of that has anything to do with potential as a club to succeed or the ceiling it has. Make no mistake the stadium and the growth we have seen off the field puts our potential up there with anyone bar City & United in the medium to long term.

How do football fans still not see that money = success?
 
billyiddo said:
You think a club that generates a revenue that puts them in the top 10 clubs in Europe doesn't have a higher ceiling that one that's nowhere to be seen in the top 20? Interesting

We've underperformed this season, hence why our manager was sacked and the majority of fans wanted him gone yet a good end to the season and we're within spitting distances of super Leicester City? Take off your self depreciating Spurs fan goggles and try to look at things from a neutral perspective - we're a bigger richer club, bigger richer clubs tend to do better over the medium to long term (as shown in the Levy thread when i looked over the last 20 years) therefore our higher ceiling is entirely justified.

Question, if Rodgers left Leicester for a different club this summer and we were both looking for new managers you don't think we'd have the pick of them?
Click to expand...

I think it depends how that manager sees working under Levy/ENIC vs their owners plus how he views our squad over theirs and, perhaps crucially whether Leicester make CL or not and whether we end up in Europe.

I honestly don't think at present we are massive catch compared to Leicester, no more than Arsenal might be to us atm
 
Leicester have to sell a top player every summer, we haven't sold one since Walker. Our spend in the transfer market is massively higher than Leicester's and that is before we have really felt the full benefits on the new stadium.
 
glorygloryeze said:
I think it depends how that manager sees working under Levy/ENIC vs their owners plus how he views our squad over theirs and, perhaps crucially whether Leicester make CL or not and whether we end up in Europe.

I honestly don't think at present we are massive catch compared to Leicester, no more than Arsenal might be to us atm
Click to expand...

I think that the difference this season is that Leicester have been better coached than us. If Rodgers had been our manager for the whole season, I am confident that we would be in the top four. I think that there are a couple of gaps in the squad and some older players need moving on but it doesn't require major work. I think that people are mistaking poor form for bad players.
 
billyiddo said:
None of that has anything to do with potential as a club to succeed or the ceiling it has. Make no mistake the stadium and the growth we have seen off the field puts our potential up there with anyone bar City & United in the medium to long term.

How do football fans still not see that money = success?
Click to expand...

Trophies and actually competing because of said money is what makes the difference. No-one worried about City when they were initially bought by the Thai mogul and then taken over by Mansour until they actually started winning trophies and competing at the top table. Before that point it was all talk about what they could potentially do.

Until we actually start flashing this cash we are said to have and beating the likes of Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool to players then we are still at the point where City had just been bought.
 
milo said:
I think that the difference this season is that Leicester have been better coached than us. If Rodgers had been our manager for the whole season, I am confident that we would be in the top four. I think that there are a couple of gaps in the squad and some older players need moving on but it doesn't require major work. I think that people are mistaking poor form for bad players.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with a lot of that re our squad, but the situation is what it is.
I don't see us as being attractive to a Rodgers who has navigated Leicester to being less reliant on Vardy to then having to deal with a situation where Kane and/or Son wanting away. He may as well stay at Leicester for now and let some other guy deal with that...
 
glorygloryeze said:
Trophies and actually competing because of said money is what makes the difference. No-one worried about City when they were initially bought by the Thai mogul and then taken over by Mansour until they actually started winning trophies and competing at the top table. Before that point it was all talk about what they could potentially do.

Until we actually start flashing this cash we are said to have and beating the likes of Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool to players then we are still at the point where City had just been bought.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should give it more than the 2 seasons we've been in the stadium and 'had the money' before stamping your feet about it?
 
billyiddo said:
Maybe you should give it more than the 2 seasons we've been in the stadium and 'had the money' before stamping your feet about it?
Click to expand...

Haha, stamping my feet:D
Oh well, i guess Poch was stamping his feet too?

Let's see who our next manager is and how we actually operate before proclaiming how high our 'ceiling' is eh.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Haha, stamping my feet:D
Oh well, i guess Poch was stamping his feet too?

Let's see who our next manager is and how we actually operate before proclaiming how high our 'ceiling' is eh.
Click to expand...

The ceiling is what the ceiling is, it's up to all involved, including the chairman, to make sure the club reaches it - if we don't now become successful on the pitch then they will have failed.
 
milo said:
Leicester have to sell a top player every summer, we haven't sold one since Walker. Our spend in the transfer market is massively higher than Leicester's and that is before we have really felt the full benefits on the new stadium.
Click to expand...
Eriksen, we didn't get top price, but he was a top player we couldn't hang on to.
 
billyiddo said:
You're the expert you tell me

We have long term structured debt - I've seen talk of 20m - 25m per season repayments, doesn't seem prohibitive
Click to expand...
OK - so Arsenal are likely to have a transfer budget about £20 to £25m bigger than ours and also allow their manager to operate a higher wage budget?
 
Finney Is Back said:
OK - so Arsenal are likely to have a transfer budget about £20 to £25m bigger than ours and also allow their manager to operate a higher wage budget?
Click to expand...

Have Arsenal paid off The Emirates already?

Edit : this suggests not

https://www.onlinegooner.com/articles/view/5086

20m interest, sounds familiar

Even if they have i don't think the difference goes straight on to the transfer budget, it just means they have one less outgoing to consider.

Finney Is Back said:
What's your timeline on that by the way? 3 years? 5 years? 10 years?
Click to expand...

A lot will rest on the next managerial appointment/next phase - the sacking of Poch and the appointment of Mourinho has raised concerns, if we follow it up with a Martinez or Southgate type appointment then I'm going to be worried whether the club can adapt to our new financial position.
 
Last edited:
harr1984 said:
This ‘we have a higher ceiling than Leicester’ thing is nonsense. They have a better balanced squad than us, they consistently buy well,sure they might not be able to emulate winning the PL again but at least they won it and we aren’t going to be challenging for the title and are very much competing for a top 4 place, just like Leicester. non-figuratively the only thing we have over them is a shiny new stadium that has put us in massive debt and is going to restrict our spending for a good period yet. Sure maybe in ten years or something we might be generating a lot more revenue because of it, but any potential manager isn’t going to be thinking about that far ahead as manager don’t tend to last for longer than 3-5 years anymore. We are at best a challenging for top 4 club - This forum tends to have a higher opinion of our players and club in general than what I’ve seen anywhere else....
Click to expand...

No, two things make you a top club

- initial injection of money
- revenue to keep it going

Location, Brand, Commercial appeal affect way more than a couple of decent seasons and/or trophies.

Leicester, just like Everton will never be self sustainable at top level (2020 revenue table - Leicester €171M, Everton €212M, Scum next at €388M, Spurs is €445M). Leicester owners matching their full year revenue every year would still leave them 100M short of us (and that's before the stadium really kicks in).

This is why Spurs is a bigger club (yes, moan/whatever) than Leicester, West Ham, Everton, and those clubs expanding their stadiums isn't going to change that, there simply isn't enough corporate interest (way more valuable than "normal" match day seats), Spurs as example has 8 levels of "premium" membership packages, some the price of pretty good car per year.
 
billyiddo said:
Have Arsenal paid off The Emirates already?

Edit : this suggests not

https://www.onlinegooner.com/articles/view/5086

20m interest, sounds familiar

Even if they have i don't think the difference goes straight on to the transfer budget, it just means they have one less outgoing to consider.

A lot will rest on the next managerial appointment/next phase - the sacking of Poch and the appointment of Mourinho has raised concerns, if we follow it up with a Martinez or Southgate type appointment then I'm going to be worried whether the club can adapt to our new financial position.
Click to expand...

I don't think our repayments are anything like as low as £20m mate (remember that amount is Arsenal's capital and interest)....
In our 2019 accounts our interest charges alone were £25m (this was before we had drawn down all that we needed for the stadium).
In 2020 once we had drawn down all we required for the new stadium our interest charges alone had climbed as high as £43 million.
I believe that since stadium completion the owners have been able to restructure the loans at better rates over a mixed length of maturities.
If we assume that our debt was evenly structured over 20 years at the (very low) rate of 2.75% then our repayments (capital and interest) would average at £42 million a year

Something else interesting from that article is that Arsenal's owners sold a 5% stake in the club for a capital injection into the club (contributing 7% of their total stadium cost). If our owners were prepared to do this sort of thing (diluting their holding) then we could inject some much needed capital into the club (equivalent value considering stadium cost/club valuation would be about £80m).

You didn't give an answer there to my question. How many years? It can't be entirely open ended. Surely at some point you'll have to decide whether or not the owner's plan is going to come to fruition? Oh and surely if our owners appoint one of those two managers then they would immediately evidence that they are the wrong people to be running our club?
 
From what we hear it doesn’t sound like Daniel Levy wants to pay compensation for a manager,” Ornstein said.

“Given the point about having to pay off previous managers, and you’re going to have to pay this new manager a really high salary.

If true, narrows the list down
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back