I think it is a pretty standard way that clubs work if they don't have a DOF. Certainly this is how it worked with Poch from what I understand. Makes sense that we now seem linked to Portugese players a lot rather than Argentinians which it used to be.
2019/20 Rivals - Spurs | Bergwijn out for the remainder of the season
- Thread starter AkaAkuma
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Well their last 5 has been 1 win, 3 defeats and 1 draw. In that time they've played three times in bottom 6/7. Should've lost to Norwich and there wasn't much in the Brighton win at all so not seeing the significantly better stuff at all.
They battled v Liverpool but remember under Poch they only lost 2-1 at Anfield in one of his last games.
They battled v Liverpool but remember under Poch they only lost 2-1 at Anfield in one of his last games.
Yeah, the last 5 under Mou have been rough. On the whole though they've won more games under Mourinho then they did under Poch, in less games played, picked up more points, scored the same number of goals.
More to the point, they were clearly trending downwards
Spurs aren't an established superclub yet. They can't afford a few years in the wilderness while they rebuild, they'd run the serious risk of falling down to everton's level. Lose the CL money and their revenue would likely be closer to everton's than Chelsea's. Good luck with the rebuild then
Performances against liverpool were similar, when you account for home/away. The home game was a lot closer overall, but it was a home game. Though they were without Kane and haven't had their starting gk yet under Mou...
This is simply not true and shows an ignorance of the facts. According to Deloitte's latest 'money league', Chelsea's income is 513m euros, whilst Everton's is only 213m euros (barely half that of Spurs).
If Spurs annual income was to drop by 100m euros (let's say) due to no CL football, our income would still be around 421m euros … far closer to Chelsea than Everton. And even this ignores the offset (to any loss of CL income) provided by income from our new stadium, in which this season will be our first full season.
You made 53% of your revenue from broadcasting rights. Over £100m of it from CL
Even accounting for increased revenue from the stadium, we're likely still talking about a loss in the region of €100m....that goes for say, 3 years in a row, you'd probably end up closer to everton than chelsea. As it is, we're talking about going from the 4th richest english club back to 6th in the space on one year...and the stadium needs to be paid for, too.
Also don't forget Chelseas figures of €513m do not include CL revenue... Therefore Spurs could lose upwards of €100m and Chelsea would gain perhaps €50-60m a swing of €160m alone. putting chelsea on close to €600m and spurs down to €421 (a 50% difference is huge)
As I've already said, even if Spurs annual income was to drop by €100m euros it would still be around €421m (we brought in €521m last time around, say Deloitte) … far closer to Chelsea than Everton.
Your talking about "three years in a row" is irrelevant. It's about annual income - an annual income of €421m in one year (without CL football) is not reduced further the next year because of the continued absence of CL football.
In an organized club, managers usually veto some transfers, but they don't usually take those decisions. They ask for a position and the football department will try to get a player that matches the profile the manager wants.
But Mourinho being a bit of old school, not totally sure if he even knows how to profile a player :P
But neither does it increase exponentially. Meanwhile, the clubs above who do play in CL will have a far bigger growth. And that's just the PL. Other clubs outside of england regularly making CL will also likely overtake you. You already have a small wagebill by the standards of big clubs, and you have the stadium to pay off
Significant loss in revenue will mean having to start from scratch, shopping at the lower end of the market and hoping to get the next wave of Eriksen, Alli, Alderweireld, Vertonghen, etc, and get the next Walker, Kane, from the academy, which is really really hard to do, even with great scouting and a great manager like Pochettino in charge. And to say nothing of whether Alli, Kane and co. would even accept staying in those conditions(Pochettino+no CL for a number of years).
You've made it to big club, not yet to superclub and your foothold there isn't nearly as solid as you pretend it is. Few years outside CL and you're right back to pre-Pochettino era
And not to forget: the Pochettino era was only made possible by united, chelsea, city, arsenal and liverpool fiddling their thumbs and leaving the door open
How much money did those teams spend in transfers over that period? Just because they were shit doesn't mean they weren't investing and trying to improve.
Obviously. But look at how you've built your team, look at how you're still operating in the market even now with the massive influx of CL money and higher standing in the game thanks to consecutive top 4 finishes and a CL final
That's really, really hard to replicate. Keeping Pochettino and betting on his ability to pull it off a second time, while most likely losing virtually all of your best players in the process, or replace him and try to remain competitive in the short term? That's not really a choice, is it
This doesn't change the fact that an income of at least €421(without CL football) will remain far closer to Chelsea's income than that of Everton's (who likely won't have CL football, even if Spurs also don't) - which is contrary to what you've claimed.
Moreover, income associated with our new stadium will continue to climb, regardless of CL football or no CL football ... so €421 income is the very least we'll get.
Nor is it the case that a "few years outside CL and you're right back to pre-Pochettino era" - because our income will far exceed what it was prior to Pochettino, due to the new stadium.
As I've said before on here, many opposition fans have not understood just how much extra income will eventually be coming in from our stadium complex (over a full season) once it is all finished. It will bring in more stadium-related income than any other Prem club will generate from their stadium ... and this is why it's a significant hedge against non-CL football.
Eriksen needs replaced absolutely fecking asap. Son, Lucas and Dele are all good individually but they aren't players that can create things from nothing. They need that Ozil/Eriksen type player stringing everything together otherwise it's just...poor. I'm not saying they are necessarily bad players either, they're just not players that can function properly without that playmaker in the side and being able to resolve that issue is going to be a make or break moment for Spurs.
Do Spurs fans believe in the process so far?
The future is bright at Spurs. 
I remember when some fans on here overrate this spurs team.I don’t blame Mourinho yet, but it is clear to see that this team only accomplished the things it did in the past because of having a good manager in Pochettino. Similar to how Rodgers is overachieving with some average/good players at the moment.
I don’t know if Mourinho is the right man for the Spurs job to win a trophy and push this team forward, but if I was a Spurs fan, I rather have a progressive manager in charge than a manager with a dull, monotonous philosophy.Spurs could still fluke a trophy win, so I can’t completely say that things will fail badly at Spurs
I remember when some fans on here overrate this spurs team.I don’t blame Mourinho yet, but it is clear to see that this team only accomplished the things it did in the past because of having a good manager in Pochettino. Similar to how Rodgers is overachieving with some average/good players at the moment.I don’t know if Mourinho is the right man for the Spurs job to win a trophy and push this team forward, but if I was a Spurs fan, I rather have a progressive manager in charge than a manager with a dull, monotonous philosophy.Spurs could still fluke a trophy win, so I can’t completely say that things will fail badly at Spurs
Poch back at Spurs in the summer?
When you try your best but you don't succeed
When you get what you want, but not what you need.
When you get what you want, but not what you need.
Zzzzz.
Man. City up for them soon at home. Indeed they've still got to play both Manchester clubs, Arsenal, Wolves and Leicester all at home so tough home games left for them considering they can't win away again.
Man. City up for them soon at home. Indeed they've still got to play both Manchester clubs, Arsenal, Wolves and Leicester all at home so tough home games left for them considering they can't win away again.
They were entertaining this season in a sort of Kevin Keegan Newcastle sort of way, until Jose came onboard.
Now they're boring as feck.
Now they're boring as feck.
Top 4 will almost be impossible for them
Don't look down on them They clamoured for Jose and know what to expect...Right?
I think in the long run they will regret hiring Mourinho. Maybe short term they may win a cup or something.
He set us back two years, despite winning stuff.
He set us back two years, despite winning stuff.
It's OK, for now. We've stabilised things a little bit compared to the results gained under Pochettino this season. And we're still in the FA Cup and have the CL knock-out stages to come.
No great shakes, but there are one or two more positive signs … so I wait to see if these grow further.
1 win in the last 6 league games. No win in the last 4. Awful run.
Will it though ?
Looking at this table i doubt you'll overtake Arsenal even in a full season mainly because of our insane ticket prices and we've been a Europa League team for 3 full years now with empty seats often visible on TV. Let's be generous and anticipate an other 10% increase for the 19/20 season, you'd be on ~102M.But even if you did better than that (how?), Manchester United is still a few steps above while they've also had runs in the EL. Aren't Liverpool also doing more works on Anfield to increase capacity ?
Did Spurs rise their tickets prices after moving ? Will they be able to if suddenly you're not paying to see Kane,Alli and Son but Winks and a 37y old Alderwereld ?
The figure cited for Spurs for 2018-19 only includes matches in our new stadium from April 3rd (because that was our first game there) until the end of that season - that's less than one-third of a season.Will it though ?
Looking at this table i doubt you'll overtake Arsenal even in a full season mainly because of our insane ticket prices and we've been a Europa League team for 3 full years now with empty seats often visible on TV. Let's be generous and anticipate an other 10% increase for the 19/20 season, you'd be on ~102M.But even if you did better than that (how?), Manchester United is still a few steps above while they've also had runs in the EL. Aren't Liverpool also doing more works on Anfield to increase capacity ?
Did Spurs rise their tickets prices after moving ? Will they be able to if suddenly you're not paying to see Kane,Alli and Son but Winks and a 37y old Alderwereld ?
A full season in our new stadium is therefore going to boost that figure considerably - far, far more than the 10% increase you've "generously" mooted for 2019-20.
Then there are the additional and large non-football events (that our new stadium can and will host) to take account of - two NFL games per year, rugby union games (e.g. Saracens v Harlequins), the Heineken Champions Cup final (2021), European Rugby Challenge Cup (2021), the final England rugby league Ashes Test against Australia (2021) ... and this doesn't include big music events, nor a possible Anthony Joshua boxing match in his next world title defence.
Then there stadium naming rights yet to come, plus other as-yet-untapped stadium related sponsorship deals.
Then there is income from the adjacent hotel and serviced apartments (not yet built), plus several other stadium-related facilities that have not yet opened.
Then there is much greater income we get from food and drink sales at each event .... because fans come earlier and stay longer than at other stadia, with their limited facilities.
Your mooted "10%" increase is hugely short of the mark.
Last edited:
If you had to guess a reasonable percentage what would it be then ? 20 ? 30 ? Enough to surpass United ? How much are you getting from those NFL games ? You didn't have a naming for the opening and still don't 6 months into the season. What's the issue that is making you lose tens of millions the longer it takes to get done ?
Eventually yes - in terms of stadium-related income. That's only another £26m based on 2018-19 figures - we'll easily surpass that.
I'm not privy to naming rights negotiations. A deal will come when it comes - and Levy is canny enough to get a good deal.
And how is the stadium being financed? it doesn't come for free. You have to pay back £1bn plus interest, so what is that costing you?
We don't owe as much as £1 billion. The years of frugal spending on transfers and wages running up to and during the construction of the new stadium and training centre allowed us to divert a lot of club income towards the construction costs.
As for financing the debt:
"The Club has completed a £637m multi tranche, long term financing anchored by a Private Placement and new bank facilities:
• A first time issuer in the US Private Placement market, the Club raised £525m of finance and was significantly oversubscribed and supported by several highly established international institutional investors.
• The refinancing successfully extends the longest debt maturities to 30 years.
• The average maturity of the total debt package of £637m is 23 years and the weighted average coupon, including the new bank facilities, is 2.66%."
https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/2019/september/club-refinances-construction-debt/
So, as you can see, the average debt interest is extremely low, and the average time we have for full debt repayment is long (23 years), if the club so chooses.
This means that the club will not be cash-strapped in the years to come - not with the level of income we now have.
£637m is stil a lot of debt. Man Utd's debt is similar and they're the biggest club in England in terms of revenue. Assuming you don't qualify for the CL next year you will lose about £80-90m in revenue. This will definitely constrain your spending and have an impact. Also you need a lot of new players due to an aging squad/replacement for Erikson, backup for Kane etc. I think you might struggle again next year to get back into the top 4. Just my opinion Glaston. You paint a rosy picture when it's anything but...
I'm sure Spurs executives are very good at their job and know a thing or two about economics but i still feel you are in for a rude wake-up call Glaston. I read Levy wants the naming rights to be over 25m/y which would be well above City with Etihad and Emirates for Arsenal (Arsenal get around 30m but that includes the shirts). I don't know how you could get that unless the whole complex and area become the Nike Hotel, the Nike Pub and the Nike waterpark on top of the Nike Stadium. As i said before this summer will give everybody a more precise look at how things will shape up. How much can Spurs invest and who will come out the winner between Levy and Mourinho. 8 points off top 4 is significant but it can be done especially if Chelsea fecks it up and United can't find some long-term form.
Dutch newspaper saying Spurs have just biught Steven Bergwijn. Anykne able to verify or disprove this?
This appears to have just broken today - looks like a strong possibility. What do you think of him?
He's very talented, but also quite inconsistent. Not helped by the atrocious state of PSV at the moment either. Very hard to judge wheter he'll adapt to the level of the premier league or drown though.
The talent is certainly there though.
Very high potential. Shame we're not in for him really.
Lo Celso is Eriksens replacement I'd imagine.
As for Bergwijn, do Spurs really need another winger? Son, Lamela, Moura, Sessegnon can all play in the wide areas, they have 1 player who is a striker, who is out for virtually the whole season. Maybe they should be looking to bring in a striker instead. Neither Son nor Moura can play that back to goal hold up play which is something Jose likes in his strikers.
Eriksen has finally gone - was a fantastic player for us and although his performances in the past year have been shockingly poor I wish him well at Inter.
Lo Celso has also been signed permanently which is really good news as he is becoming a more and more important player for us. As January windows go this one is shaping up very nicely.
Lo Celso has also been signed permanently which is really good news as he is becoming a more and more important player for us. As January windows go this one is shaping up very nicely.
Spurs have exercised their option to sign Lo Celo on a permanent deal until 2025.
https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/2020/january/lo-celso-transfer-confirmed-eriksen-to-inter/
https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/2020/january/lo-celso-transfer-confirmed-eriksen-to-inter/
Last few games he has really impressed me, you really have to watch him to see his impact on the game.