Financial results
- Thread starter guiltyparty
- Start date
Will it come crashing down for Chelsea at some point?
If it does the fallout would be hilarious. Every 'neutral' in the land would raise a glass I imagine. It's not nice seeing clubs dissolve and struggle etc but it would be hard to feel sorry for them at all. Perhaps the older generation of fan ( 60+ )
If it does the fallout would be hilarious. Every 'neutral' in the land would raise a glass I imagine. It's not nice seeing clubs dissolve and struggle etc but it would be hard to feel sorry for them at all. Perhaps the older generation of fan ( 60+ )
dagraham
Well-Known Member
- Sep 20, 2005
- 19,146
- 46,140
That's the main thing that stood out for me when looking at the club comparisons. There's no way that City in just 3 or 4 years of being big players can have built up a commercial arm capable of outdoing Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool by so much. They are approaching Utd levels. Something is definitely not kosher about those deals.
Lilbaz
Just call me Baz
- Apr 1, 2005
- 41,363
- 74,893
Seeing as it is the same family that own Etihad and City there should be a conflict of interest. Same with PSG, over £100m a year (backdated) to put a couple of posters up in the ground. Not even a shirt sponsorship. But since Platini's son works for them I doubt it will get mentioned.
dagraham
Well-Known Member
- Sep 20, 2005
- 19,146
- 46,140
This is what worries me about FFP. It's all very well adhering to these rules, but I worry about UEFA's commitment to ensuring clubs adhere to strict accounting regulations.
Those commercial deals are as far away from "an arm's length transaction" (as it's known in the world of accounting) as you can get.
FFP is a start, but it has the feel of too little too late and in some ways just ensures the cartel continues with nobody able to break it. And with FIFA and UEFA being as corrupt as you can get I'm not sure it will make that much difference in the long run.
Last edited:
But he was a novice nowhere near as experienced as Poch yet he still managed to get them to 6th place. He gave kane a chance as well and if true prevented Kane from being sold. I said from the start he was a caretaker manager there is really only so much he could do in the time he was here.
Well hold on a minute, I'm not saying that he created it all by himself just that he helped, I'm not even stating to what amount he helped. He was head of the academy, how does the head of the academy involved in developing players not have anything to do at all with the philosophy?
I'm not trying to give him credit for everything, just credit where credit is due.
Once again.........
No.
No, he was not.
His role, for only three years, was that of Technical Director - and it mostly involved coaching the U21's, arranging loans and overseeing the transition between the U18's and first team football for our academy graduates. It didn't involve overseeing the academy itself.
John McDermott is Head of the academy and has been since 2005 - more than three years before Sherwood joined the club as a first team coach. It was John McDermott, and others to a lesser extent, who created our academy and who is responsible for its philosophy and its personnel. Spurs' youth set up is a well established, well oiled operation that had been producing very promising results long before Sherwood became Technical Director. There is no way that a hugely respected and able figure within youth football such as McDermott would have tolerated a far less experienced man like Sherwood coming in and imposing his ideas. And to be fair to Sherwood, I credit him with enough intelligence to know a good thing when he sees it and, therefore, not to have interfered.
That's his official title but both the BBC and the independent associate him with being the head of the academy.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/31472125
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...-prepare-to-bring-in-new-manager-9247104.html
So perhaps there is some confusion over how powerful is role was.
One of the reasons why Sherwood isn't liked, why I didn't like him before he took the the job is because he is perceived to have backstabbed his way to the top, someone who has Levy's ear. He went from coach to Technical Director to Head coach in a very short space of time also various ITK report him as being part of the transfer committee and meddling in AVB's job.
What could McDermott really do with someone who has Levy's trust?
Everytime Clive or Bradley Allen are on the media at the moment, they are very quick to emphasise that it is McDermott and Inglethorpe who are to credit for Kane and co. and the whole academy revolution since 2005.
That's just typically shoddy reporting on the part of the BBC and the Independent. He was never head of the academy.
What could John McDermott do? I'm quite confident that, had Sherwood (who had zero experience and qualifications within youth football) blundered in and started trying to impose his philosophy on what was, effectively, McDermott's baby, McDermott would simply have concluded that his time was up at Spurs and wished everyone well on his way out. He would not have lacked for new job offers.
And as I said, Sherwood is intelligent enough not to have interfered with a set up that was already functioning very well.
BTW, I suspect that Levy puts as much (or more) faith in McDermott as he ever did in Sherwood. I'm pretty sure that he would be careful not to undermine his cherished Academy Director.
Lilbaz
Just call me Baz
- Apr 1, 2005
- 41,363
- 74,893
Why do we think only one person did anything at the club. They all had their role. I'm sure the parents played a pivitol role in their development and maybe even their school teachers.
McDermott is doing a fantastic job. But at the end of the day it is down to the player.
Sherwood is gone, so fuck him. In the nice possible taste.
McDermott is doing a fantastic job. But at the end of the day it is down to the player.
Sherwood is gone, so fuck him. In the nice possible taste.
How well do you know McDermott's character? I don't know anything about his character at all, I can't say what he would have done, I can tell you that I would have done exactly as you said if I was McDermott had Sherwood tried to impose his philosophy.
I'm not sure if he had as much faith or more than he had in Sherwood, he was never mentioned as part of the transfer committee and the rise of Sherwood to the top position in such a short space of time makes that doubtful to me, also there is the alleged but I think believable comment about Harry Kane; 'His he Champions League'. Why ask that to Sherwood and not McDermott?
Last edited:
I don't think anyone thinks this.
beats1
Well-Known Member
- Feb 22, 2010
- 30,030
- 29,611
Whilst true but having the goal to invest in youth football means fuck all, Man City, Chelsea(though they are doing well at U18 level), Arsenal, Man Utd and etc all put alot of emphasis in youth football and yet aren't getting the same results.
Whilst its ok to say that oh its Levy who has done a great job with the academy it would be silly considering that alot of teams are pouring money in to what some would call very successful academies and not getting the same results.
The training ground is another example, the players who are in the first team would be products of the old training ground whereas the new players like Onomah, Winks and etc are from the new ground. That old training ground was worse than all of our rivals and yet we have been doing a better job.
Alot credit has to go to Moniz, McDermott, Ramsey and the scouting team which was headed by David Magrone
Everyone talks about the United academy but they don't look great at the moment despite pretty much headed by the Class of 92.
Yet us on the other hand next season will possibly be have these players in our squad
McGee/Archer
Fredericks
Veljkovic
Rose
Onomah
Bentaleb
Mason
Carroll
Townsend
Pritchard
Kane
Now swap CCV for Onomah and you have a whole 11 players who came straight from the academy. Now despite shitloads of investment from other clubs, they are still a long way away from doing that.
If we were to sell Vorm and replace him with Button, that would be a genuinely decent side
There are a number of people that consider Bentaleb, Mason, Rose, Townsend and Carroll to be not good enough.
beats1
Well-Known Member
- Feb 22, 2010
- 30,030
- 29,611
I did say may or may not be here. As for those players the only one who hasn't made a case to be here next season imo is Townsend bar him everyone deserves a shot
Bentaleb and Mason have been better than about £50m of talent, so anyone suggesting getting rid of them is a numptie imo. As Dembele, Capoue, Paulinho and Stambouli should go first.
As for Rose, he has probably been the best english LB this season, unfortunately people will always find a reason to abuse him. As for suggestion about bertrand being better
IMO, Bentaleb has the potential to be. Rose is getting alot better as well. Mason is more of a squad player for us, IMO. Townsend is more of a squad player for a lower mid table PL side. Carroll is the same.
beats1
Well-Known Member
- Feb 22, 2010
- 30,030
- 29,611
Townsend is a squad player for a lower mid table PL side, lol. I can understand him not being a top player but outside the top 6 or 7 he would start for most teams. I wouldn't be surprised if Southampton come back in for him
As for Carroll, he was more highly rated than every player you listed by our coaches. Lets not forget a year ago, pretty much everyone thought mason would be thrown on the scrapheap.
Apart from Carroll all those players starred in wins against Chelsea and Arsenal, I don't think they were flukes, the players definitely have ability we just need them to develop and do it more often. As for Carroll we should definitely have him back here, give him a good preseason with Poch's fitness regime and see what happens. It's in our best interests financially as well as playing wise to have as much academy members in the squad as possible.
Firstly it shows that we are willing to give them a chance and secondly it allows a good team spirit to develop with players that have a heart and soul for the club.
