Kid Icarus

Think we're all programmed to think of any reports that aren't literally about a player signing really soon as being a waiting game for another club to come in aren't we?

Imagine showing that to someone who stormed the beaches of Normandy.

If you meant you'd have complied with the 2013 rules had they existed, fair enough, but would you have been able to right off your stadium depreciation into your calculation with the upcoming rules? Levy did lobby for those FFP rules based around his own running of Spurs as well, not for the good of the game but because it gave them a strategic advantage - not just because they'd already used their model to financial success, but because it removed other methods for financial success and put other clubs in a straight jackets that said that this is how it's done, ignoring that Spurs appear to be a pre-PSR exception to the rule who while balancing the books, getting Champions League, and being a financial success, are still seen as the junior member of the big 6 because it hasn't really resulted in honours - something that further undermines any notion of meritocracy or "pull" when you're looking at players.

Wash your mouth out, it's fantastic.

He was so good on loan like, such a shame that that was the end of it.

Wish I'd been wrong on this one but always thought he wasn't just overrated but objectively shite and all I saw when he was here was that confirmed in detail.

Don't think the bloke whose agent has been clearly telling everyone he's been 'hoping for Liverpool' while they had a manager and he was already Bournemouth manager is going to turn into a dickhead tbqh, he already was one.

Appreciate the detail, but the original incarnation of Premier League FFP started in 2013...whatever else you did to increase revenue is all still crucially prior to the start of that, you were an established CL/Europa regular by then. You saying that Spurs have become the club they are now by working within those rules (never mind the stricter ones we have now) just isn't true. And - I shied away from saying this earlier because it sounds like I'm being a dick - but your success has been mostly financial. Spurs are a bit of a 'junior partner' in the big 6 and haven't actually really been successful in terms of honours.

Look on the brightside, now that Villa and Emery want him, everyone in out fanbase will rate him now.

Lovely stuff

I'm sure it very often is the case but I refute that

I'm not sure what you mean by making the point that we had it? I don't think anyone's denying that we did, but I also don’t see what that changes about rules put in place decades later that makes it artificially extremely difficult for any club except a select few from reaching the top. I disagree that Brentford or Bournemouth have done anything tbh. We've seen too many of these clubs come, have a fleeting run at success, be seen as darling upstarts in the media, and ultimately fail because they have one bad window, one bad appointment, one bad season, or when they're anywhere near successful their talent gets snapped off them by the clubs they're attempting to compete with. The post PSR 'model' club knocking on that ceiling have been Southampton, Swansea, Leicester, Wolves, Everton, West Ham. Of those it's only Everton who didn't end up relegated, having failed for the reasons above, while pushing their faces on the glass ceiling. Now that group is Villa, us, and potentially Brighton, Brentford, Bournemouth. Let's see any in that group have sustained opportunities at CL finishes without huge fall offs and/or the top 6 taking their talent by throwing their completely fair game and not at all unfair financial weight about. Spurs breaking into the top 6 as a regular predates PSR as well so I don't think you did anything in that respect, other than box clever with player trading pre-PSR. If you'd got to where you are now by means of investment you'd have been able to at the time too, you wouldn't now and I'd argue you couldn't by boxing clever now either. The patience you speak of is based on something that I think many understandably believe is a false premise - that success is just a matter of waiting, as opposed to something that will forever be deliberately and artificially placed beyond our grasp.

That's an extension that I don't think is true. I was making a point to Froggy about why PSR restricts us in all situations when brought to its logical end, but that doesn't mean that it's what's desirable or at the crux of every Newcastle fans' argument for why PSR should be loosened.

I don't think it does tbh. It can still be true and I can still say I don't want it.

No I get that you're saying the use of the cartel line is what's embarrassing, that's what I meant. It's a perfectly accurate description of the set up in the league, the term hasn't been come to on a whim, it's because those clubs are acting in the way a cartel, or in more accurate terms imo, as any oligopoly does and protecting their shared interests while also competing with each other. Every time we miss out on a player it is technically because of PSR. With no PSR we could blow every other club out of the water with fees and wages, that's the reality of it. We can agree and disagree on whether that's a good or bad thing, or the rules are too strict, but you can't deny as a basic principle that PSR is the main reason we miss out on players. And that also comes onto another point you're making: the appeal. Money is appeal, success, honours, history etc are all appeal. Again, it's about how we create appeal in the first place, and about how that's restricted. Buzzing about Woltemade over Sesko isn't a disqualifying thing either. He was probably about our 8th choice - money, appeal, ability to create appeal all factors - and at that point we were all about to be incredibly happy just that we were able to get Strand-Larsen for 70 odd million. A huge overspend. Totally understand wanting Ratcliffe, bit with hindsight has it not shown you that these things have no race or nationality? Him being from where he is has had seemingly no bearing on his ruthlessness on the proles at Man United. He's no less at Man United to make a huge mountain of cash than anyone else would be. I'd argue spiralling out of control is what already happened years ago tbh. At best it's stable door after the horse has bolted, but really it's pulling the ladder up. What we need isn't viable, the game would need to die (and prefer to) before it brought in what I would propose.

Fundamentally this is the lie you keep telling yourself over this that's like a linchpin in your argument. No one's deductive reasoning should end on a root cause of 'The established clubs built huge revenues over decades through success, fanbases and commercial growth.' and I don't think yours' does either. The question that's hanging there and you don't address is 'well how did they build those things?' The answer is that the established successful clubs in England didn't achieve success by getting up early in the morning, going down the pit and working that little bit harder than everyone else, like it was the Hovis advert it keeps getting presented as, they did it through cold uncaring capital investment that dwarfed that of other teams. That's not a criticism, it's just the market every team has worked under for years because it's just an extension of the same system most businesses work under. Over the years a handful of clubs have used their huge capital investment, invested wisely, gained success and created a positive financial feedback loop through on field and off field success. I know you know this, I'm not telling you anything here, I'm just laying it out. Other clubs and fans don't think that's fair? Too bad, It's dog eat dog, it's laissez-faire, everyone else is just jealous they didn't do it. And on it went with clubs rising and falling, and some maintaining, then a few defected from the league itself to get on the PL gravy train set up to benefit them, then tried it again in 2020. That is until there was the recent threat that another huge investor comes along and wants to do exactly the same thing they did to everyone else and make them part of that same everyone else in the process. Then those same clubs used their hefty resources and did just as huge companies do outside of football, when they lobby the state, the media, and the population, to lobby the Premier League, its clubs, and its fans, and had the gall to turn around to the same clubs and fans they'd been lauding it over for decades and said "Come on, we need to do something about this, for the sake of everyone, for the integrity of the game" What a joke. The clubs involved, and the Premier League want to paint all of this as fair play regulation for the good of everyone, but that stated goal is barely holding up as a pretence when the other 14 see not just the double standards at play (fines over here, points deductions over here for example) but the way in which the actual main driver for the rules themselves clearly isn't fair play, but protectionism - ie the reason for the cartel tag. A collection of rules that effectively say "It would undermine the integrity of the competition to let this one or two clubs have an unfair advantage, so here are some rules that limits it to the 6 that already have an unfair advantage and also artificially protects them even further with this rule in the process." The ladder has been pulled up on the same set up that allowed them to get there. Rules for thee not for me, I'm alright Jack. You can call us embarrassing and paint it as us being brats - for wanting what you and the other big clubs had for decades, for us, Villa and everyone - that's your opinion. I certainly don't want unrestrained spending, to just buy a dream team, and undermine the integrity of the game in that way, but I completely understand people looking at the full picture and coming to the conclusion of fuck it, what integrity? The idea it's being upheld is a joke, there's no honour among thieves and we should join in in bending a rigged game to our advantage. I don't even necessarily disagree with a lot of what you're saying. If your whole point was look, yeah it's hypocritical and the set up is rigged to favour these clubs, but at the same time we can't just have one club's owners dwarfing everyone else's wealth 100 to 1 so we do need something in place I'd agree and I think plenty would. It's the whole see no evil, we all pulled ourselves up by our bootstraps, refusing to do any additional deduction beyond that thing you keep doing that's annoying, particularly as you're pairing it with calling us all embarrassing.

What a career he's had man. He's the type of player you appreciate more and more as you get older I think. Some going to have two title rivals both think the world of you as a player. Mental that he's only a year younger than me when I think about the back pain I sometimes have just from existing Started before Rooney and ended after Rooney who's the same age as well.

Now it'll hurt if he goes. Can't really explain why like.

As a full package it's Osula's I think. Lost my mind over Woltemade's Brighton one though, that one as part of a win and I'd maybe go with that.

Been saying for years that the takeover is going to have some people realise that they're just unhappy. This relentless nihilism that you're describing here has been going on more or less since the takeover happened.

Definitely realistic these days, he's been crap for a while.

Ruddy hell, he was hard to sell.

Only watched the highlights because fuck that, but how on earth were the 14 separate handballs by Saka not given in the Champions League of all things?

I'd argue it's rare predominantly because managers rarely, if ever, get the chance to, but the obvious ones that come to mind are: Fergie went 3 years not winning the title then won it 3 years in a row. Man United also had finishes of 11th, 2nd, 13th, 8th, 6th, and 2nd before he started his dominance. Arteta had a good start with an F.A Cup at Arsenal, but finished 8th, 5th, 2nd, 2nd before finally winning something (the league) again. The other two that I've spoken about loads are Klopp and Guardiola. Both had transition seasons with big drop offs that they somewhat recovered from. Klopp had two within a run of from 1st to 3rd to 2nd to 5th to 3rd. 1st to 3rd was a 30 point drop off, back to 2nd a 23 point gain, down to 5th a 25 point drop off, up to 3rd a 15 point gain, then Slot came in and won the league on 1 point more. Guardiola was in the middle of something similar, highs then dropping off and regaining, but with the rebuild still needing to be complete, but he's left.

Wenger probably had to end, but he never failed like, and they entered their decade long banter era when he left. Rodgers is a good shout, similar to Leicester too. Redknapp never had the chance to fail, he was sacked after a 4th place finish. Pellegrini, 4th and a League Cup isn't toooo bad like.