Europa

[Original # 10]

We're in it so use to our advantage. It's a better comp to blood some of the youngsters than the FA or League Cup as we are guaranteed to play at least 6 games from the offset.

Use it to give squad players who haven't had much game time some minutes to ensure they are ready for EPL duty if required. Give some of the youngsters a go as it will be a better learning curve than loaning them to Championship sides.

Give some game time to first teamers who are returning from injuries.

We have more than enough talent in our squad to mix and match like above ensuring we are both competitive in the Europa League and not hurting our chances in the EPL

 

[3Dnata]

Is it possible to function as a challenging club if we play joke teams( let alone the effect that will have on fans, sponsors etc) then expect the team to be able to switch on for the 4th place cup?
Has this worked?
I don't think either that if we do qualify for a CL spot we could then just take to European football from cold.

 

[buttons]

Unfortunately I was in the Dam last Wednesday

Hope you found something to do to take your mind off those chavy c**** !!

 

[E17yid]

Hope you found something to do to take your mind off those chavy c**** !!

I must admit it was hard to avoid them on Wednesday but didn't let those twats ruin my time.

 

[roosh]

Winning the Europa League would still net us around £10m in prize money, not taking into account gate receipts, merchandise sold on match nights, TV rights and sponsorship.

Plus that all-important thing which we lack so desperately - SILVERWARE.

I don't want us to become an Arsenal who are always up there but never win anything. It seems 90% of us on here actually want Spurs to become that. Madness. We play to win, it's that simple.

It's not so much a case of not wanting to win anything, but rather setting short-, medium-, and long-term goals, and wanting to compete at the highest level.

We didn't have the strength-in-depth to compete on all fronts this season, that is, all the competitions we were entered in. Chelsea had an unbelievably gruelling fixture list this season, but they had the squad to compete. This means that we have to prioritise our objectives. This season I think our objectives were to challenge for the Eurpopa league and 4th place, with the cups seeming to be a lesser priority - judging by the way our manager was talking. In the end we came up short in both. Chelsea, on the other hand, after changing managers, succeeded on both fronts, because they had a strong enough squad to compete. I don't think we will add the number of players we need, during the summer, to ensure that we can challenge on both fronts. We could come close on both fronts again, but I would rather prioritise finishing in the top 4 and use the Europa league to give players experience so that they can step in when needed in the league.

Once we have established ourselves as a regular top 4 team and have the resources to build a strong enough squad to compete on all fronts, then we can re-focus on winning silverware. It would be great to win something in the short-term, but if that comes with a trade off of challenging for the top 4, then I think it affects our longer term goals of competing at the top level and growing a club that can compete, on a sustained basis, for more silverware.


tl;dr - I think focusing on qualifying for the CL will accelerate us towards our longer term goals of competing at the top and winning silverware on a sustained basis. I think focusing on the EL could bring us silverware in the short-term, but could slow our progress towards our long-term goals.

 

[roosh]

didn't realize we'd become like the arse being picky with which trophies we should go for (we've seen how well thats working for them). unless and until we've achieved the success the likes united and pool have there is NO excuse to not try to win everything there is to win and beyond that. thats what being a champion is all about.

europa didnt damage anything. we've been unbeaten in most of our games this season despite the competition. in case you forgot bale came back from a painful injury sustained in that competition and still managed to score one of the best goals this campaign. our weakness was lack of squad depth and failing to bolster it when we should. dont try and place blame where it has no business being placed.

But lack of squad depth is the reason we should be focusing on one goal over the other. I don't think we have the squad to compete on both fronts. Indeed, we tried this season and came up short in both.

 

[roosh]

How can we predict next season? We might have sufficient squad depth by then for all we know, so its a bit early for people to say sack it off, don't try etc.

It does sound like some people (not you specifically) are being snobby and feel Europa League is somehow all of a sudden beneath us.

It's not beneath us, we're just aspiring to greater heights.

 

[balalasaurus]

But lack of squad depth is the reason we should be focusing on one goal over the other. I don't think we have the squad to compete on both fronts. Indeed, we tried this season and came up short in both.

Lack of squad depth was primarily caused by injury and the fact that we sent out players who we should have kept to serve in the case of said injuries (townsend, rose for example). add to that the fact that we really weren't as decisive as we should have been in the transfer window and you compound the problem. We fell short but we came bloody close even with the thin squad. we reached the QFs of a European competition and came to within a point or two of our rivals directly above us. that in itself is an achievement. just imagine what we could do if we recalled the right players and reinforced key areas. if we could compete (and compete well i might add) with a thin squad then what's to stop us from competing again with a re-inforced squad where the chances of achieving our objectives are that much greater?

 

[roosh]

Lack of squad depth was primarily caused by injury and the fact that we sent out players who we should have kept to serve in the case of said injuries (townsend, rose for example). add to that the fact that we really weren't as decisive as we should have been in the transfer window and you compound the problem. We fell short but we came bloody close even with the thin squad. we reached the QFs of a European competition and came to within a point or two of our rivals directly above us. that in itself is an achievement. just imagine what we could do if we recalled the right players and reinforced key areas. if we could compete (and compete well i might add) with a thin squad then what's to stop us from competing again with a re-inforced squad where the chances of achieving our objectives are that much greater?

Not being able to cope with injuries is a symptom of lack of squad depth, and is part of the reason we weren't able to compete on both fronts. We sent out players like Townsend and Rose to develop them, because the thinking was clearly that they weren't ready for sustained first team involvement, even in the event of injuries to players in their position. Not being decisive in the transfer market is more a symptom of our financial clout than anything, given the inflated prices that are charged in January.

The thing is, if we improve our squad in the summer, and I imagine we will, our rivals are going to do likewise, off-setting any improvements we make; which means that the chances of achieving our objectives aren't actually greater. I don't think we have the finances to add the number of quality players we need to compete on both fronts and, personally, I would rather see us use the EL to give certain players games and experience, while focusing on the league and CL qualification, because CL qualification will help us achieve our medium- to long-term goals quicker than winning the EL would.

In an ideal world we could do both, but we don't have the resources that Chelsea do to make that more than just a fighting chance. I would rather sacrifice the EL to increase the chances of CL qualification, than risk CL qualification to improve the already unfavourable chances of winning the EL. The risk/return ratio is much more favourable if we prioritise the CL, I think.

 

[balalasaurus]

Not being able to cope with injuries is a symptom of lack of squad depth, and is part of the reason we weren't able to compete on both fronts. We sent out players like Townsend and Rose to develop them, because the thinking was clearly that they weren't ready for sustained first team involvement, even in the event of injuries to players in their position. Not being decisive in the transfer market is more a symptom of our financial clout than anything, given the inflated prices that are charged in January.

The thing is, if we improve our squad in the summer, and I imagine we will, our rivals are going to do likewise, off-setting any improvements we make; which means that the chances of achieving our objectives aren't actually greater. I don't think we have the finances to add the number of quality players we need to compete on both fronts and, personally, I would rather see us use the EL to give certain players games and experience, while focusing on the league and CL qualification, because CL qualification will help us achieve our medium- to long-term goals quicker than winning the EL would.

In an ideal world we could do both, but we don't have the resources that Chelsea do to make that more than just a fighting chance. I would rather sacrifice the EL to increase the chances of CL qualification, than risk CL qualification to improve the already unfavourable chances of winning the EL. The risk/return ratio is much more favourable if we prioritise the CL, I think.

clearly that kind of thinking wasn't prudent then because those same players who you say we did not consider ready for sustained first team involvement did just fine playing in the first teams they were loaned out to (and on more than one occasion were the stand out players of those teams). whether or not they were ready for first team play at spurs the fact remains that they should have been kept especially considering our modest activity in the tw and injuries to our existing first team players.

ok say for a second we go with your plan, bleed the younger players in the EL and achieve CL, that's just one year of CL. the players will still have to get used to playing more than one game a week. further CL iirc increases revenue by 30m for that one year. can we really buy enough players (let alone CL quality players) to ensure sustained involvement in the competition? what happens if we get knocked out and fail to achieve it the following year? then we have an inflated squad and wage bill minus the necessary funds to support such a situation. CL only really becomes profitable when you get sustained participation in it and to do that the players must first get used to competing on more than one front. that's the only way we'll be prepared for any outcome that comes our way.

 

[roosh]

clearly that kind of thinking wasn't prudent then because those same players who you say we did not consider ready for sustained first team involvement did just fine playing in the first teams they were loaned out to (and on more than one occasion were the stand out players of those teams). whether or not they were ready for first team play at spurs the fact remains that they should have been kept especially considering our modest activity in the tw and injuries to our existing first team players.

Playing on loan for a different club is a lot different to playing for your bigger parent club. When you're on loan there is somewhat less pressure on the player, because they know they are there to develop and return to the parent club. Instead of being in the mindset that they have to take their opportunity when it comes, with the added pressure that brings, they can be of the mindset that they are there to improve so that they can take their opportunity when they return to the parent club. This relative freedom is part of the reason why loaning players can be so good for their development.

But that is more of an academic discussion and open to debate.

ok say for a second we go with your plan, bleed the younger players in the EL and achieve CL, that's just one year of CL. the players will still have to get used to playing more than one game a week. further CL iirc increases revenue by 30m for that one year. can we really buy enough players (let alone CL quality players) to ensure sustained involvement in the competition? what happens if we get knocked out and fail to achieve it the following year? then we have an inflated squad and wage bill minus the necessary funds to support such a situation. CL only really becomes profitable when you get sustained participation in it and to do that the players must first get used to competing on more than one front. that's the only way we'll be prepared for any outcome that comes our way.

I'm not sure that CL qualification necessarily means an inflated squad and wage bill. While we would add a number of better quality players, on somewhat higher wages, it doesn't mean that we have to buy an inflated squad and smash our wage structure, we can still be prudent in our transfer dealings.

I would, however, rather fall short of qualifying for the CL because we were competing in it, than fall short because we were trying to win the EL. If we do fall short, then we've had the benefit of a year in the CL, with the increased revenue, as well as the brand building that goes with it. Levy was able to exploit our debut season in the CL to increase the revenue over and above that which comes directly from the competition, and another season would only help that. The EL doesn't quite have the same appeal for potential sponsorship partners.

 

[robbiedee]

Well I for one hope we give it a go. With a better squad and good rotation, it shouldn't impact our PL challenge.

I really enjoyed our journey. We got to the quarter final playing pretty badly. Imagine what we could achieve if the boys played a bit better!

On a side note...I really think Chelsea should be given the opportunity to defend their EL trophy and therefore free up a place in the CL

I also think it's bollox that teams that don't cut it in the CL get a second bit e of the cherry...both Chelsea and Benfica were those teams and made it to the final... (and Basel)

 

[chrissivad]

Totally agree that it can be built up with or without CL, but getting CL makes that easier going forwards whereas getting EL doesn't really have any impact.

And whilst I'd love us to get a squad that is capable of playing 2 games a week (and competing in those games), I don't think we have the finances to do that properly (again to a level where we can compete) based on being in the EL.

I think ultimately I can't see past the fact that winning the Europa League means very little and gains us very little in terms of the development of the club.

If we're going to focus on a cup competition I'd much rather see us focus on the FA Cup to be honest. It's at least as well respected and doesn't take 452 games to win.

Don't get me wrong, if Levy splashes the cash this Summer and we have a considerably stronger squad next season then yes I'd love us to win the Europa League. But if our squad strength is similar to this season then we can't compete on both fronts and it's a no-brainer as to which one we should focus on.

what do you think would be different between us getting CL last time, and if we had scrapped into 4th this year?

I just dont think if we get into the CL then Levy will release the funds that some think he will.

 

[talkshowhost86]

what do you think would be different between us getting CL last time, and if we had scrapped into 4th this year?

I just dont think if we get into the CL then Levy will release the funds that some think he will.

I think that he'd be more likely to release the funds (as by being in the Champions League we'd have more funds available anyway), and by being in the CL we also have more pulling power in terms of player purchases.

Of course this is all down to the whim of the chairman, and he could easily decide not to make the most of us being in the CL (as appeared to happen last time).

But the money would be there and our reputation would be increased. The opportunities would be provided, which is not something that can be said for the Europa League.

 

[roosh]

I think that he'd be more likely to release the funds (as by being in the Champions League we'd have more funds available anyway), and by being in the CL we also have more pulling power in terms of player purchases.

Of course this is all down to the whim of the chairman, and he could easily decide not to make the most of us being in the CL (as appeared to happen last time).

But the money would be there and our reputation would be increased. The opportunities would be provided, which is not something that can be said for the Europa League.

The progress on the new stadium could have an impact. With things progressing more suredly now, we might be in a position to start offering higher wages in the knowledge that we will have the income in the future to sustain it.

 

[talkshowhost86]

The progress on the new stadium could have an impact. With things progressing more suredly now, we might be in a position to start offering higher wages in the knowledge that we will have the income in the future to sustain it.

It will help in the future certainly. In the shorter term though getting in the CL gives us another boost financially.

 

[Krafty]

The Europa League offers three things:

1. A Trophy
2. Money (even thought prize money is relatively small, it does offer more chances for matchday revenue, sponsorship etc)
3. Uefa Co-efficient

Winning a trophy is obviously a big deal, and the uefa co-efficient is important too, especially as it will help get an easier draw (theoretically) for the Champions League.

To be honest, a team our size and stature and quality should get through the group stages easily. We should have got through the group stages when Harry wasn't even taking the tournament seriously, all we needed to do was draw at home to PAOK and then beat Shamrock, but we managed to lose!

A team of Friedel, Naughton, Caulker, Carroll, Townsend, Kane, you could probably even include Livermore, Obika, Luongo as well, should beat the bottom two seeded teams in the group at home. A few bigger names and we get through the group easily, and then we can see where we are in February, whether we can afford to compete on several fronts or if the league takes priority

 

[eddiebailey]

In the early stages we should play a mix of up-for-it kids and solid old pros, that would solve the tiredness issue and enable us to progress just as easily as if we play a full first team. There is no advantage in playing johnny big bollocks who are going to stroll through the game with a sense of entitlement and like as not get turned over, and absolutely no point at all in playing sulky out-of-favour first teamers.

Friedel​

​

Smith Dawson Caulker Rose​

​

Parker Carroll​

​

Townsend Holtby Falque​

​

Defoe​

is ample good enough to see off Ruritania FC.

 

[absolute bobbins]

The Europa League offers three things:

1. A Trophy
2. Money (even thought prize money is relatively small, it does offer more chances for matchday revenue, sponsorship etc)
3. UEFA Co-efficient

Winning a trophy is obviously a big deal, and the uefa co-efficient is important too, especially as it will help get an easier draw (theoretically) for the Champions League.

To be honest, a team our size and stature and quality should get through the group stages easily. We should have got through the group stages when Harry wasn't even taking the tournament seriously, all we needed to do was draw at home to PAOK and then beat Shamrock, but we managed to lose!

A team of Friedel, Naughton, Caulker, Carroll, Townsend, Kane, you could probably even include Livermore, Obika, Luongo as well, should beat the bottom two seeded teams in the group at home. A few bigger names and we get through the group easily, and then we can see where we are in February, whether we can afford to compete on several fronts or if the league takes priority

This reason ALONE mean's that Europa league football is very important. Pot one and Pot two means we only play against one of the huge teams when we get there next season

 

[Gilzeanking]

This argument goes backwards and forwards .

Its not so black and white as playing first team in Europa ...or the kids . Its a question of rotation , its a good point that EL is an opportunity to give game time to some fringe players and first teamers coming back from injury etc .

Only skimmed this thread , but I've not seen anyone mention how totally SHIT many of our 'first teamers' were in numerous of the 12 EL games . So this is another part of the rotation argument ie we may improve our chances by rotating and giving hungry players opportunities.

However , hearing a recent AVB interview , I'm sure it will be first teamers all the way once again . To me that's ignoring reality . Wenger has said the hardest thing is to run successful Prem and European campaigns together, but AVB just won't accept this . He is always adamant that a long EL trip on Thurs has zero impact on the next sunday Prem match ...mebbe it was the case at Porto ,but with regard to the Prem ..

...It simply isn't true .