Is it time for Daniel Levy to step down?

[jambreck]

Appointing managers is one aspect yes - it's also the most important aspect. At the end of the day we are a football club and the most important part is on the pitch.

Sorry, but I don't agree that appointing managers is the most important responsibility that a chairman has. The most important responsibility is the overall health and direction of the club.

I commend Levy for his work off the field in terms of keeping books balanced etc but the fact remains that signings should be the choice of the manager and DOF for clubs who have them. Not a committee. The only person who gets sacked is the manager when he only had one vote in who to buy. This has happened for years and Levy's response is to sack the manager. He needs to be held responsible for the clubs performances on the pitch too - he appoints managers and has a massive day on players we bring in.

The chairman is the man who has overall responsibility for the club and its future. Of course he has to have a say in transfers.

If the manager / head coach wants players X,Y and Z but player X costs more than the club can afford in terms of transfer fee and player Y costs more than the club can afford in terms of wages, while there are other legitimate objections to player Z, then the chairman has to retain the right to veto those players.

What have we achieved in Levy's 14 years as chairman? 2 league cup wins and 1 CL campaign? I understand if that's enough success for you but when you look at the players we've had in recent years (and sold I must add) we have failed to kick on to next level.

Not wishing to be pedantic but Levy has been chairman for a little under 13 years and we have only won 1 League Cup in that time!

Of course I, like any other Spurs fan, would have wished for far greater success. We all dream. But we can't escape reality. Spurs doesn't exist in a vacuum. It exists in a world where three or four clubs were miles ahead of us 13 years ago, far beyond the horizon. We had no chance of competing with them at all when Levy first took over. Before and since, they enjoyed a massive financial advantage over us.

And as if that wasn't enough, two clubs won the oil lottery and started playing the game by a completely new set of rules. If not for them, the chances are that Spurs would have won more than just a solitary League Cup and would have enjoyed considerably more than just the one CL campaign.

To judge Levy's Spurs without taking into account what we've had to compete against makes no sense at all.

Levy always wants to buy 3 decent players instead of 1 class player and as long as he continues in that way we will never be successful - end of story.

Carrick wasn't class?
Berbatov wasn't class?
Bale wasn't class?
Modric wasn't class?
VDV wasn't class?
Vertonghen isn't class?
Lloris isn't class?

Isn't it better to buy 3 class players than 1? We're not a club that can go out and buy the likes of Ozil. Either we cannot afford them or they will not come to us. Or both. We have to be cleverer than that. It means that often we will fail. But, on balance, we've got it more right than wrong.

As far as compensation goes - Graham, Hoddle, Jol, Ramos, Redknapp (had 1 year remaining), AVB have all been employed and sacked by Levy. Surely you don't think these left for nothing? If reports are believed AVB went for 4.5m for your info. I don't know the ins and outs of what compensation each has received but it's cost club millions. And don't forget we paid compensation to Leeds for Graham and Sevilla for Ramos. Come on - as far as football matters are concerned Levy has been poor.

Red top reports. Worthless. The reports that I trust (by Jason Burt and by the Portuguese journalist who is also close to AVB) suggest otherwise.

And yes, there is a cost to hiring and firing managers. And Levy has got it wrong plenty of times. But as I said, the overall health and direction of the club is what really matters. Graham was a Sugar appointment, by the way. Any compensation paid to Leeds was his responsibility.

We are a football club and success is judged by what happens on the pitch not in the bank.

Indeed.

And by any conceivable measure, we are vastly more successful now than we were before Levy took over and we have a far better chance of earning tangible success in the form of silverware.

 

[Bobbins]

Sorry I just don't see it that way. At all. And the difference in our versions surprises me. As I recall it, there was a time that criticism of Levy was regarding as a heinous crime, accompanied by gasps of shock, the perp being told he was a mug etc etc. Dissenting voices were few and far between, maybe not because nobdy wanted to critiscise him, but no one dared to (or could be bothered to get involved in it on here) The Levylove on SC was magnificent in its size and unwavering loyalty.

That's changed over the last 12/18 months, slowly at first, but it's gathering momentum, look at the vote. There's no way, absolutely no way that would have been anything other than a Levy landslide maybe as recently as 6 months to a year ago.

The BSoDL are in retreat. Some are even asking for DNA tests

I think you're confusing the morons who for years now have been screaming 'LEVY OUT HE'S A ****', who have been rightly Spammed/Dumbed into oblivion, with a number of quiet posters who have more sensibly described Levy's obvious faults, whilst probably at the same time also talking about his qualities.

Criticism of Levy doesn't have to be shouted or get its own thread every time it's posted - a hell of a lot of it, almost certainly the overwhelming majority, is talked about sensibly and rationally and as part of existing discussions.

As for the poll - you're dead right. A while back it's would've been 90% Levy stay I expect. But again, just because more people want Levy out now doesn't mean there haven't always been plenty of us who still want him in, but at the same time can recognise his faults and criticise him. The 90% Levy stay posters - same as the 43.5% of people in this poll who want him to stay - aren't all BSoDL who can neither hear nor see no evil.

I'm the perfect example - I want him to stay, obviously, but I can and do regularly criticise him for what he does wrong. I ain't no BSoDL, and I don't think that many people have ever been to be honest.

 

[markiespurs]

I've been a big fan of the bald one but in appointing AVB in the first place has me thinking it could be time to say its time to move on.

He has got a lot right but his judgment on managers has been poor IMO.

Shame.

I've said this in another thread somewhere, but how many managerial appointments actually work out in football?

At a guess, I'd say the vast majority of managerial appointments don't work out for whatever reason.

 

[markiespurs]

Might be time for a carefree billionaire now. I don't see how we have any other choice.

Football isn't what it used to be so may as well go for it.

p.s. this upsets me

Bloody hell mate, take some happy pills, I'm really beginning to worry about your mental state

 

[TaoistMonkey]

Bloody hell mate, take some happy pills, I'm really beginning to worry about your mental state

Haha. Def got the hump about all this.

 

[Jaddas]

As a shareholder I would've hoped you'd be a bit more informed about the financial side of the club.

Anyone who thinks Levy is involved with Spurs for the money is deluded. There is absolutely no evidence for it.

It was always ENIC's aim to take the club off the stock market, but this takes time and must be planned and managed.

The share rights issue was absolutely nothing to do with making money - did Levy pocket the money made? No, it formed part of the initial investment in the massive new training ground project, which cost £40m.

When has Levy ever 'pocketed' money from the club? He pays himself a handsome salary, but so do most chairmen. When ENIC eventually come to sell we should have a new training ground and new stadium and so yes at that time they should make a healthy profit on us - and will have left us in an incredibly healthy financial situation as well.

Levy has his faults, and they are many, but to suggest he's only interested in the club for the money is frankly absolutely fucking insulting, to him and us.

Sorry, have to disagree. There is plenty of proof.

Paying out a dividend of 4p per share at the time (think it was 4/5 years) was not required. I'm no financial guru but the share rights issue wasn't available for the public to buy and exisiting shareholders are normally issued with extra shares to compensate for the dilution but this didn't happen.

Finally our net spend over the years is one of the lowest in the premier league.

These are the facts.

As a football Chairman he is the 2nd highest paid in the country, this is taking money out of the club but the results don't justify being so highly paid.

I have nothing against Levy but there have been many mistakes e.g. managerial appointments, not pushing on as a club when we should've done. If we made the same mistakes in our jobs then we would've been sacked!

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

I think you're confusing the morons who have been screaming 'LEVY OUT HE'S A ****', who have been rightly Spammed/Dumbed into oblivion, with a number of quiet posters who have more sensibly described Levy's obvious faults, whilst probably at the same time also talking about his qualities.

Criticism of Levy doesn't have to be shouted or get its own thread every time it's posted - a hell of a lot of it, almost cvertainly the overwhelming majority, is talked about sensibly and rationally and as part of exsiting discussions.

As for the poll - you're dead right. A while back it's would've been 90% Levy stay I expect. But again, just because more people want Levy out now doesn't mean there have always been plenty of us who still want him in, but at the same time can recognise his faults and criticise him. The 90% Levy stay posters - same as the 43.5% of people in this poll who want him to stay - aren't all BSoDL who can neither hear nor see no evil.

I'm the perfect example - I want him to stay, obviously, but I can and do regularly criticise him for what he does wrong. I ain't no BSoDL, and I don't think that many people have ever been to be honest.

Blood test come back negative then?

But going back to being serious, again, your version surprises me. You might be right with your first paragraph, you might not be, I dunno, but i'd stand by what I said. In general, critcism of Levy was rarer than a Spurs league title.

I'd suggest that the poll results shouldn't be taken too literally in that it's more a manifestation of people general dissatisfaction with Levy being expressed as opposed to a genuine wanting him out. And as I type, it also occurs to me that perhaps my thoughts stem from constantly reading posts defending and absolving him from any sort of blame whatsoever and regardless. (Not so much now but going back in time).

 

[Bobbins]

Blood test come back negative then?

But going back to being serious, again, your version surprises me. You might be right with your first paragraph, you might not be, I dunno, but i'd stand by what I said. In general, critcism of Levy was rarer than a Spurs league title.

I'd suggest that the poll results shouldn't be taken too literally in that it's more a manifestation of people general dissatisfaction with Levy being expressed as opposed to a genuine wanting him out. And as I type, it also occurs to me that perhaps my thoughts stem from constantly reading posts defending and absolving him from any sort of blame whatsoever and regardless. (Not so much now but going back in time).

You've been at the coalface too long, policing those LEVY OUT threads which then became full of Levy-based group-wanking (some of that spunk was mine I admit) I reckon

 

[Misfit]

You've been at the coalface too long, policing those LEVY OUT threads which then became full of Levy-based group-wanking (some of that spunk was mine I admit) I reckon

I think you're both right. There was a lot of "Levy is saint!" stuff going on. He could have marched into their homes and killed their family and he'd have been defended. Against that was equally nonsensical "Levy is the debeeeeeeel!" guff whereby you'd think he was running Treblinka.

That was yrs in the making and came to a head during the H stuff. Since then both sides seem to have moved more to meet in the middle. We can finally have the same discussions that have been had for yrs but were drowned out by those at the extremes screaming over everyone else at the top of their lungs.

It's nice.

 

[Josiebyar]

#LevyOut

 

[jambreck]

Sorry, have to disagree. There is plenty of proof.

Paying out a dividend of 4p per share at the time (think it was 4/5 years) was not required. I'm no financial guru but the share rights issue wasn't available for the public to buy and exisiting shareholders are normally issued with extra shares to compensate for the dilution but this didn't happen.

Finally our net spend over the years is one of the lowest in the premier league.

These are the facts.

As a football Chairman he is the 2nd highest paid in the country, this is taking money out of the club but the results don't justify being so highly paid.

I have nothing against Levy but there have been many mistakes e.g. managerial appointments, not pushing on as a club when we should've done. If we made the same mistakes in our jobs then we would've been sacked!

Paying out a dividend was always designed, IMO, as a vehicle for increasing the attractiveness of THFC to potential investors. It certainly wouldn't have been about the earnings, which would have been chicken feed to Lewis. His and Levy's MO has always been to increase the capital value of their investments - not to farm them for income.

4p per share would have been worth about £750K to Levy. A lot of money, for sure. But let's put that in perspective - it's about eight weeks worth of wages for Adebayor (not including the wages that City still pay him). Dividends were only paid for a few years and at a time when Levy's pay was considerably less than it is now (and considerably less than someone of his qualifications and experience in his position could have expected to earn elsewhere). Don't forget that he is doing the job of both chairman and chief executive at Spurs. Even so, what he earns is still only on a par with an average player at Spurs. Hardly scandalous.

As to the share issue not being opened to either the public or existing small shareholders, what are you referring to? The 2004 share issue? Or the 2009 share placement? The 2004 share issue was open to all shareholders. The 2009 share issue was a private placement. It was only open to large investors, as with all private placements. And whether or not it was a good thing can only be judged by the purpose it served - i.e. what was done with the money raised. In this case, the private placement paid for £15m worth of costs incurred by the stadium project which would otherwise have been met by normal operating income and which would therefore have had a detrimental effect on the club's ability to invest in new players or to pay competitive wages to its players as a whole.

One final thing - net spend on transfers is a pretty meaningless figure. The club is not bankrolled by an oil billionaire. It operates within a budget. It spends what it can. And that figure must include wages. It's quite simple, really.

 

[NEVILLEB]

Sorry I just don't see it that way. At all. And the difference in our versions surprises me. As I recall it, there was a time that criticism of Levy was regarding as a heinous crime, accompanied by gasps of shock, the perp being told he was a mug etc etc. Dissenting voices were few and far between, maybe not because nobdy wanted to critiscise him, but no one dared to (or could be bothered to get involved in it on here) The Levylove on SC was magnificent in its size and unwavering loyalty.

That's changed over the last 12/18 months, slowly at first, but it's gathering momentum, look at the vote. There's no way, absolutely no way that would have been anything other than a Levy landslide maybe as recently as 6 months to a year ago.

The BSoDL are in retreat. Some are even asking for DNA tests

Spot on.

The time you're referring to was last week.

 

[shelfyid]

him and the **** in the bahamas wont be going anywhere anytime soon unless lewis pops his cloggs which by the look of him is a possibility.

levy has systematically fucked things up from day one. the shortarsed little twunt thinks he knows the game when he is no more than a bean counter. what a job the man has, he has a ready made scapegoat if anything goes wrong on the pitch and awards himself his own pay rises. lewis is just as much of a fucktard, he could not give a flying shit what happens on the pitch. as long as we dont get relegated that **** wont move his wrinkly arse as all he wants to do is get the stadium built and sell.

 

[tiger666]

him and the **** in the bahamas wont be going anywhere anytime soon unless lewis pops his cloggs which by the look of him is a possibility.

levy has systematically fucked things up from day one. the shortarsed little twunt thinks he knows the game when he is no more than a bean counter. what a job the man has, he has a ready made scapegoat if anything goes wrong on the pitch and awards himself his own pay rises. lewis is just as much of a fucktard, he could not give a flying shit what happens on the pitch. as long as we dont get relegated that **** wont move his wrinkly arse as all he wants to do is get the stadium built and sell.

You really think that?

 

[Yid1987]

Sorry, but I don't agree that appointing managers is the most important responsibility that a chairman has. The most important responsibility is the overall health and direction of the club.



The chairman is the man who has overall responsibility for the club and its future. Of course he has to have a say in transfers.

If the manager / head coach wants players X,Y and Z but player X costs more than the club can afford in terms of transfer fee and player Y costs more than the club can afford in terms of wages, while there are other legitimate objections to player Z, then the chairman has to retain the right to veto those players.



Not wishing to be pedantic but Levy has been chairman for a little under 13 years and we have only won 1 League Cup in that time!

Of course I, like any other Spurs fan, would have wished for far greater success. We all dream. But we can't escape reality. Spurs doesn't exist in a vacuum. It exists in a world where three or four clubs were miles ahead of us 13 years ago, far beyond the horizon. We had no chance of competing with them at all when Levy first took over. Before and since, they enjoyed a massive financial advantage over us.

And as if that wasn't enough, two clubs won the oil lottery and started playing the game by a completely new set of rules. If not for them, the chances are that Spurs would have won more than just a solitary League Cup and would have enjoyed considerably more than just the one CL campaign.

To judge Levy's Spurs without taking into account what we've had to compete against makes no sense at all.



Carrick wasn't class?
Berbatov wasn't class?
Bale wasn't class?
Modric wasn't class?
VDV wasn't class?
Vertonghen isn't class?
Lloris isn't class?

Isn't it better to buy 3 class players than 1? We're not a club that can go out and buy the likes of Ozil. Either we cannot afford them or they will not come to us. Or both. We have to be cleverer than that. It means that often we will fail. But, on balance, we've got it more right than wrong.



Red top reports. Worthless. The reports that I trust (by Jason Burt and by the Portuguese journalist who is also close to AVB) suggest otherwise.

And yes, there is a cost to hiring and firing managers. And Levy has got it wrong plenty of times. But as I said, the overall health and direction of the club is what really matters. Graham was a Sugar appointment, by the way. Any compensation paid to Leeds was his responsibility.



Indeed.

And by any conceivable measure, we are vastly more successful now than we were before Levy took over and we have a far better chance of earning tangible success in the form of silverware.

Ok so there are a few errors (league cup was supposed to be 2 finals 1 win 1 runner up).

Ask yourself how many of players you listed were class when we bought them and how many developed to be class? Those listed are the transfers he's done well with and as I've said I commend Levy for some of this stuff he's done. I look at both sides of the coin and there comes a time when he needs to be looked at when the same process is being repeated with transfers and managers!

If appointing a manager isn't most important job then what is? How can you run the business without a manager and team on the pitch? A football club starts with having a team on the pitch and to do so they need a manager. Otherwise how can it be a football club?

By your comments to a number of responses on here from various people it's quite obvious that you won't have a bad word said about Levy and fair play to you for your support but I'm sorry unless he changes some of his ways we are going to fail to attract class managers because time and time again Levy wants final say.

On your point about him being entitled to it - he should give the manager a sum that can be spent e.g 100m & x amount salaries. How many players the manager wants then should be down to him. If he feels he needs 4 at £25m so be it. I agree Levy needs to be involved but ultimately the manager should have final say as he's employed to manage/coach players and is the one who will get sacked if it doesn't work. At the moment managers are sacked when having to work with some players they didn't want and cheaper alternatives to who they did want.

 

[shelfyid]

You really think that?

what i wrote is what i believe yes. we are run by greedy, incompetent businessmen who in any other form of business would have been sacked for not having a fucking clue what he was doing.

 

[RuskyM]

My decision is entirely dependent on how the next few months go, but right now it's definitely leaning to "yes"

 

[MikeCOYS]

Transfer wise he's been great. On the other hand, for managers he's been poor.

We may never find out if the manager he's brought in are quality or not. As whenever a dip in form, the manager is sent packing by Levy.

Wenger, Fergie, Moyes (for Everton), Pardew, Martinez (Wigan) all had experienced losses either heavily or for a spell of time.

All are given time and have done very well. A manager also needs confidence as well. Having the thought of you may lose your job at any given point certainly doesn't help with confidence.

With confidence perhaps AVB would have been more daring and played with our pricy signings, but since he doesn't have any he's resort to playing defensive football so that his team will not lose and cost him his job.

In the beginning of the season we absolutely battered teams with the AVB's tactics, but lacking goals. Keep in mind the players are quite unfamiliar with each other. However, after some games in which the team hasn't scored we started to perform badly. This is the resort of a dip in confidence from AVB and the players, and it could also be AVB's man-management skills isn't there when the players need it.

IMO, AVB deserves more time as I don't think we've truly seen the best of him. However, he also needs to change his ways and stop being so stubborn with his tactics. When it's not working he ignores suggestions and tries to prove a point and hopes it somehow works out in the end. Unfortunately for him, he's stubbornness to prove a point is what cost him his job.

To sum up, Levy needs to give managers more time and perhaps seek help to aid AVB in his problem areas, and not just to sack him in the middle of the season.

 

[xtrac]

Sorry, but I don't agree that appointing managers is the most important responsibility that a chairman has. The most important responsibility is the overall health and direction of the club.



The chairman is the man who has overall responsibility for the club and its future. Of course he has to have a say in transfers.

If the manager / head coach wants players X,Y and Z but player X costs more than the club can afford in terms of transfer fee and player Y costs more than the club can afford in terms of wages, while there are other legitimate objections to player Z, then the chairman has to retain the right to veto those players.



Not wishing to be pedantic but Levy has been chairman for a little under 13 years and we have only won 1 League Cup in that time!

Of course I, like any other Spurs fan, would have wished for far greater success. We all dream. But we can't escape reality. Spurs doesn't exist in a vacuum. It exists in a world where three or four clubs were miles ahead of us 13 years ago, far beyond the horizon. We had no chance of competing with them at all when Levy first took over. Before and since, they enjoyed a massive financial advantage over us.

And as if that wasn't enough, two clubs won the oil lottery and started playing the game by a completely new set of rules. If not for them, the chances are that Spurs would have won more than just a solitary League Cup and would have enjoyed considerably more than just the one CL campaign.

To judge Levy's Spurs without taking into account what we've had to compete against makes no sense at all.



Carrick wasn't class?
Berbatov wasn't class?
Bale wasn't class?
Modric wasn't class?
VDV wasn't class?
Vertonghen isn't class?
Lloris isn't class?

Isn't it better to buy 3 class players than 1? We're not a club that can go out and buy the likes of Ozil. Either we cannot afford them or they will not come to us. Or both. We have to be cleverer than that. It means that often we will fail. But, on balance, we've got it more right than wrong.



Red top reports. Worthless. The reports that I trust (by Jason Burt and by the Portuguese journalist who is also close to AVB) suggest otherwise.

And yes, there is a cost to hiring and firing managers. And Levy has got it wrong plenty of times. But as I said, the overall health and direction of the club is what really matters. Graham was a Sugar appointment, by the way. Any compensation paid to Leeds was his responsibility.



Indeed.

And by any conceivable measure, we are vastly more successful now than we were before Levy took over and we have a far better chance of earning tangible success in the form of silverware.

So how comes we didnt buy the striker we were crying out for when we were in the CL, at a time citeh was struggling to get a top 4 spot that season after spunking millions, and yet allthough we had a fantastic run in the CL we missed out i believe by 1-2 points for consecutive seasons in the top 4, not forgetting the storys of uber strikers plastered over ssn we were in for, but im guessing you think H said we didnt need one..that season was pivitol, DL failed to recognise the importance of the opportunity we was in, and yet its always H's fault!! that season will always live in the memory of how close we was of cracking the top 4 elite, and yet we sit here today arguing the toss over managers..the finger is pointing in DL's direction and rightly so!!

 

[jambreck]

Ask yourself how many of players you listed were class when we bought them and how many developed to be class?

But that's the point. We can neither afford nor attract the Ozil's of this world. So we have to do the next best thing. We have to attract those who will never be at that level (but who can still do a job) or those who we believe have the potential to be at that level.

If appointing a manager isn't most important job then what is? How can you run the business without a manager and team on the pitch? A football club starts with having a team on the pitch and to do so they need a manager. Otherwise how can it be a football club?

Sorry if it sounds as though I'm repeating myself but the most important responsibility for a football club chairman is the overall health and direction of his club.

By your comments to a number of responses on here from various people it's quite obvious that you won't have a bad word said about Levy and fair play to you for your support but I'm sorry unless he changes some of his ways we are going to fail to attract class managers because time and time again Levy wants final say.

Not at all. He's made loads of mistakes. Doubtless he'll make many more. I've been very critical of him in the past - particularly in relation to the attempted move to Stratford. Even on this thread, I've conceded several times that he has indeed made many poor managerial choices.

It's just that I don't ascribe such all encompassing importance to managerial appointments as you seem to. I prefer, instead, to look at the bigger picture which shows that we have made enormous strides forward under Levy's stewardship.

On your point about him being entitled to it - he should give the manager a sum that can be spent e.g 100m & x amount salaries. How many players the manager wants then should be down to him. If he feels he needs 4 at £25m so be it. I agree Levy needs to be involved but ultimately the manager should have final say as he's employed to manage/coach players and is the one who will get sacked if it doesn't work. At the moment managers are sacked when having to work with some players they didn't want and cheaper alternatives to who they did want.

Again, I just don't buy the notion that Levy persistently foists unwanted players on his managers.