Well, of course he bloody did....he left Spurs. 'Former Tottenham star Toby Alderweireld scores a STUNNING 94th-minute equaliser to deliver his hometown club Royal Antwerp their first league title in 66 YEARS... '
The players who leave do well but largely...............the coaches don't. Strange. I've no explanation.
We catch falling knives. Conte, Mourinho, Nuno, AVB. Or go for one season wonders Ramos, Poch*, Ange* * I know both have more than a season, but they sparked interest after one season under Levy’s nose.
I guess Levy *is* a top businessman. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoz...on-over-the-past-three-years/?sh=4b2f73676e44
Do you really care about that jumhead or would you prefer trophies regardless of how good a businessman Levy is?
I find it funny how people defend his bad football decisions with how good a businessman he is. To me they are two separate things. We get it, he's good at business, nobody is disputing that. But the man knows nothing about football and there is a 22-year body of work that supports this.
I'm not defending anything, I find it incredible that Spurs is the 3rd most profitable sporting entity currently in existence, and the 1st from the EPL. I made a comment a while back that Tottenham's owners aren't as interested in winning as they are in being a massive business. They'd rather spend enough to be top 4 and get in the CL than actually win either competition, because the money that would be needed to be spent to win them would outweigh the earnings that would come in from actually winning them. If that's Levy and Lewis's goal, then the least they can do is get a coaching team in that plays entertaining football on the way to top 4, as everyone employed post-Poch has created some of the worst football ever seen at our ground since George Graham's Tottenham side were stinking the place up.
That chart proves my point about Levy - if we had a competent football person making those crucial decisions instead of Levy, we would have been far more successful on the pitch.
Nobody may be disputing it, but you sure as hell bang on as though it doesn't matter. And it does matter, because they are not entirely separate things. Nobody with a hint of comprehension would argue that money doesn't matter in English professional football. The correlation between pounds spent and position in the table makes that utterly indisputable. Yes, absolutely yes, most of us are in agreement that it would be better if Levy gave x-amount of that money he's so good at making to the football-side directors and then let them get on with. But he doesn't. So the question - to the extent that you and I disagree about it - seems to be whether that refusal to be 'hands off' on the football side is a net negative in the case for Daniel Levy as Chairman of Tottenham Hotspur FC. And the evidence of that 22-year body of work that you scathingly refer to, relative to the two preceding chairmen at Spurs, is that it is not. The football under Levy has been superior to the football under Irving Scholar or Alan Sugar, and it's not even close. The only thing it's been inferior to, by and large, is the football of the handful of clubs with more to spend than we have. Putting value on the things he does well for the club is not "defending bad football decisions". It may be defending a person who's made bad footballing decisions, but it's a far more comprehensive way of analyzing the job the chairman does than simply taking the bits you don't like and leaving the other parts off the scale entirely.
No it doesn't. That chart is about profitability, not outlay. City, Chelsea, et.al., haven't had to generate revenue in order to spend outrageously. If we had a more competent football person making those crucial decisions, we would have been far more successful on the pitch. But conversely, if we had a less financially competent chairman at the helm, we would have been far less successful on the pitch. Both of these statements are correct, to my thinking; but the former is pure conjecture, whereas there is actually more evidence in support of the latter.
Levy needs to figure out that he has been trying to do the work of more than one person (and he's not good at some things, like evaluating talent). It seems like maybe he is moving in the direction of letting other people handle the football side of things. I hope so.
I have always said I have no issue with the things Levy has done away from the football side of things: 1. He oversaw the construction of an amazing stadium and a state-of-the-art training facility. Very good. But guess what? We are not the only club that has done that. And if our chairman is earning 3.2 million quid a year (plus bonuses), he damn well better be doing things like that. 2. He is using the stadium to bring in other revenues (concerts, NFL, etc.). Again, very good. But guess what? We are not the only club that does that. I am extremely happy with the way he runs the club financially, I have never said otherwise. But based on his résumé and salary, this should not be seen as an out-of-this-world accomplishment. Regarding the first team, the vast majority of his decisions have been categorical disasters. There is no discussion here and to defend his terrible decisions by praising his financial acumen is a disingenuous and illogical argument. I have said all along that as long as he is involved in the football side of things, we will never be successful on the pitch. 22 years is a pretty convincing case study. You compare his tenure with Sugar, but why don't you compare it with the period from 1961-1984? During a similar period, the club won 11 major honours, 11 major trophies to Levy's 1. How did that happen? We had a board that hired good managers and let the football people go about their business while beginning the process of modernizing the stadium. Every successful pro sports team has exceptional leadership at the top. Daniel Levy is many things, but he is not an exceptional leader.
Cameron Carter-Vickers. Did anyone mention him? He is another on the list of Spurs rejects to go on and win a trophy elsewhere. And Marcus Edwards.
They won the League Cup last season but he didn't play in any of those games. The last league title they won was 2020/21.
Tottenham's first fixture if the 2023 season is against...*drumroll* Brentford away. Tough one for us as they actually have their shiz together.
Without Raya? Trust us to have a connection first match of the season. Normally we lose when there's a connection for instance when a Spurs coach or player leaves for another team and we play that team. Or vice versa. When a player or coach comes from another club to Spurs, we normally lose the first match. The exception tot hat rule was "Holy Spirit" when we won the first three matches against sides with a connection. Each score was a 1-0 win to us. Then our season started proper when we played Palace, NO connection and we lost heavily. The football gods just had to give us Brentford first. The second match is also a connection, Kane being linked with Utd like he was with City.
Every fixture is a difficult fixture for us in our state. One thing that is different is that we will start in round 2 of the League Cup late August as we are not in Europe. That will be our first chance to see if the club are serious about the domestic cups.