Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

How Spurs is a smaller club/behind Arsenal and Chelsea?

Is it because they're poorly managed (at board at team levels)?

And why do most Spurs fans base their success on idle speculation? For most of my life it's been this way. Seems after any promising development, they get carried away and say how they're going to conquer lol.... Was the same after Jol got the near the top 4, and Harry, and then AVB, and then the 100 milllion pounds worth of "talent". Most of them even say Lamela "will come good" (clairvoyance/psychic abilities too?)

Even when the Lane gets re-developed, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, United and City would all have consolidated CL places and money. And who says Pochettino will be a success, or they could get a decent manager in 2018 or whenever it's completed?

Shouldn't Spurs fans have a bit more humility and not think they're going to win it all after any good result, or player signing? :wink:

*How Are Spurs.

They don't win much and they don't have any really good players. That about sums it up.

Look at Chelsea in management. It's normally an absolute mess, yet they keep on winning.

Reply 3

ApeMob

Who the hell is on that team seriously? They're like lame haha

Reply 4

Charliemouse

Spurs were until Chelsea's sugar daddy a far bigger club than Chelsea and even now they just as well supported as them.

Arsenal though have always been bigger to be honest, their success has stretched throughout their history while Chelsea have only been successful in the Premier League era which makes up just a tiny part of the history of football in this country, which is something an awful lot of football fans forget.

Reply 5

pane123

Christian Eriksen is a superb player but they have wasted a lot of money on duds or on players who, quite simply, were not worth anything close to the fee Spurs paid.

Reply 6

Barry2011

Spurs are not a small club; they charge the highest season ticket prices in terms of per match value and consistently fill out 35k, They could fill out a 55k stadium and when I mean fill out, I mean fill out at high prices like Arsenal and not like Newcastle for example.

Chelsea charge lower prices than Spurs despite having much more recent success and this is down to their fanbase.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 7

Thugnificent.

Only player I rate in that spurs squad is Eriksen.

Reply 8

Clip

Spurs have spent an absurd amount of money on players and wages. The reason we are not more successful (in recent times) is down to two things:

1. The Premier League has a lot of good teams in it. Nothing is guaranteed.

2. Daniel Levy is a moron.

Reply 9

Mackay

They are a club of the same level as Everton. They haven't got the history of the top four sides, or City arguably. I think a lot of Spurs fans are guilty of thinking they have a divine right to compete for the top four. They get rid of their managers when they finish fifth FFS.

Reply 10

ZÃ¼rich

Spurs are very badly managed, Levy is shocking and would probably have been sacked but the owner wants a nice Jewish boy who he knows to run the club :rolleyes:

Spurs first and foremost have delusions of a history of 'glory' when they havent won the League since 1961 and have collected the odd Cup since. Yet they instinctively feel that they should be rubbing shoulders with the likes of Bayern, Barca and Juventus. They have fantasies about Herbert Chapman and Arsenal somehow ruining them in the 1930s as well :confused:

So they go through phases of imitating Arsenal and then when that doesnt work, trying to be different to Arsenal. We hired Wenger, they almost immediately went out and got their own continental manager who was terrible. When that fails, appoint pwopa British Hoddle to show Arsena how its done. Fail? Jol/Ramos/Santini are continental! Fail? Harry is pwopa British! Fail? AVB is continental! Fail? Tim Sherwood is British. Fail? Another continental. etc etc

Then you have this new stadium nonsense which started because Arsenal got a new stadium basically. Can they fill it? Does it not make more sense to establish CL football first?

I dont see any long term planning anywhere with Spurs. Always they blow huge money on transfers, they'll have the odd great player like Bale, Modric, Berbatov but they can never decide where they are. All they know is that they're behind Arsenal and that cant be right!

I predict a decade of upper midtable for Spurs, which is better than what they were in the early PL era I guess! :rolleyes:

Reply 11

NDGAARONDI

Original post by Charliemouse

Spurs were until Chelsea's sugar daddy a far bigger club than Chelsea

Spurs were on a gradual decline compared to Chelsea prior to Roman's takeover. The points tally in the league (also when was the last time Spurs beat Chelsea at Stamford Bridge?) shows this as well as Spurs only winning the League Cup in the Premier League era. Chelsea won honours in the Premier League era before Roman's takeoever.

Reply 12

ZÃ¼rich

Original post by NDGAARONDI

Spurs were on a gradual decline compared to Chelsea prior to Roman's takeover. The points tally in the league shows this as well as Spurs only winning the League Cup in the Premier League era. Chelsea won honours in the Premier League era before Roman's takeoever.

Funded by a Leeds United style debt binge that left the club teetering on the brink of insolvency before Roman!

Please will Chelsea fans just be honest about what your club was before 2003...

Reply 13

Lyrical Prodigy

Spurs basically just bite off more than they can chew.

Reply 14

NDGAARONDI

Original post by Zürich

Funded by a Leeds United style debt binge that left the club teetering on the brink of insolvency before Roman!

Please will Chelsea fans just be honest about what your club was before 2003...

Doesn't actually rebut my point that Spurs' one League Cup in the Premier League era is less than Chelsea's FA Cup and others.

Reply 15

kimolozen

Original post by Zürich

Funded by a Leeds United style debt binge that left the club teetering on the brink of insolvency before Roman!

Please will Chelsea fans just be honest about what your club was before 2003...

Thing is it paid off for them. they won 2 FA Cups, a League Cup, and a Cup Winners Cup.

Reply 16

ZÃ¼rich

Original post by kimolozen

Thing is it paid off for them. they won 2 FA Cups, a League Cup, and a Cup Winners Cup.

Sure it paid off because Roman bailed them out, that's why!

Reply 17

IanDangerously

I think Spurs and Chelsea are about on a level in terms of club size, just that Chelsea have been the more successful in recent years. Arsenal are the biggest London club, then you've got those two, and then you've got everything else in no particular order.