Salaries at Spurs

[DAVE BUNWORTH]

The position whereby Darren Bent refused £75,000 p.w to join Spurs has become a rarity in the money based game of football.

However like it or not Spurs have a real dichotomy in their spending/salary philosophy. Teams like West Ham now offer £60k/70k to most of their new signings yet we offer a max of £40-50k and most at substantially less (Berbatov is a case in point).

I don’t condone the inflated figures offered by most other clubs, currently, but the marketplace is what matters. Whilst we can pay the transfer fees for players (Bent 16.5m) we refuse to move away from a strict salary cap.

This is becoming a real issue as don’t tell me Petrov refused Spurs for Sven........ 55k p.w v 30k p.w is an obvious enticement above anything else.

We will not attract the really top players without looking at our salary caps and deciding to realign them to reflect the new levels required.

I know the Leeds story is a dark spectre for all clubs in this area of potential profligacy but now the new £60m TV income for Premier clubs has forced the salary structures into a new level.

We need 3 or 4 top, top players with experience and salary will be the inhibitor when push comes to shove if they are to join us.

I hate to say it but we can’t be top 4 without paying top 4 salaries rather than just compete for transfer fees!

[Stu]

and will you complain if the ticket prices go up?

We need a bigger stadium or a rich dude to compete with other teams wage structures.

I'd rather have a bigger stadium, much more sustainable.

[jenko]

Er, we're doing it already. We HAVE top players. Look at our squad! We're paying less for better players because the club have ambition to match the players and they respect it. We just need to get 4th now so that we can continue to do it.

But we don't have to change anything this transfer window and if you're saying we do then I disagree. If Petrov went for the cash then he is not the player we're looking for (a la Duff). Our policy has been working for us and I trust the management team to change it at the right time. If we brought in someone on the wages you're talking about it could disrupt the togetherness of the team. One player is not worth that.

[ShadyAftermath2k]

^^ Amen...

[Legacy]

Our wage budget was good enough for Dimitar Berbatov last season and it was good enough for Darren Bent this season. Yes, we offer players a relatively low wage when they first join the club, in comparison to teams like Newcastle and West Ham et al who'll throw £70,000 p/w at a player just to get them to sign the contract.

But what does that achieve? Every team who does that ends up with at least a few unwanted players on sky high wages, draining their club of funds. And with long contracts too, they can refuse to leave, stay for the money and their clubs will have a hard time shipping them on to another club when the player proves to be an unsuccessful signing.

Spurs offer a player a decent wage. It may not be the £100,000 p/w that the Chelsea players are earning, but if you can't live on £15,000-£40,000 p/w then you have some serious issues.

However, when a player steps up and proves himself to be a good signing and an important player for the team, the club will step in and offer a significantly improved contract to reflect that (Berbatov is a case in point).

And you can bet that players are aware of that little fact when it comes to contract negotiations before signing for Spurs. And you will get the occasional player who'll turn their head at the offer Spurs provide, and jump at a 'lesser' club who'll offer an instant £50,000+ a week.

But what does that say about those players? Are they really that unsure of their ability that they can't go out and prove they deserve to earn a higher wage? Or are they just so greedy, selfish and lazy to even try to prove they deserve a higher wage at a 'bigger' club who stand a pretty good chance of winning any of the three cups they're entered in as well as potentially breaking the top4 stranglehold in the Premier League?

I don't know about you, but I don't particularly want a player like that at our club. I want a player to come to Spurs to play for the club, to play to win games and, possibly, trophies and to play to succeed as a footballer, not because we were the club desperate enough to throw the most money at them.

Darren Bent is a player that emphasises what I want at Spurs. Turning down West Ham and a higher wage to join a team with so much potential because he wants to help them succeed. That's the type of player I want.

[Kendall]

load of shit

we can get class players to come on board within our wage structure. So Petrov was after one last payday, big deal, fuck him. We have bought better players on the last 3 years than any of us would ever dreamed of 10 years ago and if you remove the dirge from your eyes, you will see we are competing, we're improving every year and we're attacting a lot of players we would never have before.

Breaking our wage structure for 1 28 year old LW mercanery would cause our club more harm than the good he would bring.

[tananwat_w]

The fact that John Terry is making £135,000 a week is insane, and from what we all heard of several more of their players earn over £100,000 a week. I am sure as soon as the Russian jumps off the ship, they will be in serious troubles.

[will8587]

I see what you're saying, and I think Spurs will eventually break their pay scale, as they should. It would be unfair to offer Berbatov £50k and expect him to be content with it. If he felt so inclined, he could easily move to ManU, play in the Champions League and make double the wages. We should reward him for his loyalty, and show how much he means to the club by breaking with our wage scale.

It doesn't have to be a black and white issue- that we've gotta stick with our current system or we'll turn into Chelsea. We can still responsibly pay players, but pay them more than £50k per week. What if we do make the CL, and are linked with a few world class players, who express serious interest in us? Surely, we couldn't expect them to cut their wages in half to play for us.

Finally, all the people who are out criticizing Petrov are all hypocrites. Berbatov was in the same situation as Petrov. He was being courted by ManU and a lesser club (Spurs). He appreciated the attention he received from Spurs, and didn't feel that he got the same from ManU, so he signed with a weaker team. Maybe, Petrov was put off by Spurs for the same reason Berbatov was put off by ManU. To say Petrov is a money-grubbing mercenary is ignorant and close-minded. You're only looking at it from a Spurs-centric view, yet if you heard the same shit about Berbatov being greedy, selfish and lazy for signing for a lesser team, you'd call them crazy. So unless you know the whole story, quit making so many (ignorant) assumptions.

[chookz]

How about performance related bonuses?

[hugefanfromwayback]

I think some of you live in a dream world where players (who lets face have a fairly short career span as footballers) are perfectly happy to get paid less. Berbatov was not expecting to walk into the prem at 60k/wk, he was underrated prior to last year but rightly at this stage deserves a pay rise, I am actually quite surprised (gladly so) that he is still here.

Look at the business world (which spurs are part of) the best CEOs in the business get headhunted by the best companies which pay the best salaries. Companies have to in order to keep the best talent. With the new money floating around the prem it is the same as inflation, everything costs more.

So if we were to sign, for example (only!) say, Ronaldinho and pay him more than our wage cap amount (which some argue we will have to do to attract 'top 4' type players) the other members of the team will feel rightly aggrieved.

So what I propose is simple, a large increase to the win bonus so that all players in the team benefit and this can be included as part of Ronaldinho's salary negotiations.

Yes, players do want to be part of a team going somewhere like we are this year, hence Bent's decision. But he is an exception to the rule. If we were to qualify with Champions League this year I suggest we reward firstly our current players and then offer a new wage cap of say 60k next year we would stand a chance of keepin Berbs et. all next year. Maybe we would have to renegotiate a few contracts but that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

In short, with more money in the game and salary inflation, to keep our current wage structure would be risky in the long run.

We are in good, even great hands with Jol, Levy and co but remember nine times out of ten, the talent always follows the money.

[Rufio]

To increase our wage structure we need to increase the stadium capacity (or ticket prices - nobody wants that, and/or get into the champions league (regularly).

What I would suggest if it is a problem in attracting players, that we should use bonus related pay (which is probably happening anyway).

Using Berbatov as an example: He is currently paid say 30k per week (I don't know). If Spurs make the Champions league qualifying places give him an end of year bonus that would have been equivalent to him being paid 45k per week. If Spurs make it into the league stages of the Champions league, give him an end of year bonus that would have been equivalent to him being paid 75k per week...knock out stages (90k per week), final (115k per week).

And that could be in place for all players with different values depending on who you are. That is what it should be, with more money you can reward for great achievment.

I believe this to be the best way before improving the stadium / becoming champs league regulars.

[TheGeneral]

I think some of you live in a dream world where players (who lets face have a fairly short career span as footballers) are perfectly happy to get paid less. Berbatov was not expecting to walk into the prem at 60k/wk, he was underrated prior to last year but rightly at this stage deserves a pay rise, I am actually quite surprised (gladly so) that he is still here.

Look at the business world (which spurs are part of) the best CEOs in the business get headhunted by the best companies which pay the best salaries. Companies have to in order to keep the best talent. With the new money floating around the prem it is the same as inflation, everything costs more.

So if we were to sign, for example (only!) say, Ronaldinho and pay him more than our wage cap amount (which some argue we will have to do to attract 'top 4' type players) the other members of the team will feel rightly aggrieved.

So what I propose is simple, a large increase to the win bonus so that all players in the team benefit and this can be included as part of Ronaldinho's salary negotiations.

Yes, players do want to be part of a team going somewhere like we are this year, hence Bent's decision. But he is an exception to the rule. If we were to qualify with Champions League this year I suggest we reward firstly our current players and then offer a new wage cap of say 60k next year we would stand a chance of keepin Berbs et. all next year. Maybe we would have to renegotiate a few contracts but that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

In short, with more money in the game and salary inflation, to keep our current wage structure would be risky in the long run.

We are in good, even great hands with Jol, Levy and co but remember nine times out of ten, the talent always follows the money.
:clap:

[Arnoldtoo]

Newcastle are a prime example of a club trying to buy their way up the League and failing. West Ham and Man City are the next ones to follow the same route, and they are taking just as big a risk. As has been said before, getting players in on an immediate high salary and a long contract is an expensive gamble. It hasn't worked for Newcastle, and there is no guarantee that it will work for the other two.

Chelsea are also a time bomb. If the row between Abramovich and Mourinho last year had resulted in the former walking away, where would they be?

The route to the top which Spurs are taking involves getting in players who, in the judgement of BMJ & DC, will "improve the squad" - that's always been the mantra - not superstars. If they don't, because the Premiership is a different beast to the other European leagues, then you are not left with high earning reserves who are difficult to offload. Whether you agree with that plan or not is up to you, but no-one can argue that it isn't working at the moment. The squad, and the club, is improving and is the best in a long long time.

Having said that, there must come a point where the salary cap is a barrier to improving the squad. When that point is reached - and the Spurs management might recognise it almost as soon as us experts on SC - then the cap must be raised, not only for new signings but, more importantly, for the established successes who will form the core of the team as we push to the next level.

There will still be players who don't want to come because of the "low" starting salary. But they will be the ones who are either looking just for the money or who are not confident enough in their own ability to risk having to prove themselves as part of that core. And, though some of them will be successes elsewhere, they are the sort of players we can probably do without.

[choffer74]

I see what you're saying, and I think Spurs will eventually break their pay scale, as they should. It would be unfair to offer Berbatov £50k and expect him to be content with it. If he felt so inclined, he could easily move to ManU, play in the Champions League and make double the wages. We should reward him for his loyalty, and show how much he means to the club by breaking with our wage scale.

It doesn't have to be a black and white issue- that we've gotta stick with our current system or we'll turn into Chelsea. We can still responsibly pay players, but pay them more than £50k per week. What if we do make the CL, and are linked with a few world class players, who express serious interest in us? Surely, we couldn't expect them to cut their wages in half to play for us.

Finally, all the people who are out criticizing Petrov are all hypocrites. Berbatov was in the same situation as Petrov. He was being courted by ManU and a lesser club (Spurs). He appreciated the attention he received from Spurs, and didn't feel that he got the same from ManU, so he signed with a weaker team. Maybe, Petrov was put off by Spurs for the same reason Berbatov was put off by ManU. To say Petrov is a money-grubbing mercenary is ignorant and close-minded. You're only looking at it from a Spurs-centric view, yet if you heard the same shit about Berbatov being greedy, selfish and lazy for signing for a lesser team, you'd call them crazy. So unless you know the whole story, quit making so many (ignorant) assumptions.

I'm not sure we'll break our pay scale. Its there for a reason - financial stability. Levy and the board have shown over the years that they run a tight ship, and we're now one of the best run teams around. So its unlikely that we'll change that. However each year they will reassess the pay scale dependent on how well we've done, the revenue we're had etc. I'm sure if we get into the champions league we'll not only start paying higher wages to new signings, but will offer a lot of the existing players improved contracts to match.

Secondly your point about Petrov isnt really valid. Berbatov would have got paid more going Man U, so in coming to us (a lesser team) he was actually the complete opposite of a mercenary. He came to us for footballing reasons, not monetary gain! Petrov on the other hand chose Man City over us, and will get paid 20k (?) a week more. Its not hard to see why people are calling him a mercenary! Personally i think it wasnt just the money, I'm sure Sven still has pulling power :wink:, and in theory they could be challenging for a place in Europe this season.

[sebo_sek]

:clap:
I maybe the only knight in shining armour arounf here, but my head is beginning to spin from all these amounts.

I'll tell you what I think. Ł30.000p/w is about PLN165.000 a week in Poland. To put that into perspective, after a month's work, you have a house, a car and a kickass holiday.

I am sure that berba is still thinking of going back home after his career ends and is doing similar multiplication in his head. Someone said that it would be unfair to offer him JUST 50k... Jesus can you hear yourself? That would be PLN275,000 here. The above list after two weeks. When Les Ferdinand signed for the Barcodes at 48,000 people were saying what a mountain of an amount that was - today they wouldn't even bat an eye.

Footballers get paid too much everyone knows that. But some of them are thinking longterm especially if they are foreign and their national currencies exchange at a very good rate.

Yes he deserves a pay rise, but I dont think it is a priority for him. He is making double of what he got in Germany, simply by switching from Euros to Pounds.

I can't speak for other players, but this is still a very much complex-infested Eastern European mentality. We don't advertise as much, but it is there.

It's not sexy, but could part of the answer of why he is happy at 22,000.

[tottenham4life]

load of shit

we can get class players to come on board within our wage structure. So Petrov was after one last payday, big deal, fuck him. We have bought better players on the last 3 years than any of us would ever dreamed of 10 years ago and if you remove the dirge from your eyes, you will see we are competing, we're improving every year and we're attacting a lot of players we would never have before.

Breaking our wage structure for 1 28 year old LW mercanery would cause our club more harm than the good he would bring.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[gilpinsgurgler]

So if we dont break our wage structure and pay over inflated wages we wont be a top team with top players.?
Excuse me OP, but open your eyes, we are a top team, not THE top but a top team with an excellent squad all HAPPY to be here.
Levy knows how to run this club its evident....so let him get on with it, if he wants to up the structure he will, and when he does it will only be at the right time.
This club is healthy prosperous and going places, we dont need to keep up with the Jones's
The top four are looking over their shoulders at us and watching us break the monopoly they hold on this league....and weve done that without turning into the new Leeds (soon to be spammers).
If it aint broke....DONT FIX IT.

[Lillywhite_Jon]

Slight digression from the threads that precede this but of course as a non-Uk domicilliary Petrov would have been able to have part of his salary from us structured as a payment for services whilst on European duty and would therefore not be taxed on it in the UK. However, even that would not mean the net paid by us came anyweher near to the amounts suggested to be paid by Man City.

Back on topic, I like our approach but agree it needs to be adapted. I like the idea of getting players in on reasonable wages but with a promise if they are good and loyal. This would be by raising them based on performance and loyalty in subsequent seasons. It avoids the inflated wages for new players (that quite often fail as pointed out above) but rewards our best and loyal players adequately and so keeps them at The Club - promoting stability.

[vietnam1973]

im delighted tottenham have a structure, footballers are all gready bastards anyway, ther should be a wage cap of no more than £20,000 a week, just think of that figure 20 grands a massive amount of money! the ticket prices would come down aswell, im sorry but footballs becoming or has become an elitist sport

[N10toN17]

We do not want to copy the philosphy of Wet spam, citeh and the barcodes, they are throwing high wages at players, who otherwise wouldn't touch them with the preverbial barge pole.

It means they will need to produce high finishes in the league asap and if they don't they'll be in trouble, add to that the fact that some of these players will flop and that squad morale may suffer as well.

We've brought in young, hungry and talented players, if they perform and bring us to the next level, they will have there wages negotiated upwards, simply, you perform and we'll pay, a much better philosphy. Levy is not going to risk our medium to long term health for a short quick fix, it doesn't work, Leeds anyone?

[macspurs]

I think the whole system of players wages is obscene. To think it could take a nurse 10 years to earn what John Terry earns in a week. WTF !!!!!
Bravo for Spurs not joining the madness, but they ALL get paid too much in the prem.
It is way too late to change it now though. A monster !
A monster I tells ye.

[Chimbo!]

Levy strikes me as a fantastic negotiater and someone who knows the limits, this will benefit us in the long-term whilst the mass spending sprees of West Ham and Newcastle will cause more damage then good whether or not they are successful on the pitch, will no1 learn from leeds?

[Krafty]

How many clubs make a profit in the prem? How many clubs outside of the champions league places make a profit every season? How many of them have a stadium that is far too small for their needs and could double their match day income by expansion?

If we had paid Petrov 50k a week everyone else would have wanted 50 k a week. Even for the top players, an increae of only 10k a week works at half a mill. Multiple that by 6 or 7 players that would ask for a 10k increase and thats us in debt. We are one of the few clubs that doesnt owe a massive amount, we put money away for the stadium increase, and we still spend biug all the while making a profit.

In the end all the other teams are hoping someone comes in and ploughs money down the drain to keep them going year on year. If abramovich leaves chelsea they will be stuffed. The same can be said for a lot of teams. Look at a team like Blackburn. They had their sugar daddy, did well for a few years but then had to rebuild, and now they are a 7th place team. Whereas we could keep on progressing, a lot of teams are gambling on making it big now to cover their spending.

Look at the players we have missed out on because we would not play top dollar. How have they got on? Would it have been worth ruining our long term stability for them?

I applaud Levy and the board for their stance. If we had spent big the young players we have brought through, and that we are so proud of, would not have gotten their chance. We pay good wages on based on performances. I can see no problem with the way our club is run.

[j777777]

But what does that say about those players?

...

I don't know about you, but I don't particularly want a player like that at our club. I want a player to come to Spurs to play for the club, to play to win games and, possibly, trophies and to play to succeed as a footballer, not because we were the club desperate enough to throw the most money at them.


Precisely

[hugefanfromwayback]

How many clubs make a profit in the prem? How many clubs outside of the champions league places make a profit every season? How many of them have a stadium that is far too small for their needs and could double their match day income by expansion?

If we had paid Petrov 50k a week everyone else would have wanted 50 k a week. Even for the top players, an increae of only 10k a week works at half a mill. Multiple that by 6 or 7 players that would ask for a 10k increase and thats us in debt. We are one of the few clubs that doesnt owe a massive amount, we put money away for the stadium increase, and we still spend biug all the while making a profit.

In the end all the other teams are hoping someone comes in and ploughs money down the drain to keep them going year on year. If abramovich leaves chelsea they will be stuffed. The same can be said for a lot of teams. Look at a team like Blackburn. They had their sugar daddy, did well for a few years but then had to rebuild, and now they are a 7th place team. Whereas we could keep on progressing, a lot of teams are gambling on making it big now to cover their spending.

Look at the players we have missed out on because we would not play top dollar. How have they got on? Would it have been worth ruining our long term stability for them?

I applaud Levy and the board for their stance. If we had spent big the young players we have brought through, and that we are so proud of, would not have gotten their chance. We pay good wages on based on performances. I can see no problem with the way our club is run.


You make good points here regarding how well the club has been run up to this point but I think all of us agree that this is a make or break season. The hard work of all at THFC has put us in a great position BUT a string of bad luck here, an injury there, we face ignomy in mid table.

My personal opinion is that we were a bit fortunate to finish as high as we did last year, going right down to the wire, we were'nt as consistent as the previous year. The pressure is on from other clubs who look like they have raised their game. If we stand still we will risk losing out.

Isn't now the time, what with the quality of lennon, berbatov, chimbs, all the guys who other clubs are scoping out as future targets, to lay our balls on the poker table, buy some chips and go all in. :omg:

All we gotta do is get champions league spot and we're off on the gravy train, the media lappin us up a-la scum five yrs back or so.

[Kendall]

Berbatov has actually been outspoken about the silly money people are willing to pay him. It's not at the forefront of his mind, I believe he and others are starting to understand that they can get by on £20/30k per week.....just.

[davidmatzdorf]

A lot of good replies to this column already.

We don't need to sign every damned star player who is available. And we're doing just fine signing the Bents and Berbatovs who put their football before extreme riches.

I expect that Levy will increase the wage cap when we qualify for the Champions League. When our players show that they are worth that kind of money by helping the club to earn that kind of money, they will get it. Levy has an established record of offering steep increases in wages to players (in exchange for extended contracts) after they have proved that they have what it takes to succed at Spurs: Dawson, Lennon, Robinson, Keane, King, Huddlestone, Defoe and Carrick all got such offers and only Defoe and Carrick have not accepted them.

And the Leeds analogy is irrelevant. Leeds re-mortgaged their stadium to fund player acquisitions. Then they couldn't pay the mortgage and lost their main fixed asset. That's the root of their continuing financial crisis. It's a completely different financial situation. Spurs are properly capitalised and, even if we wanted or needed to, we aren't in a position to re-mortgage the stadium, because we're hoping to rebuild it soon.

[lionsno1]

If the player only signs for money, then i dont want them at WHL. Much rather have players who want to play for the club because of the club itself and not because the will get a fat pay cheque. The West Ham sitution is ridiculous, offering average already over paid footballers stupid amounts of money, hope they do a Leeds!!!!!

[striebs]

.....I don’t condone the inflated figures offered by most other clubs, .....
.....


Many but surely not most .

There are rumours that the wages Spurs are paying players they wish to dispose of are an obstacle to buying sides too .

[akie]

the main point that should be made is that...man city/west ham and chelsea can only afford to pay the wages that they can due to a single person ( eg abramovic/magnusson etc). however i feel that players should be paid based on performance of the individual and the team, why should a strikr have a huge wage when he doesnt do the job of scoring goals?

Tottenham will be able to increase the salary cap if we make the champs lge due to the revenue, which the players will have earnt by breaking into the top 4!! if berba scores 20 goals a season, he should have a goal scoring bonus ( eg£2.5k per goal) Money and wages should be relative to the success of player and club!

[Chimbo!]

Isn't now the time, what with the quality of lennon, berbatov, chimbs, all the guys who other clubs are scoping out as future targets, to lay our balls on the poker table, buy some chips and go all in. :omg:

All we gotta do is get champions league spot and we're off on the gravy train, the media lappin us up a-la scum five yrs back or so.

Exactly, our wage structure will fit in with the clubs finances and income and when we qualify for the champions league our wage budget will increase. We have steadily built up to this season and now is the time to make the step up and get top 4, we are capable so lets not b shy about it and go all out 4 it!

[JuanRebelde]

I think some of you live in a dream world where players (who lets face have a fairly short career span as footballers) are perfectly happy to get paid less. Berbatov was not expecting to walk into the prem at 60k/wk, he was underrated prior to last year but rightly at this stage deserves a pay rise, I am actually quite surprised (gladly so) that he is still here.

Look at the business world (which spurs are part of) the best CEOs in the business get headhunted by the best companies which pay the best salaries. Companies have to in order to keep the best talent. With the new money floating around the prem it is the same as inflation, everything costs more.

So if we were to sign, for example (only!) say, Ronaldinho and pay him more than our wage cap amount (which some argue we will have to do to attract 'top 4' type players) the other members of the team will feel rightly aggrieved.

So what I propose is simple, a large increase to the win bonus so that all players in the team benefit and this can be included as part of Ronaldinho's salary negotiations.

Yes, players do want to be part of a team going somewhere like we are this year, hence Bent's decision. But he is an exception to the rule. If we were to qualify with Champions League this year I suggest we reward firstly our current players and then offer a new wage cap of say 60k next year we would stand a chance of keepin Berbs et. all next year. Maybe we would have to renegotiate a few contracts but that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

In short, with more money in the game and salary inflation, to keep our current wage structure would be risky in the long run.

We are in good, even great hands with Jol, Levy and co but remember nine times out of ten, the talent always follows the money.

There's a lot of things wrong with your post such as the assumption that players don't move for footballing reasons but are on the whole money orientated. Frankly, as any top professional will tell you, football is the ONLY thing that they are interested in. They want to be in winning teams with other good players.

For the last few years we have opted for a strategy of attracting young players with potential and blending a team which with their improvement sees the side / club improve year on year. If he doesn't progress then he is moved on usually without a loss but in the case of Carrick (who also moved for footballing reasons remember) we turnover over a massive profit.

Your view that paying big bucks is what is needed for success by attracting so-called top four players is in business terms a disaster. Why? You create an unsustainable inflation in the price of your raw material (i.e. players). You own income does not rise as fast as wage or transfer price levels. It is unsustainable - just ask a Leeds fans and eventually a Chelski and Wet Spam fan they'll know what I am talking about. Manure and until recently, the Goons lived within their means and still one titles, Liverpool have tried several times to buy the league and failed even after following the strategy you are advocating. Your approach is to effectively gamble your future against the short-term as you will not have built of the long term like we are doing now with our youngsters.

In short a strategy like that who never be adopted by the top ceos you have mentioned, instead they use prudence and planning to plot their way to success. Fools like the Leeds chairman and the rest of the boards at Chavski and spam have ignored those fundamentals of business to live the short-term unsustainable dream.

On that note, what do you called a top four player exactly? Sidwell? Cygan? and many others? The fact is the term is fictious and as football has always been in a state of premanent transition as powers rise and fall my advice to you is to call us a top team as we have always but for a brief recent period been just that in England and Europe.


Levy and co are right on this and we are still unique in what we are doing. When (not if) we win something serious and nail down our top four place we will have done so with financial stability and with the funds to go to a new stadium without going bankrupt like us and other have almost done in the past.

[liewser]

There's a lot of things wrong with your post such as the assumption that players don't move for footballing reasons but are on the whole money orientated. Frankly, as any top professional will tell you, football is the ONLY thing that they are interested in. They want to be in winning teams with other good players.


Surely u dont honestly believe that? Of course footballers aren't gona come out and say "i moved for the money."

At the end of the day trophies and money both come into the equation, but if they were honest i reckon there'd be more players putting money on top of the priority list.

The thing is, the winning teams tend to be the richest teams and vice versa, they go hand in hand, and so the top players never really have to choose between the two, they get both.

However, if united were paying their players with the wage budget of the Wigan squad, do you honestly think they'd stick around at the club even though they stand the best chance of winning trophies there? They'd head off to chelsea or liverpool or to one of the top foreign clubs. And if they had the choice of winning trophies on low wages, or signing for west ham on £100+k a week, i have no doubt theyd sign that contract, knowing that in time West Ham's money would build a half decent squad.

[tevezito]

You scupper your own argument - yes, they would go to Chelsea or Liverpool because they could still play with good players and win things, but no, they wouldn't sign the contract at West Ham because they wouldn't want to play in a 'half decent squad'.

[Bilko]

Congratulations to all the opinions before me.
You`re an educated lot-I`ve just had an interesting half hour read.

[ginolaboy]

The fact that John Terry is making £135,000 a week is insane, and from what we all heard of several more of their players earn over £100,000 a week. I am sure as soon as the Russian jumps off the ship, they will be in serious troubles.Yes, Chav$ki were on the verge of joining Leeds Utd on melt down before they hit the Russian jackpot. If he ever upped and left with his roubles then it would be bye bye Chav$!

[hugefanfromwayback]

Frankly, as any top professional will tell you, football is the ONLY thing that they are interested in. They want to be in winning teams with other good players.
:violin:
Yeah and I just want a wife who can cook and clean, but not look like Scarlett Johannsen too!

On that note, what do you called a top four player exactly?
Sidwell? Cygan? and many others? The fact is the term is fictious and as football has always been in a state of premanent transition as powers rise and fall my advice to you is to call us a top team as we have always but for a brief recent period been just that in England and Europe.

A top 4 football player is anyone who when he comes on the market, us spurs fans go, well he will never come to us, Valencia/Barcelona/other top 4 clubs in the Europeanleagues, will get him.

Simple enough. And I want spurs to be one of these clubs more than anything.

[will8587]

Secondly your point about Petrov isnt really valid. Berbatov would have got paid more going Man U, so in coming to us (a lesser team) he was actually the complete opposite of a mercenary. He came to us for footballing reasons, not monetary gain! Petrov on the other hand chose Man City over us, and will get paid 20k (?) a week more. Its not hard to see why people are calling him a mercenary! Personally i think it wasnt just the money, I'm sure Sven still has pulling power :wink:, and in theory they could be challenging for a place in Europe this season.

I wasn't calling Berbatov a mercenary at all, but I agree Petrov and Berbatov weren't in identical situations, but they were largely similar. I used the comparison to bring up the point, that monetary gain isn't always the biggest factor in a player's decision. What if Petrov was really impressed with SGE when he met with the club? City are headed in the right direction, and Petrov has the potential to lead the club for the next few years. I can't blame him from taking that route, although I'd have loved it if he had signed for Spurs.

[liewser]

You scupper your own argument - yes, they would go to Chelsea or Liverpool because they could still play with good players and win things, but no, they wouldn't sign the contract at West Ham because they wouldn't want to play in a 'half decent squad'.

They go to Chelsea or Liverpool because they can get trophies AND money.

Given the (hyperthetical) choice between trophies OR money, imo they'd choose the £80k weekly wage (and therefore a club like west ham) rather than winning trophies on £15-£20k a week.

Players have a shelf life of 15 years or so, after which the large majority will not be able to maintain their wage level, and therefore lifestyle. This is their living and imo the majority are looking to maximise their earnings for the long run.

[JuanRebelde]

Surely u dont honestly believe that? Of course footballers aren't gona come out and say "i moved for the money."

At the end of the day trophies and money both come into the equation, but if they were honest i reckon there'd be more players putting money on top of the priority list.

The thing is, the winning teams tend to be the richest teams and vice versa, they go hand in hand, and so the top players never really have to choose between the two, they get both.

However, if united were paying their players with the wage budget of the Wigan squad, do you honestly think they'd stick around at the club even though they stand the best chance of winning trophies there? They'd head off to chelsea or liverpool or to one of the top foreign clubs. And if they had the choice of winning trophies on low wages, or signing for west ham on £100+k a week, i have no doubt theyd sign that contract, knowing that in time West Ham's money would build a half decent squad.


Fact is players look at the club and the football side first when they are moving and money does come second. In fact Wet Spam, Wigan and even Sunderland are finding this out as the game is awash with money. After the football decision is made only then are the terms discussed. Chelsea distorted the picture recently but for example the Goons or Liverpool never historically paid the amount Chelski and Manure do but still attracted the best players around based on football reasons. So it is not the case that money is the be all and end all as many non-financial factors come in to play.

So Yes I do believe it and Spurs are increasingly the proof that it is so. Infact, I really wouldn't be surprised if berbatov stayed far longer than the papers and Sky would have you believe because it is clear that the football and human factors at Spurs are what drive him and are keeping him happy.

[JuanRebelde]

They go to Chelsea or Liverpool because they can get trophies AND money.

Given the (hyperthetical) choice between trophies OR money, imo they'd choose the £80k weekly wage (and therefore a club like west ham) rather than winning trophies on £15-£20k a week.


That is a false analogy as the difference in wages like that is extremely rare. 60-65K pw difference between wage offers and undermines what you're saying. Take mercenary Lucas Neil 35K liverpool with the promise of a rise on performance criteria and 60k Spammers. Even the wage offers at Spurs and Spam were closer for Bent.

[JuanRebelde]

:violin:
Yeah and I just want a wife who can cook and clean, but not look like Scarlett Johannsen too!



A top 4 football player is anyone who when he comes on the market, us spurs fans go, well he will never come to us, Valencia/Barcelona/other top 4 clubs in the Europeanleagues, will get him.

Simple enough. And I want spurs to be one of these clubs more than anything.

Ahh, like Klinsmann?? Lineker? and many others. The point about Scarlett Johannsen is missing the point when all the potential wives are gonna be models anyway. i.e. the average EPL professional WILL be a multi-millionaire within a few years and the best players inside a year or so. So he won't be choosing between the missus and Scarlett J will he!?

:bang:

[liewser]

That is a false analogy as the difference in wages like that is extremely rare. 60-65K pw difference between wage offers and undermines what you're saying. Take mercenary Lucas Neil 35K liverpool with the promise of a rise on performance criteria and 60k Spammers. Even the wage offers at Spurs and Spam were closer for Bent.

Its not a false analogy, its hypothetical, hence the "(hypothetical)". In reality this is rarely a decision that would have to be made, but what im saying is that if this was the reality, the money would come first, not the trophies, because that is more important to the players at the core.

In reality the closest choice that players have to my hypothetical analogy is between the following options:

1) High wages and a lot less chance of winning trophies.
2) Slightly less wages and a much higher chance of winning things.

That choice doesnt expose a players need to earn money. However if you honestly believe that given the choice, players would choose trophies (i.e. personal glory and achievement) over money (a substantial constraint on how they live the rest of their life) then you have too much faith in the pulling power of "winning". And in many cases "winning" isn't even guarenteed.

[JuanRebelde]

Its not a false analogy, its hypothetical, hence the "(hypothetical)". In reality this is rarely a decision that would have to be made, but what im saying is that if this was the reality, the money would come first, not the trophies, because that is more important to the players at the core.

In reality the closest choice that players have to my hypothetical analogy is between the following options:

1) High wages and a lot less chance of winning trophies.
2) Slightly less wages and a much higher chance of winning things.

That choice doesnt expose a players need to earn money. However if you honestly believe that given the choice, players would choose trophies (i.e. personal glory and achievement) over money (a substantial constraint on how they live the rest of their life) then you have too much faith in the pulling power of "winning". And in many cases "winning" isn't even guarenteed.

I think we have to agree to disagree on the whole subject as it comes down to a personal interpretation of the transfers we are seening these days. But interesting all the same.

[19darren82]

i think people are too quick to moan at the players, petrov, neil etc, i'm sorry but if another company offered me double my current salary i'd be off, they're only human, a footballers work is only what 20 yrs max, so they get wat they can in that period, fair play to them. People like bent, he chose us not cus he thought 'fuck getting richer quicker' he chose us as he's struggled before and can see our potential, thats all.

[Alan Brazil's haircut]

When Keane signed his new contract earlier this summer, reports said it was for £50-55k a week. The contract that Berbatov may or may not have signed this summer was also supposed to have been in the £50-55k pw bracket and Bent's just come in at a reported £45k.

Might be shooting in teh dark but I'd guess that was one of the reasons Defoe ws less than happy to sign up for £30k a week, ie. not because he's a bread head (though he might be how the hell do I know?) but because it would signal his place in the pecking order, how many games he was likely to get, how much he valued his talent and that would have a knock on effect for his career.

Our wage structure has already changed in response to the football bubble boom, the real questions for spurs in our pre-CL football days (ptui ptui) are judgement calls on who's worth the cash, and who's considered dispensable.

[michaelden]

Our priority must be a larger stadium that seats more than 60K fans. Ideally with two levels of boxes as that's where the big bucks is too.

We could fill 80K in almost every Category A & B game I reckon.