• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Ange in or out?

Ange in or out?

  • In

    Votes: 90 58.1%

  • Out

    Votes: 65 41.9%
  • Total voters
    155
Glenda's Legs said:
If Levy steps back, what makes you think the investment or spending strategy would be any different? ENIC will still own the club.
Click to expand...
I don't think we necessarily need to spend any more money, we just need to have a far better structure right from the CEO down. We don't have the 'best' of anyone. We don't poach anyone from clubs doing things really well. The few really good people we have got in have left pretty quickly.
 
Kompakted said:
How do you know? The stadium makes us attractive for a leveraged buy out a la Man Utd/Glaziers where a tonne of debt is dumped on the club, secured against the stadium by an investor that is content to reap the income from concerts, NFL and PL without investing any more than they need to.....
Click to expand...
We aren't particularly attractive for a leveraged buy out at all. We already have a ton of debt. We can't really carry a whole lot more.
 
Raziel said:
Again, the world of managers is big, if Munn's answer is we have no option that is an improvement on our current reality, he should fudging go as well.

I'm actually confused, lots of people dismiss any Spurs decisions as "donkeys running the show", I work for a much larger organization than Spurs and can justify/see the logic behind almost all our decisions (good and bad), I have no fudging idea what we are doing with Ange, there is zero scenario where the risk/reward/business view gives you an answer of stick with him (regardless of replacements).
Click to expand...
I'm still amused that people on here thought Munn was anything other than a cheap appointment.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Yeah all those players were bought after Poch left.
We indeed chould have shortcircuited, but it's swings and roundabouts though: they might not have flourished in our more demanding surroundings, but who knows.

Not buying Mane from Soton to play alongside the likes of Son, Kane and Eriksen was for me one the real sliding doors moments as he was proven by that time. Can you imagine the extra goal threat and pace on the break? Oh man...
Click to expand...

Yeah, it makes sense now. Mitchell was scouting those players for Poch / Saints and both men brought their black books to Spurs with them. No wonder we wanted all of those players.

Mane would have been incredible for Spurs.
 
Muttley said:
Yeah, it makes sense now. Mitchell was scouting those players for Poch / Saints and both men brought their black books to Spurs with them. No wonder we wanted all of those players.

Mane would have been incredible for Spurs.
Click to expand...
Ah Mitchell.... Another one that moved on pretty quickly.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I'm still amused that people on here thought Munn was anything other than a cheap appointment.
Click to expand...

See, that's where I struggle a little with you mate. Arnesen, Comolli, Paratici, when we do use DoF type models, the appointments usually are actually well qualifed/have a reputation.

Is Munn the right guy? right now the answer looks like no, but the dismissal "it's because he's cheap" isn't a viewpoint, it's the same as Ange. There was some perspective beyond salary. What would your viewpoint have been if we had hired Maresca? you think Chelsea bought him because he was cheap? same with their sporting director, the guy was a scout for Brighton, being cheap or well identified or brick hire?
 
Muttley said:
Yeah, it makes sense now. Mitchell was scouting those players for Poch / Saints and both men brought their black books to Spurs with them. No wonder we wanted all of those players.

Mane would have been incredible for Spurs.
Click to expand...

Mitchell was in for a cut of Mane’s next fee, of course he did.
 
Finney Is Back said:
It is quite interesting that we haven't sold off the stadium naming rights. I wonder if the owners are not selling naming rights as that makes buying the club more attractive? (i.e. they are still available for a new owner to name after one of their own brands)
Click to expand...


Yeah. Its basically an extra 300 million they can charge the new owners.

The fact they haven’t tapped this well says everything you need to know about theor ambition for the football club.

Of course the lickers will say its brand awareness. Like we need Beyonce fans to know who Tottenham Hotspur football club is…

NFL the same. Its a waste of a resource but here we are.
 
thfcsteff said:
Indeed and fair to him (I am a fan of his). I think it is also true to suggest that a managerial career of 13 games total is perhaps not a clear enough sample size to get too deep into 'win percentages'...
Click to expand...
With this current iteration of Ange, I'm fairly confident Mason would have a decent chance of having a better win ratio than Ange after 40 games!
 
Finney Is Back said:
I don't think we necessarily need to spend any more money, we just need to have a far better structure right from the CEO down. We don't have the 'best' of anyone. We don't poach anyone from clubs doing things really well. The few really good people we have got in have left pretty quickly.
Click to expand...


A lot of clubs refuse to do business with Levy or charge a levy surcharge. Chelsea and West Ham to name but 2. Even Everton fudged us over with Richarlison. Levy thought he was getting a bargain when in reality he was being rinsed.
 
Batspur said:
Yeah. Its basically an extra 300 million they can charge the new owners.

The fact they haven’t tapped this well says everything you need to know about theor ambition for the football club.

Of course the lickers will say its brand awareness. Like we need Beyonce fans to know who Tottenham Hotspur football club is…

NFL the same. Its a waste of a resource but here we are.
Click to expand...
Actually I've chatted to a few investors (not particularly those interested in spurs) about this. Concensus of opinion is that Spurs have found more brand exposure and revenue generation from having the "Tottenham Hotspur" brand used in NFL and events broadcasts globally than investors are willing to pay for the naming rights so far. If they ever do a deal for the naming rights it will break the record.
 
Gazza said:
So what, pay the fee peak mane, Son and Kane would have ripped teams to shreds
Click to expand...

If it had worked out.

We wouldn’t have been “preparing” him in the same way as the dipper medical dept don’t forget.

Also, quite a few other players would have been demanding salary parity, and we’d have had to at least match the 300k a week he got up there.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Do you know that the club didn't even have a data department at this point? Apparently Paratici actually laughed at our set up when he initially joined Spurs. I think just about every club in the championship had a more grown up structure than we did.
Click to expand...
Apparently Paratici turned up and said that Spurs had the best set up he'd ever seen. He also said that Levy had the most impressive length he's seen this side of youporn.

We can all play the making claims that can't be disproved game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back