ENIC are not the problem

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Spurs_Bob said:
Anyway, to keep to the topic, of course ENIC are the way forward and those who oppose this are the same short sighted groups that were behind Redknapp being removed.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but I could not agree less with this. I for one am questioning ENIC and I was very sceptical of Redknapp being sacked. Look at the most successful clubs not bought by Russians or oil in the PL era (United, south london pricks, & even Liverpool) they all have 1 thing in common manager continuity. Ferguson 20+ years in charge, Pedo 14 or something, both Houlier and Rafa both got 6 years which would be seen as an eternity at our club.

ENIC haven't had a single manager last close to any of those time-frames and we've had little to no success. Coincidence? I think not
 
Aussie Ardiles said:
ENIC haven't had a single manager last close to any of those time-frames and we've had little to no success. Coincidence? I think not
Click to expand...

I'm not going to google this to back it up but, continuity does not equal success. Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayen Munich, Chelsea for example.
 
CJJ said:
I think the supporter's trust is a good place to start. All I ever hear is how they 'plan' on this meeting and that talk, but we (fans outside of the trust) never really seem to get much back on that, or at least not that I'm aware of.

I can't see how we can have a voice of the supporter and quell any unrest when the ST act like they are part of the inner sanctum
Click to expand...
Im sure i have seen on here and also on twitter that they post the Mins of the meetings they have with the club
 
Fidel Castro said:
Blimey , would you Adam and Eve it .
Looks like we all up the Kyber then.
Click to expand...

I'm not being disrespectful here but, if you can not see the positive difference between before ENIC and after then there's not much point in debating anything with you. Maybe you didn't see the club during Sugar or Scholar? If that's the case then fair enough. Some fans however, have lived through the three eras and can see the positive effects that ENIC have brought with them.
 
Spurs_Bob said:
I'm not going to google this to back it up but, continuity does not equal success. Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayen Munich, Chelsea for example.
Click to expand...
It depends on what you're looking at when defining continuity. There are long-term strategies in place at all those clubs, but for different things. Bayern seem to have built a degree of continuity in their style of play (pressing and possession-based, be it LVG, Henyckes or Guardiola), Barcelona have tika-taka and their Academy program, Real Madrid have a business plan involving buying emerging stars at the 24-25 years old mark, and riding their peak years before selling them.

Chelsea are just Roman's toy.

Continuity in terms of the squad, tactics and Academy will help Spurs sustain momentum, rather than having to rebuild after every minor set-back. Levy and the rest of the board seem to believe that at least, given their attempts to closer integrate the three.
 
Spurs_Bob said:
I'm not being disrespectful here but, if you can not see the positive difference between before ENIC and after then there's not much point in debating anything with you. Maybe you didn't see the club during Sugar or Scholar? If that's the case then fair enough. Some fans however, have lived through the three eras and can see the positive effects that ENIC have brought with them.
Click to expand...
Financial stability at the cost of on field success!
 
Spurs_Bob said:
I'm not going to google this to back it up but, continuity does not equal success. Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayen Munich, Chelsea for example.
Click to expand...
Chelsea - crazy investment in on field & off field talent. Paid to get the best players and best managers

In Spain it's a league dominated by 2 teams, max 3.
Barcelona - Rijkaard 5 years (relatively successful), Guardiola 4 years (internal promotion), Cruyff 8 years
Real Madrid - tend to spend up big and get immediate results. Their % share of tv money compared to their league competitors is crazy.

Bayern - the Hitzfeld-Magath-Hitzfeld era I'd consider the successful period with 7 league titles. Hitzfeld had the job for 6 seasons, Magath for 3 then Hitzfeld for another 1 and a half. After that they went all ENIC and got in Klinsmann, Heynckes short-term, Van Gaal and a caretaker with nobody lasting over 3 years and got only 1 title from the 3 seasons. The landscape of German football since Dortmund's last title has changed completely. They have that much financial muscle compared to their so-called greatest title challenger they've picked off their best talent each season meaning anyone with half a clue could come in for a season and they'd win the league.
 
pleb said:
Financial stability at the cost of on field success!
Click to expand...

correct me if I'm wrong here but, isn't ENIC's on field success the best of the last three owners, as we'll as the clubs most stable financial position?

I guess you could argue about cup success but then by that measure, a lucky deflection determines success, right?
 
Aussie Ardiles said:
Chelsea - crazy investment in on field & off field talent. Paid to get the best players and best managers

In Spain it's a league dominated by 2 teams, max 3.
Barcelona - Rijkaard 5 years (relatively successful), Guardiola 4 years (internal promotion), Cruyff 8 years
Real Madrid - tend to spend up big and get immediate results. Their % share of tv money compared to their league competitors is crazy.

Bayern - the Hitzfeld-Magath-Hitzfeld era I'd consider the successful period with 7 league titles. Hitzfeld had the job for 6 seasons, Magath for 3 then Hitzfeld for another 1 and a half. After that they went all ENIC and got in Klinsmann, Heynckes short-term, Van Gaal and a caretaker with nobody lasting over 3 years and got only 1 title from the 3 seasons. The landscape of German football since Dortmund's last title has changed completely. They have that much financial muscle compared to their so-called greatest title challenger they've picked off their best talent each season meaning anyone with half a clue could come in for a season and they'd win the league.
Click to expand...

indeed, no of which equates to success bind with continuity. Of the three teams you quoted, manure are the only success. le arse haven't won jack for their continuity, as with the dippers.

I named a few clubs off the top of my head who have had success with changes of management. that list could go on for ever.

the point being, continuity does not equal success but, that statement is going to go back and forth until the cows come home so maybe an agree to disagree stance?
 
Spurs_Bob said:
indeed, no of which equates to success bind with continuity. Of the three teams you quoted, manure are the only success. le arse haven't won jack for their continuity, as with the dippers.

I named a few clubs off the top of my head who have had success with changes of management. that list could go on for ever.

the point being, continuity does not equal success but, that statement is going to go back and forth until the cows come home so maybe an agree to disagree stance?
Click to expand...
Since 2001 when ENIC took over in England the big 4 have all had some sort of success that as a club we'd kill for. It pains me to say but Woolwich's consecutive Champions League knock-out stages & always managing to get 4th would be a success for us. And in this Sky era of football so too is the Champions League and FA Cup wins and top 3 finishes Liverpool has achieved would be too. And all this was while backing a manager for more than 3 years.

Comparing to Germany or Spain is apples & oranges due to the duopoly that often exists in those leagues.
 
The positivies of ENIC, they are not the Glazers which is one thing but with Levy the amounts of managers and players that have walked through this club is amazing until they understand that we need some stability we won't develop.

We can't go from English style manager to continental style and back again then expect instant results, If ENIC want respect then they should let Poch run the show including giving final say over transfers if that means Baldini goes and Levy backs off then fine but it's obvious this is not a happy sqaud of players. Our club is a comedy event for other fans now because of this shit shower and for me Levy's melting is at least partly to blame.

Not much we can do about it but if people are saying ENIC are good because they are better than Sugar we really have gone down the pan, Sugar is and always was a useless dick with an ego the size London. We really need to be aiming higher not just in the table but in everything.
 
.... if people are saying ENIC are good because they are better than Sugar we really have gone down the pan, Sugar is and always was a useless dick with an ego the size London. We really need to be aiming higher not just in the table but in everything.[/QUOTE].

Perfect summing up. The Sugar years have gotten very little reflection. My own feeling is that the lost decade under his management is the reason for everything else that has followed. ENIC we're starting from the Abysis taking over from Sugar, so in context have done well. However, the most unlucky man has to be Irving Schloar. An equal to David Dein ( gooner b@stard) in terms of vision, but the dosh ran out over the stand redevelopment & the rest is history.....but he's the Chairman who was a real life long fan & gave the Supporters the likes of Waddle, Gazza & Lineker.

Where as Sugar gave us Fox, Sinton & once tried to sign John Hartson !

& ENIC well.....they are a player trading operation & it would be wrong to point out Toda, Mabizala or The RAZZ.....or Bongolhu ( spelling) as they did well with Modric, Bale & Darren Bent ( kidding )
 
LeeMcl said:
Perfect summing up. The Sugar years have gotten very little reflection. My own feeling is that the lost decade under his management is the reason for everything else that has followed. ENIC we're starting from the Abysis taking over from Sugar, so in context have done well. However, the most unlucky man has to be Irving Schloar. An equal to David Dein ( gooner b@stard) in terms of vision, but the dosh ran out over the stand redevelopment & the rest is history.....but he's the Chairman who was a real life long fan & gave the Supporters the likes of Waddle, Gazza & Lineker.

Where as Sugar gave us Fox, Sinton & once tried to sign John Hartson !

& ENIC well.....they are a player trading operation & it would be wrong to point out Toda, Mabizala or The RAZZ.....or Bongolhu ( spelling) as they did well with Modric, Bale & Darren Bent ( kidding )
Click to expand...

Scholar did also sell Waddle, mind.
 
CJJ said:
Scholar did also sell Waddle, mind.
Click to expand...
Yep. True enough. Massive money at the time. But compensation was we still held on to Gazza, Lineker, Stewart, Mabbutt, Allen etc

Where as whenENIC sold Bale. We end up with Lamela & Soldado ! Poor reinvestment while retaining utter cr@p like Kaboul.

Even worse though.... Under Alan Sugar Spurs sold no one for big money as mostly our players were Kak & 2 bob or injured too much. The little good we did have, like Sheringham was sold for 3.5 million & replaced by Les Ferdinand for 6 million. Oh dear.
 
LeeMcl said:
Yep. True enough. Massive money at the time. But compensation was we still held on to Gazza, Lineker, Stewart, Mabbutt, Allen etc

Where as whenENIC sold Bale. We end up with Lamela & Soldado ! Poor reinvestment while retaining utter cr@p like Kaboul.

Even worse though.... Under Alan Sugar Spurs sold no one for big money as mostly our players were Kak & 2 bob or injured too much. The little good we did have, like Sheringham was sold for 3.5 million & replaced by Les Ferdinand for 6 million. Oh dear.
Click to expand...

He sold Nick Barmby for £5.25m in '95. For comparison, Bergkamp cost £7.5m the very same season.
To be fair, Ginola and Iversen replaced Sheringham the following season. 98/99 was a good example of Sugar, sold like £10m worth of players and brought in about £250k's worth.

One thing you can say about Levy is that he wouldn't have sold Klinsmann for half the price he paid for him after becoming a one-season-legend
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom