What's new

Bigger than Manchester United

Jay The Yid

Active Member
Aug 18, 2010
637
625
I remember when the biggest star in English football opted for Spurs over United

I remember when we were the top club in London and the most glamourous. Forget Arsenal and especialy Chelsea we were the top dogs in London and we knew it and so did our rivals.

I remember when all the top players wanted to play for Spurs

I remember when we used to win trophies regulary.

Then something happened. I call them the "Sugar Years" 15 years of mediocrity, it was so painful.

Only the last 5 years have seen us get back to somewhere we belong. Well done Levy, Jol, Ramos, and Harry and co.

Can we get back to where we were 25 years ago?

If not, why not?
 

danielneeds

Kick-Ass
May 5, 2004
24,183
48,814
I remember when the biggest star in English football opted for Spurs over United

I remember when we were the top club in London and the most glamourous. Forget Arsenal and especialy Chelsea we were the top dogs in London and we knew it and so did our rivals.

I remember when all the top players wanted to play for Spurs

I remember when we used to win trophies regulary.

Then something happened. I call them the "Sugar Years" 15 years of mediocrity, it was so painful.

Only the last 5 years have seen us get back to somewhere we belong. Well done Levy, Jol, Ramos, and Harry and co.

Can we get back to where we were 25 years ago?

If not, why not?

It's going to be a long road, some would say it is impossible without the new stadium...
 

PT

North Stand behind Pat's goal.
Admin
May 21, 2004
25,468
2,408
Sugar's stewardship actually prevented Spurs from going in to receivership. He wasn't a football man but his business acumen ensured the Club had a value when ENIC came along.
 

NEVILLEB

Well-Known Member
Nov 6, 2006
6,788
6,431
When you look at the money we've spent we should be higher than we are.
 

StartingPrice

Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
Feb 13, 2004
32,568
10,280
Sugar's stewardship actually prevented Spurs from going in to receivership. He wasn't a football man but his business acumen ensured the Club had a value when ENIC came along.

This.
I agree with everything you say, up to that point - and tire of telling younger Spurs fans that we don't have to show so much deference to the teams above us...catch up with them, yes, deference, no.

But then you lose miss. If you really believe the decline started when Sugar took over and not almost a decade earlier, then you must have been MIA - the 1991 Cup Final covered over cracks that had already begun to appear. And if you believe Sugar inherited a club that wasn't in a financial mess and brought some sense to financial matters you have been the victim of the worst tpe of one sided propoganda. This crops-up every-so-often, and I'm sure you are not going to agree just on my say-so, but it is an absolute myth that Sugar put this club into decline.

When you look at the money we've spent we should be higher than we are.

And this.
 

Jay The Yid

Active Member
Aug 18, 2010
637
625
Nevilleb.

If you look at net spend and wages spend. We are no where near United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool, or even Arsenal.

Its so easy to say oh look at Spurs they always spend money. But in reality our spend on wages is alot lower than the other clubs i have mentioned even the likes of Newcastle. and we recoup a hell of alot.

As for Sugar. Yes he steadied the ship. BUT in this game you have to speculate to accumulate. He simply didnt.

He built the stadium too small when redeveloping

He built a trainng complex that has a few years later seen to be not up to scratch. Hence the new development.

He decided after Klinsmann he wouldnt go foreign. (Worst days was whilst the scum were signing Bergkamp we spend nearly the same amount of money on Chris blooming Armstrong

He hired a long string of failure managers.

We were awful. Very dark times.
 

tRiKS

Ledley's No.1 fan
Jun 6, 2005
6,854
142
When you look at the money we've spent we should be higher than we are.

Transfer fees are only half the tale though. when you include annual net spedn on transfers+wage bill over the last 10 years we're over achieving compared to the other team in our league.

For example in a 5 year period the goons have spend over 200m more on wages and even if you take off the net or gross transfer spend, the gap between the two is still £150m
 

tony_parkes

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2008
3,298
1,558
If we keep hold of our current crop of players and can get a new stadium sorted in the next few years, then yes we could become a force again competing for trophies.

Remember dynasties eventually fail, dallas too, you would have thought they'd be top forever with the 'who shot JR'.

The importance of finance in football makes it more difficult than in the past but the cost of our tickets and the increased capacity is vital to challenging again, Levy sort the stadium out!!
 

Jay The Yid

Active Member
Aug 18, 2010
637
625
If I remember correctly Bale opted for us ahead of United


Fair enough and so did Berbatov initially.

But it is a bit different to when we signed Gazza. He was the hottest player in English Football. Todays equivalent would be Rooney choosing Spurs over United when he left Everton. Unfortunately that was never going to happen.
 

Maske2g

SC Supporter
Feb 1, 2005
4,257
1,726
I remember nearly not having a football club 3 years after signing Gazza.

Not one mention of Irving Scholar the bloke who ruined us, just a berating of the one that saved us.
 

StartingPrice

Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
Feb 13, 2004
32,568
10,280
I remember nearly not having a football club 3 years after signing Gazza.

Not one mention of Irving Scholar the bloke who ruined us, just a berating of the one that saved us.

Amazing, isn't itEek
It's like the whole anti-Sugar crowd are on a neverending loop of incredulity:

Sugar ruined us.
No, he saved us after Scholar ruined us.
Well, yeah, he did save us, but he didn't do anything else.
But saving us was hard enough work, trying to do anything else would probalby have seen us doing a Leeds.
No, but he didn't do anything else and that ruined us.
No, but he saved us.
Yeah, he did save us, but he didn't do anything else...and on and on and Ariston:roll:
 

bas

Member
Jan 1, 2004
187
24
I remember those years as well. Whoever we played it was not a case of would we win but by how many. As you say when Sugar was here he put a cap on how much we could pay in transfer fees and consequently we only got a mediocre squad. I do not think we have progressed like Arsenal have and will not until we have increased crowd capacity. The current rumours about selling our best players make me cringe. Previously we kept our best players and added other top players - eg Greaves to name but one. I just pray we do not sell our best players - especially Modric or we will become known as a feeder club for the likes of Man U. I feel we missed the boat for a top 4 position when we did not buy a top stiker in January and DL & HR probably are regretting that now as a golden opportunity that went begging. Let us hope they can continue ambitiously and "go for it" - as Del boy says "He Who Dares Wins".
 

Jonboy

Well-Known Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,151
990
Good post bas,
Irving Scholar, wheres the money!! Was a very popular song in those days
 

Mchillio

Resident Alf
Jun 24, 2005
955
4
Amazing, isn't itEek
It's like the whole anti-Sugar crowd are on a neverending loop of incredulity:

Sugar ruined us.
No, he saved us after Scholar ruined us.
Well, yeah, he did save us, but he didn't do anything else.
But saving us was hard enough work, trying to do anything else would probalby have seen us doing a Leeds.
No, but he didn't do anything else and that ruined us.
No, but he saved us.
Yeah, he did save us, but he didn't do anything else...and on and on and Ariston:roll:

This!

I feel a tad sorry for Sugar he did save us and if it wasnt for him we may not have even existed today.

At the end of the day as much as he brought in some rubbish players and managers he thought it was best for the club at the time and that is fine with me.
 
Top