Realistic Ambitions Whilst at WHL

Discussion in 'The New Stadium' started by Hoowl, Jan 28, 2011.

  1. kaz Hirai

    kaz Hirai Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,257
    Ratings Received:
    +12,874 / 525 / -157
    well then exactly, the clubs with the biggest stadiums and most money dont always get the best young players, man city could go build themselves a 500k capacity stadium with cheerleaders, lightning displays and dancing robots, doesnt mean they'll identify and/or sign every young emerging talent with great potential.
     
  2. michaelden

    michaelden Knight of the Fat Fanny

    Messages:
    20,232
    Ratings Received:
    +9,428 / 232 / -45
    kaz, don'tassume the exception will prove the rule in the future. Bale was an exception. The rule is Raphael & Fabio, Kukuta, Mikel, Balotelli etc...

    We did very well with Modric, VdV & Bale but a top 4 team has 5-6 top players not 3-4. We would need to be very luckly and have very long contracts to keep them as soon as they shone
     
  3. Hoowl

    Hoowl Dr wHo(owl) Staff

    Messages:
    6,513
    Ratings Received:
    +233 / 4 / -0
    We are way behind 5 other teams in our league in terms of what we can spend in wages. See the numbers on the first post, or even better the SwissRamble article. It doesn't matter where we sit in relation to German or Italian side, it's the premiership we have to compete in.

    As the first post suggests, in the short-term we're doing alright but it's the long term that's the problem.
     
  4. llamafarmer

    llamafarmer One of Spursking's African boys

    Messages:
    10,776
    Ratings Received:
    +1,107 / 18 / -5
    Things were different back then, before foreign ownership really took hold. The sugar daddy effect has completely moved the goalposts. The gooners made their move to the Emirates just at the right time and had the best youth production line in the league.

    We genuinely do need to up our turnover imo, or at best we'll end up like Ajax where we bring great youngsters through but don't have the finances or the stature to fend off the top clubs.
     
  5. N17_spurs

    N17_spurs Banned

    Messages:
    117
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Big debt and big wages...seems like a guarantee of success to me.

    People assume that a move = success. I see it as a bigger exposure to risk.

    There are many examples of clubs that have suffered for building new stadia, more than those who have pushed on in fact.
     
  6. kaz Hirai

    kaz Hirai Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    12,257
    Ratings Received:
    +12,874 / 525 / -157
    hmm i dont know, lennon, huddlestone and dawson turned out pretty well i think. what if sandro turns out to be quality, kyle walker already talked about being called up into the england squad, i believe that even without massive revenue we would still be able to and will continue to get talented youngsters, some turning into bales, some turning into routledges

    now whether we can keep them is a different story, you can only hope that they all come good at the same time putting us in a position to challenge
     
  7. michaelden

    michaelden Knight of the Fat Fanny

    Messages:
    20,232
    Ratings Received:
    +9,428 / 232 / -45
    Or as mentioned earlier by llama, we could end up like Ajax, a feeder club to WHU, Chelsea, etc...
     
  8. Hoowl

    Hoowl Dr wHo(owl) Staff

    Messages:
    6,513
    Ratings Received:
    +233 / 4 / -0
    Arsenal and United will have paid off their debt soon. Debt isn't an issue to City or Chelsea. It's not that a move gurantees success, it's that not moving and staying in the current WHL severely reduces the probability of us challenging. As I said in the first post and you have yet to counter. Yes moving is a risk, especially financially, and that's why Stratford is more attractive to the NDP.
     
  9. N17_spurs

    N17_spurs Banned

    Messages:
    117
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    There is a suggestion that each project wont be far away on cost, not miles apart as Levy has suggested. Maybe his preference has more to do with AEGs obsiession withowning that part of london and EVERYTHING in it.
     
  10. Hoowl

    Hoowl Dr wHo(owl) Staff

    Messages:
    6,513
    Ratings Received:
    +233 / 4 / -0
    Is that relavent to the original thread in any way or are you just trying to throw muck at Levy? As I've said, whether the NDP is viable is another huge debate, this thread suggests, with facts, that if we don't move we'll have little chance of success.
     
  11. jj87

    jj87 Active Member

    Messages:
    1,734
    Ratings Received:
    +193 / 6 / -1
    It is not another, huge, separate debate, they are intrinsically linked.

    If the NDP can go ahead, (and there is zero evidence to say it cant), then we can stay at home and still expand.

    Questioning Levy's motives is not 'throwing muck' - it is critical analysis of which so few on here have felt willing to apply to the board.

    As has been pointed out, we actually have a very large revenue anyway.

    We are competing now - quite clearly because of Redknapp managing an expensively - assembled squad very well.

    We are not in any danger of getting relegated, becoming West Ham's feeder club or going bankrupt or any other ridiculous scenario envisaged by the more imaginative pro-Stratford posters.

    It's almost like we have had a bit of success and now everyone is so terrified of going back to mediocrity that any attempt to questions Levy's motives opens the accusations of sedition, wanting the club to fail, being anti-progress and the Dear Leader. Please cast your mind back to when Redknapp first took over, would everyone have been so uncritical of Levy then?

    Questioning the official line is not treason, especially when it comes from a place that understands what it is that makes being a football fan, and more importantly, a Tottenham fan, special and unique. It is absolutely essential.
     
  12. ThorntonSpur

    ThorntonSpur every away game is a home game

    Messages:
    2,392
    Ratings Received:
    +621 / 62 / -22
    the question is can we sustain our position and continue to challenge for a top four and Cl finish for the three to five years it will take for a 60k stadium whereve it is????

    I :pray::pray::pray: we can
     
  13. jj87

    jj87 Active Member

    Messages:
    1,734
    Ratings Received:
    +193 / 6 / -1
    Realistic ambitions whilst at WHL -

    Please imagine asking yourself the same question 10 years ago - Before Abramovic, before Man City's new owners, before Liverpool fell apart.

    Would ANY of you have predicted how well we have done recently? Stop all the doom-mongering and apocalyptic predictions.
     
  14. Hoowl

    Hoowl Dr wHo(owl) Staff

    Messages:
    6,513
    Ratings Received:
    +233 / 4 / -0
    I'm not saying we can't question the official line at all. I'm just saying if we don't get a bigger stadium we're unlikely to be able to compete with the likes of Arsenal in the long term. If you disagree, then by all means constuct an arguement to say why.
     
  15. sloth

    sloth Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,990
    Ratings Received:
    +7,036 / 170 / -64
    Levy said it's not viable. As he's the owner of the club I'd say that's pretty strong evidence.

    The allegation that ENIC want to sell to AEG is baseless, built only on the fact that THFC and AEG have a mutual interest in the OS. Levy has said that this isn't the plan. You have no reason to think otherwise, except that you don't want to believe the OS is a lot cheaper than the NDP.

    The question is, why don't you want to believe it? You don't want to believe it because it doesn't suit your wishes which is to persuade as many people as possible that staying is the most important thing. If you don't persuade everyone else to your view then the protest will be weak and more people are likely to accept the move on financial grounds.

    The view of those prepared to countenance a move away is that if it makes financial sense we should do it. Because of this you're willing to engage in any tactic foul or fair to persuade people that in fact it isn't cheaper, that therefore there must be some hidden reason for moving and that if there is indeed a hidden reason perhaps it's because ENIC want to sell to AEG.

    Which is pretty pathetic when you realise it.

    Here's Howl's opening stat cross-correlated with the last four and a half years performances.

    -----------------------TOT -----ARS -----CHE ------MUN-----LIV ---- MC
    08/09 wages (m) -67 -----111 ----- 149 ----- 132 ----- 90 ---- 149

    Team _ / City / Spurs / Liv / Arse / Chel / Utd
    Ave pts / 1.5 / 1.53 / 1.81 / 1.99 / 2.13 / 2.29

    The relationship between what you spend on players and CL qualification couldn't be clearer, but for our anomalous performance last season, those who spend the most qualify.

    With City's sudden arrival as big spenders it's going to be even harder in the future. Six into four places doesn't go and my money is on the team which spends the least getting squeezed out.

    Not ridiculous (though perhaps a trifle imaginative). What is frankly silly is that on the one hand you argue that moving to the OS is a scheme to sell the club to a billionaire investor and on the other you think it's ridiculous that West Ham would not attract a billionaire investor by doing the same.

    Not only that, but West Ham would be cheap, and situated in the OP they'd be in prime position to suck in all of North East and East London, plus the surrounding counties. It would cost a bit to put removable seats in, but not that much.

    And if we have a Chelsea equivalent sitting 4 miles to the South East and Arsenal 3.5 miles south and both have 60k seat stadia, both extremely well funded and able to pay huge wages, where exactly does that leave us in our 36k stadium?

    Where will the next generation of Spurs fans come from?

    And you scoff at relegation, but look at Leeds and Newcastle. It can happen if you don't have the quality and are poorly run.

    How are we going to keep hold of the super-stars if they don't think we can get in CL?

    Or we can't pay the salary?

    What happened a couple of years back when Utd came calling for Berba and Liverpool for Keane?

    You cast your mind back and ask whether last years success is as relevant as an example of progress as you think it is.

    You can question all you like, you can even slander or cast aspersions. It's just other people have an equal right to point it out when you do.
     
  16. SpurSince57

    SpurSince57 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    45,214
    Ratings Received:
    +8,480 / 265 / -139
    United make a massive profit; most of it goes to pay off the interest on their absolutely gargantuan debt.

    Arsenal are far better-run (probably on a par with us, although we may dislike to admit it); having been able to stay competitive with a relatively small outlay has enabled them to weather the dangerous period after the move to the Immigrants.

    If we were able to open a new stadium next year we'd still be playing catch-up with both of these clubs.

    Chelsea and City—City especially—could play in smaller stadia than the Lane and still have an advantage due to their owners' megabucks.
     
  17. Lilbaz

    Lilbaz Just call me Baz

    Messages:
    26,502
    Ratings Received:
    +39,466 / 734 / -238
    If we want to compete with these teams then we need to increase our finance. This could be done through a number of factors, among them increased match day revenue. Man Utd earn £100m a year from match day revenue we get £27m. That is £63m difference a year. If we could make an extra £40m a year by moving or building the NDP (possibly more as corporate is bigger in London) then this has to help us compete with the other teams.

    As for those who are saying we are competing now, how many points off of top were we last 5 seasons?
    09/10 - 16
    08/09 - 39
    07/08 - 41
    06/07 - 29
    05/06 - 26

    That is not competing.
     

Share This Page