The Roflham Lolspurs Thread

[Unbelievable]

12 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

I think it is because they have so much headroom with PSR, could buy loads of players and pay better wages and he chooses not to. 
 

Loads of Spurs mates and they’ve said for a good while he is like a richer version of Ashley. 
 

Isn’t their wages to turnover ratio like 46% or something mental like that this season? 
 

EDIT: Levy out isn’t new. They’ve disliked/hated him for quite some time and always rears it’s head before Levy then sacks another manager. Before maybe spending a few quid to quiet the fans down  

 

 

 

 

These people haven't the faintest, have they..?

[Geogaddi]

11 hours ago, Heron said:

I kinda feel like when we had Ashley a lot of folk claimed he wasn't that bad (who didn't support us) and now that he's fucked off and their own clubs aren't winning things they reference their own clubs as their own respective versions of "Ashley".

 

I mean, forgive my ignorance in advance, but how is Levy like Ashley?

 

They've built a whole new fucking state of the art stadium and invested in the club? Alright their wages to turnover might be shite or whatever, but they're paying for a brand new stadium. They may have not recruited well, but in essence that is not the same as Ashley. Man United are being stripped apart. Fucking Geoff and Janet the cleaners are losing their jobs that is more Ashley-esque but even Man United have spunked millions on shite managers and players and slowly driven themselves down to where their assets no longer outweigh their debt and the lack of Europe could be crippling.

 

But neither are anywhere near as bad as Ashley was for NUFC. We had like nothing, no opportunity for revenue, no expenditure on players, just a 1 in 1 out pound for pound-hope that you can shake things up mentality that gambled the clubs existence on odd bits of quality. They've both mismanaged their respective clubs and that is the only thing remotely like our levels of Ashley.

 

Perhaps I need to educate myself. I don't know.

 

 

 

I don't understand the stick Levy gets either , comparing him to Ashley is just crazy talk. I do think a big part of the problem is Spurs for some reason have been shoehorned into a big 6 by the media , when in reality over the last 20/30 years they are miles behind in terms of honours won compared to the other 5 clubs . Spurs fans think because they have been mentioned on par with them clubs they should be winning trophies like the others do. In reality Spurs were no bigger than us and it was only due to the way Ashley ran us that they ended up so far above us in the first place .

 

 

Edited Monday at 08:33 by Geogaddi

[Lush Vlad]

32 minutes ago, Unbelievable said:

 

These people haven't the faintest, have they..?

Just to follow on from this and the wider point @Heron was making. 
 

I am in no way saying he is as bad as Ashley. I don’t even think they would say that if they looked into it in any detail at all. 
 

I’m not saying it is a subject I am really well versed in. I just have a lot of Spurs supporting mates. When you see their revenues, how well supported they are, their ticket prices, money that was brought in from player sales, the wages they pay/don’t pay etc. Their owner clearly lacks ambition and drive to try and get Spurs to push onto that next level. Despite having the ability to do so.
 

So yes. In a shiny new stadium and with a lot more money. I do think there are some similarities to how Ashley ran NUFC. Albeit their version is diamond encrusted and in a platinum coated stadium. I think this all pre-dates said new stadium and the debt on that,  however. 
 

Ask @leffe186 I’m sure he’ll be able to give a much more insightful opinion. 

[aussiemag]

Don’t they need to pay off the debt on the new stadium though? 

[TomYam]

3 hours ago, Geogaddi said:

I don't understand the stick Levy gets either , comparing him to Ashley is just crazy talk. I do think a big part of the problem is Spurs for some reason have been shoehorned into a big 6 by the media , when in reality over the last 20/30 years they are miles behind in terms of honours won compared to the other 5 clubs . Spurs fans think because they have been mentioned on par with them clubs they should be winning trophies like the others do. In reality Spurs were no bigger than us and it was only due to the way Ashley ran us that they ended up so far above us in the first place .

 

 

 

Don't forget that Spurs were the initiators of the group of clubs that became the 'big or breakaway 5' and then went on to form the PL. Unlike the 3 red tops. they've won very little over the intervening 40 years, and had a lengthy period of mediocrity, but Spurs were intrinsic to the commercialisation and elitism you see in the game today. It so happened they started to be highly competitive again at just the right time - just as we went in the opposite direction.  

[midds]

Anyone hear O'Hara having a sustained pop at Ange yesterday? I'm not his biggest fan but it was actually nice to hear a pundit actually speaking their mind and giving their honest opinion of the situation without being frightened of not being invited back again. Normally the pundits are so bland and safe that they're not even worth listening to. They're shit scared of offending a player or manager that they give the predictable, diplomatic answer every time. This bloke tore at him for 10 mins and never once seemed to give a fuck about being controversial or overly critical, he spoke like a fan who'd just had enough and it was refreshing to hear. 

[SteV]

2 minutes ago, midds said:

Anyone hear O'Hara having a sustained pop at Ange yesterday? I'm not his biggest fan but it was actually nice to hear a pundit actually speaking their mind and giving their honest opinion of the situation without being frightened of not being invited back again. Normally the pundits are so bland and safe that they're not even worth listening to. They're shit scared of offending a player or manager that they give the predictable, diplomatic answer every time. This bloke tore at him for 10 mins and never once seemed to give a fuck about being controversial or overly critical, he spoke like a fan who'd just had enough and it was refreshing to hear. 

*disclaimer I haven’t heard it yet*
 

That’s TalkSport though, that’s the modus operandi. Whether positive or negative, just make sure it’s OTT and will attract attention/views. 
 

He may well have made some absolutely valid points, but I guarantee it will be whacked up on SM along the lines of ‘Listen to O’Hara’s EPIC rant on Ange Postecoglou’, it will get loads of interactions, and he will have done his job regardless of how appropriate and well made his points are.

[madras]

1 minute ago, SteV said:

*disclaimer I haven’t heard it yet*
 

That’s TalkSport though, that’s the modus operandi. Whether positive or negative, just make sure it’s OTT and will attract attention/views. 
 

He may well have made some absolutely valid points, but I guarantee it will be whacked up on SM along the lines of ‘Listen to O’Hara’s EPIC rant on Ange Postecoglou’, it will get loads of interactions, and he will have done his job regardless of how appropriate and well made his points are.

And two weeks down the line if Spurs do OK the line changes completely. It's all for clicks and to get people to ring in, the more outrageous the better.

[Bimpy474]

Just now, SteV said:

*disclaimer I haven’t heard it yet*
 

That’s TalkSport though, that’s the modus operandi. Whether positive or negative, just make sure it’s OTT and will attract attention/views. 
 

He may well have made some absolutely valid points, but I guarantee it will be whacked up on SM along the lines of ‘Listen to O’Hara’s EPIC rant on Ange Postecoglou’, it will get loads of interactions, and he will have done his job regardless of how appropriate and well made his points are.

 

He said it on Sky Sports, only just below Talksport in the lets be OTT about everything, gnats eyelash between em mind.

 

No idea if he said same on Talksport though.

[midds]

1 minute ago, SteV said:

*disclaimer I haven’t heard it yet*
 

That’s TalkSport though, that’s the modus operandi. Whether positive or negative, just make sure it’s OTT and will attract attention/views. 
 

He may well have made some absolutely valid points, but I guarantee it will be whacked up on SM along the lines of ‘Listen to O’Hara’s EPIC rant on Ange Postecoglou’, it will get loads of interactions, and he will have done his job regardless of how appropriate and well made his points are.

No it was on sky after the game. He's in the studio listening and giving his thoughts. I wouldn't have heard it had it been on TalkSport. But he kicked off about Ange and you could almost feel the host recoil a bit as to how critical of him he was being. Then he just let him rant and he piled in on him in a way you don't normally hear on sky. 

[SteV]

8 minutes ago, midds said:

No it was on sky after the game. He's in the studio listening and giving his thoughts. I wouldn't have heard it had it been on TalkSport. But he kicked off about Ange and you could almost feel the host recoil a bit as to how critical of him he was being. Then he just let him rant and he piled in on him in a way you don't normally hear on sky. 

Fair enough. Obviously not quite the same blatant tactics as TalkSport, but the principle is the same I suppose.

 

And no doubt it won’t do O’Hara’s brand any harm.

[bobbydazzla]

7 hours ago, aussiemag said:

Don’t they need to pay off the debt on the new stadium though? 

 

They pay about £30m a year in repayments for the stadium build. The stadium finance is over several decades and with low interest rates

 

Their revenue just from commercial activity is now £230m a year, a big chunk of which comes from having a state of the art multi-use stadium in London

Match day revenue is £115m on top of the commercial activity revenue

 

Cogito ergo sum, the money they make each year from the stadium is shitloads more than what they spend paying off the cost of building the new stadium

 

 

Edited Monday at 17:07 by bobbydazzla

[Stifler]

7 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

Cogito ergo sum, the money they make each year from the stadium is shitloads more than what they spend paying off the cost of building the new stadium

That’s generally the plan though.

[bobbydazzla]

4 minutes ago, Stifler said:

That’s generally the plan though.

But Levy seems to have skipped the chapter in the New Stadiums for Dummies guide book where the improved bunce is used to pay for an improved squad 

 

They’ve got lowest wages to turnover ratio in the league so the dolla dolla bills y’all aren’t going onto the pitch 

 

 

Edited Monday at 17:16 by bobbydazzla

[Wolfcastle]

Seems its more often the case with new stadiums that a side either stagnates or goes backwards rather than kicks on.

 

[bobbydazzla]

8 minutes ago, Wolfcastle said:

Seems its more often the case with new stadiums that a side either stagnates or goes backwards rather than kicks on.

 

We should rebuild St James Park to an exact replica of how it was in the 1904-1910 seasons 

[The College Dropout]

Levy is not like Ashley.

 

Spurs legit have top 6 revenues. They've spent £500m over the last 3 years. The lionshare of that has been on kids though, literal teenagers who must be paid fairly lowly. Best case scenario for Spurs is Levy is thinking 3-4 years ahead and wants another Bale, Carrick type era with the best kids available. If that's the case, Ange was always going to be a transition manager.

 

You can see a similar approach at Chelsea. That team lacks character and leadership - the oldest players are like 25 years old.

 

[Jonas]

Spurs were behind us commercially, for revenue and in the all time table (PL and D1)  when Ashley arrived and in conjunction with Levy being there.

How can going in the exact opposite directions over their tenures thereafter make them comparable.

Spurs have punched above their average (8th) under his ownership,  Ashley well below ours (7th)

 

Saying that hope all the stick he's getting hurts him tremendously.  Maybe should have spent more time on his own club than trying to hold others back (who are all above him anyway).

 

 

Edited Monday at 21:40 by Jonas

[The College Dropout]

People look at things simplistically.  Doesn’t like to spend money = Mike Ashley. 
 

And Spurs have spent plenty of money in recent years.  Way more than us.  

[Bimpy474]

The comparison to Ashley isn't really right as one owned a club lock stock and barrell, and the other is a chairman/chief executive/wanker.

 

Maybe Levy runs septic club number 6 just how the owner instructs him to.

[PauloGeordio]

[gjohnson]

On 27/01/2025 at 16:31, midds said:

Anyone hear O'Hara having a sustained pop at Ange yesterday? I'm not his biggest fan but it was actually nice to hear a pundit actually speaking their mind and giving their honest opinion of the situation without being frightened of not being invited back again. Normally the pundits are so bland and safe that they're not even worth listening to. They're shit scared of offending a player or manager that they give the predictable, diplomatic answer every time. This bloke tore at him for 10 mins and never once seemed to give a fuck about being controversial or overly critical, he spoke like a fan who'd just had enough and it was refreshing to hear. 

Only one problem with this entire statement....O'Hara....probably the thickest 'pundit' outside of Deeney

[54]

Maddison apparently out for 3 weeks now  

[Ben]

51 minutes ago, 54 said:

Maddison apparently out for 3 weeks now  

 

Are they training on concrete in mankinis 

[leffe186]

1 hour ago, 54 said:

Maddison apparently out for 3 weeks now  

It’s mental. Current injury team would be:

 

Vicario, Spence, VDV, Romero, Udogie, Sarr, Bissouma, Maddison, Johnson, Solanke, Odobert, with Werner on the bench and Richarlison having a late fitness test.

 

Meanwhile players like Porro, Son and Kulu are out on their feet. I said I was checking out until Feb but honestly might have to wait until March. Want to berate Ange but the whole thing is a joke.