"Did everyone else under perform? Use points, league position to get my point across.
Did Spurs over perform? No. Because I say so."
What?
Your post is factually incorrect. I did not say that "everyone else" underperformed. Arsenal and Liverpool, for example, were not mentioned, I said that United did
not underperform, and I said that I didn't know concerning Man. City, despite their drop in league places.
As for Spurs, Chelski's obvious underperformance left a clear vacancy in the top 4, achieving which did not require "over-performance" from Spurs to fill because:
(a) It was always likely that the team under such a focused and bright manager as Pochettino would improve after his first season with us: more time to coach the squad, more time to assess the squad, more time to further improve its fitness, and more time in the summer to make changes to its personnel, including the key arrivals of Alli and Alderweireld, plus the deployment of Dier as DM.
(b) With United - a key rival for a top 4 slot - it was already clear that LvG was over the hill, with no coherent plan, chopping and changing every which-way, and terrible when to came to engendering team spirit. Spraying money around enabled United to finish 4th the previous season, but with the expected improvement of Spurs and the surprise emergence of Leicester, this was never likely to be enough by itself for a repeat top 4 finish. So United's disjointed squad finished where I expected them to finish - below Spurs.