My point is that we should be content with our position. So many people are acting as if it is a simple job to make that jump into the top four every year when that isn't the case. We all remember when Spurs were a fallen giant under the arse end of Sugar's reign. We were mid-table, looking to finish in the top ten, knowing that a bad season could see us battling to stay in the league.
It was hard work but over the last decade this club has moved from that to being a European main stay, challenging for fourth every year. Just think about a player today being given the option of coming to Spurs or Newcastle. 10-15 years ago they would have gone up north, now there is no competition.
Unfortunately there is still a gap to the clubs above us, and that gap takes time and investment to bridge, just as the gap between ourselves and the likes of Newcastle and Villa took. We can compete with them, but they have advantages we can't match on or off the pitch. We need to continue with our current plan of growing the club because, looking at the success and momentum we have shown, it is working. Spurs have grown hugely over the last ten seasons, but that plan is not finished yet.
If I had a sense that Enic were happy to follow the Mike Ashley route and were content to just remain as we are now, I too would be upset and demanding investment. But I do not get that sense. We are clearly still aiming higher than where we are, but that aim can only be met when our revenue and investment has increased to match that position.
I want us to win the League. But to do that will take time and money and we are no where near it yet. But, crucially, I am enjoying watching us build towards that.
You see that as a negative, which I don't understand.
Every club should be running at about even in transfers. If you are spending a fortune in net transfer spend it is because you are buying the wrong players who don't succeed and have no value when you sell them.
Stoke City are a prime example. They are not a desirable club with continent wide lure. They have to pay more in wages than other clubs to make up for their position and as a result those players are worth less than Stoke spent on them when it comes time to move them on. Stoke spend a fortune to remain static.
We rarely make a loss on a player. We often make extraordinary profits on players which we reinvest in better players. We sell Jake Livermore for about half the fee we sign Christian Eriksen for. Everyone here is delighted with this as we should be. We upgraded a player in our squad hugely for small investment. This is a sign that our recruiting is working. We are able to sell on unwanted players for good fees, and replace them with better players for good fees.
The longer term damage big net spend can have is also huge. When you spend that money it has to come back into the club sometime. If you don't generate that money then you eventually go out of business. We've seen the effects in this country with Leeds and Portsmouth spending money they couldn't recoup, which sent both clubs to the wall. But even if it isn't that drastic the effect can be huge on a club.
Villa spent a huge amount on players when Randy Lerner took over and couldn't make that money back in sales. As a result the money eventually ran out and they had to find other ways to balance the accounts which has resulted in a cut down squad of players, not being able to spend in the market and has left a club who were above us in the league just ten years ago struggling to stay in the division.
It has also meant that the football has suffered. Villa don't have players as good as they had during their spending. This has left Villa, who were one of the finest teams to watch under Martin O'Neill, bereft of quality and playing some awful shit. Even though they have had a really good start to the season there were about 25,000 at Villa Park the other day because Villa fans have had nothing good to watch for years. It has damaged the club for a generation.
While we are improving the squad and not throwing money away to do it we are moving forward.