|
|
From Pretenders To Contenders - The Real Cost Of Transforming Tottenham
Harry Redknapp's swipe at the riches of rivals Manchester City and Chelsea belies the vast outlay it has taken for the sleeping giants of north London to awaken
14-Jan-2012 5:14:00 PM
Getty Images
COMMENT
By Jay Jaffa
“Tottenham are not third in the Premier League because someone has walked through the door at White Hart Lane and slapped a bundle of money on my desk.”
So said Harry Redknapp in his Friday press conference this week. And it was clear what the Spurs manager meant: the team he built, that he has taken from relegation candidates to within a win of the leaders of the Premier League, was all built on a comparative shoestring.
It is the story of the White Hart Lane paupers and the billionaire princes of Manchester City and Chelsea, reckons the 64-year-old.
But just how true is that jibe? Even staunch supporters of all things Lilywhite would struggle to disagree that the club have always been lavish in their spending, but Redknapp is referring to the era of sugar daddy financing – the kind of outlay that just would not be possible without the backing of multi-billionaires such as the Abu Dhabi group and Roman Abramovich.
Look at the figures, however, and it is difficult to argue Tottenham have not done their share of spending in the transfer market.
Since Redknapp arrived in October 2008, a total of £92.5m has been spent on players - an outlay that has prompted many critics to deride the notion Tottenham are anything other than big spenders.
Consider the spending of the north Londoners' rivals, though, and Redknapp's words start to ring a little truer. Over the same period, Manchester City spent £411.75 million, Chelsea £190.4m, Liverpool £180.75m and Manchester United £101.1m.
In fact only Arsenal of Tottenham's current closest rivals have spent less, and only then by a mere £0.25m.
Net figures - accounting for the income through sales of the likes of Dimitar Berbatov and Michael Carrick to Manchester United for nearly £50m between them - make even more comfortable reading, particularly if your name is that of the chairman Daniel Levy.
While many of their rivals receive substantial backing from their respective owners, Tottenham's holding company – ENIC – have always acted in a spirit of prudence: a 'make money to spend money' mantra.
In his 11 years at the helm Levy has forged a reputation in English football for his shrewd negotiation skills: see the profit made on Carrick for example – he was bought for £2.75m and sold to Manchester United for £18.6m two years later.
Still, ENIC's involvement with Spurs has seen £330.5m spent on players and when an opportunity arrives, Levy has seized it. The most famous example is the 'gift' of Rafael van der Vaart – signed on last season's summer deadline day for a modest £8m.
Clearly, Tottenham have acted rather more prudently in recent years than many of their rivals - just as Redknapp suggested.
In fairness, Tottenham's comparative low spend can in many ways be attributed to the stability enjoyed over the past three seasons.
Manchester City's whopping outlay, for example, does not tell the whole truth. In fact, every club I have mentioned except for Manchester United and Arsenal has seen at least one managerial change in the last three years. New managers bring new ideas and often new players and when the transfer budget is endless you can understand how expenditure can reach such figures.
Managerial stability breeds squad stability. Club takeovers on the other hand spark an upheaval from top to bottom, and there are few greater examples of this than at Manchester City and Liverpool recently.
The manager deserves huge credit for turning the club's fortunes around – lest we forget the precarious two points from eight games scenario when he took over – but 14 of the current Premier League squad of 25 were already on the books when he joined.
There are supporters that disagree with Levy's purchasing model, but it cannot be denied that the club are beginning to reap the benefits of his transfer market tactics.
Redknapp has described Levy as “a businessman, a clever businessman, with a fantastic business brain.”
And that has scarcely been more true than during the past three years, where the chairman has shown more caution towards big name transfer targets.
Gareth Bale, Tom Huddlestone and Aaron Lennon were all signed for small fees and with the future in mind. The players have grown together and though the fans have endured a couple of frustrating near-misses, the aim was to see them mature together.
Redknapp's job, as he proclaimed on arrival, was to give Tottenham a backbone. For the attacking flair witnessed with Martin Jol in charge, the mentality of the team was too brittle to sustain a Champions League pursuit.
Though not at the club anymore, Wilson Palacios embodied the steely determination Redknapp wanted at the club and he has continued this tactic, signing elder statesmen such as Brad Friedel, Scott Parker and William Gallas – three players the wrong side of thirty but with the nous needed to push the swashbuckling upstarts closer to the top of the table.
The fact Champions League football provided such a financial boost last season -
gate receipts and prize money flooded an additional £37m into the club's coiffers - Redknapp will be all too aware of the need and reward of leading Tottenham into Europe's premier club competition again this campaign.
Not just as a means to the end of adding to the squad, of course, but with an eye on keeping the star players currently firing the Londoners' title push.
Should Tottenham miss out on qualification for the Champions League, the excellent blogger Swiss Ramble puts it best when he wrote: “without the boost of Champions League money, it is very likely that Spurs will have to sell players if they wish to make a profit.
Clearly with the Luka Modric merry-go-round of the summer fresh in his mind, Levy appears to have uncharacteristically gambled on Champions League qualification this season.
If Redknapp can lead the club back to the promised land, Levy's decision will be justified. If not, it could spark another cycle that could not only see Modric move but also Redknapp, Bale and others. It is a dangerous game but one that Spurs are winning at present.
So what does this mean for the future?
Tottenham have ambitious, expensive plans to redevelop White Hart Lane, as well as a new state-of-the-art training ground that is set to be opened in time for next season.
Champions League qualification is therefore essential – both on the field and off it. If Tottenham want to continue to press for trophies in England and abroad, they will need to preserve the alchemy that has taken them this far already.
As Redknapp said in the midst of the Modric drama: “you can't say he is worth £40m and want to pay him the wages of someone who is worth £5m.”
The north London club are reaching a crucial juncture and if they are to remain competitive with the likes of Manchester City they will, at some point, have to break their wage cap.
The catch-22 situation that requires regular Champions League football to sustain a top class squad is something supporters will have to entrust to Redknapp and that clever little businessman they have.
By Jay Jaffa
“Tottenham are not third in the Premier League because someone has walked through the door at White Hart Lane and slapped a bundle of money on my desk.”
So said Harry Redknapp in his Friday press conference this week. And it was clear what the Spurs manager meant: the team he built, that he has taken from relegation candidates to within a win of the leaders of the Premier League, was all built on a comparative shoestring.
It is the story of the White Hart Lane paupers and the billionaire princes of Manchester City and Chelsea, reckons the 64-year-old.
But just how true is that jibe? Even staunch supporters of all things Lilywhite would struggle to disagree that the club have always been lavish in their spending, but Redknapp is referring to the era of sugar daddy financing – the kind of outlay that just would not be possible without the backing of multi-billionaires such as the Abu Dhabi group and Roman Abramovich.
Look at the figures, however, and it is difficult to argue Tottenham have not done their share of spending in the transfer market.
Since Redknapp arrived in October 2008, a total of £92.5m has been spent on players - an outlay that has prompted many critics to deride the notion Tottenham are anything other than big spenders.
Consider the spending of the north Londoners' rivals, though, and Redknapp's words start to ring a little truer. Over the same period, Manchester City spent £411.75 million, Chelsea £190.4m, Liverpool £180.75m and Manchester United £101.1m.
In fact only Arsenal of Tottenham's current closest rivals have spent less, and only then by a mere £0.25m.
 "Champions League qualification is essential – both on the field and off it."
|
Net figures - accounting for the income through sales of the likes of Dimitar Berbatov and Michael Carrick to Manchester United for nearly £50m between them - make even more comfortable reading, particularly if your name is that of the chairman Daniel Levy.
While many of their rivals receive substantial backing from their respective owners, Tottenham's holding company – ENIC – have always acted in a spirit of prudence: a 'make money to spend money' mantra.
In his 11 years at the helm Levy has forged a reputation in English football for his shrewd negotiation skills: see the profit made on Carrick for example – he was bought for £2.75m and sold to Manchester United for £18.6m two years later.
Still, ENIC's involvement with Spurs has seen £330.5m spent on players and when an opportunity arrives, Levy has seized it. The most famous example is the 'gift' of Rafael van der Vaart – signed on last season's summer deadline day for a modest £8m.
Clearly, Tottenham have acted rather more prudently in recent years than many of their rivals - just as Redknapp suggested.
In fairness, Tottenham's comparative low spend can in many ways be attributed to the stability enjoyed over the past three seasons.
Manchester City's whopping outlay, for example, does not tell the whole truth. In fact, every club I have mentioned except for Manchester United and Arsenal has seen at least one managerial change in the last three years. New managers bring new ideas and often new players and when the transfer budget is endless you can understand how expenditure can reach such figures.
Managerial stability breeds squad stability. Club takeovers on the other hand spark an upheaval from top to bottom, and there are few greater examples of this than at Manchester City and Liverpool recently.
Shrewd | Daniel Levy has overseen a successful spell at White Hart Lane
Another part of the reason Spurs have spent less than their nearest rivals (excluding Arsenal), is the core squad that preceded Redknapp's appointment. The manager deserves huge credit for turning the club's fortunes around – lest we forget the precarious two points from eight games scenario when he took over – but 14 of the current Premier League squad of 25 were already on the books when he joined.
There are supporters that disagree with Levy's purchasing model, but it cannot be denied that the club are beginning to reap the benefits of his transfer market tactics.
Redknapp has described Levy as “a businessman, a clever businessman, with a fantastic business brain.”
| GROSS SPENDING SINCE OCT 2008 |
|
 |
|
| Manchester City Chelsea Liverpool Manchester United Totttenham Arsenal |
£412.75m £190.5m £180.75m £101.1m £92.5m £92.25m |
And that has scarcely been more true than during the past three years, where the chairman has shown more caution towards big name transfer targets.
Gareth Bale, Tom Huddlestone and Aaron Lennon were all signed for small fees and with the future in mind. The players have grown together and though the fans have endured a couple of frustrating near-misses, the aim was to see them mature together.
Redknapp's job, as he proclaimed on arrival, was to give Tottenham a backbone. For the attacking flair witnessed with Martin Jol in charge, the mentality of the team was too brittle to sustain a Champions League pursuit.
Though not at the club anymore, Wilson Palacios embodied the steely determination Redknapp wanted at the club and he has continued this tactic, signing elder statesmen such as Brad Friedel, Scott Parker and William Gallas – three players the wrong side of thirty but with the nous needed to push the swashbuckling upstarts closer to the top of the table.
The fact Champions League football provided such a financial boost last season -
gate receipts and prize money flooded an additional £37m into the club's coiffers - Redknapp will be all too aware of the need and reward of leading Tottenham into Europe's premier club competition again this campaign.
Not just as a means to the end of adding to the squad, of course, but with an eye on keeping the star players currently firing the Londoners' title push.
Should Tottenham miss out on qualification for the Champions League, the excellent blogger Swiss Ramble puts it best when he wrote: “without the boost of Champions League money, it is very likely that Spurs will have to sell players if they wish to make a profit.
Clearly with the Luka Modric merry-go-round of the summer fresh in his mind, Levy appears to have uncharacteristically gambled on Champions League qualification this season.
If Redknapp can lead the club back to the promised land, Levy's decision will be justified. If not, it could spark another cycle that could not only see Modric move but also Redknapp, Bale and others. It is a dangerous game but one that Spurs are winning at present.
So what does this mean for the future?
Tottenham have ambitious, expensive plans to redevelop White Hart Lane, as well as a new state-of-the-art training ground that is set to be opened in time for next season.
Champions League qualification is therefore essential – both on the field and off it. If Tottenham want to continue to press for trophies in England and abroad, they will need to preserve the alchemy that has taken them this far already.
As Redknapp said in the midst of the Modric drama: “you can't say he is worth £40m and want to pay him the wages of someone who is worth £5m.”
The north London club are reaching a crucial juncture and if they are to remain competitive with the likes of Manchester City they will, at some point, have to break their wage cap.
The catch-22 situation that requires regular Champions League football to sustain a top class squad is something supporters will have to entrust to Redknapp and that clever little businessman they have.
How do you stay up to date with football when on the move? With http://m.goal.com – your best source for mobile coverage of the beautiful game.
Inside Goal.Com
-
The list of EPL targets from Euro 2012 Group A
With the transfer rumour mill set to kick into frenzy throughout this month's European Championship, Goal.com looks at which players could be heading for England this summer
-
Euro 2012 Dream Team: Ronaldo & Van Persie feature
Goal.com puts together its dream team for this summer's European Championship in Poland and Ukraine
-
Euro 2012 Tactical Analysis: How far can Roy's masterplan take England?
England are a diminished lot, with the experienced players like Lampard, Gareth Barry and Gary Cahill all ruled out of the Euros. Goal.com's Sarthak Dubey analyses their chances..
-
Euro 2012 Trivia: Which team has no player from their domestic league?
In another episode today of Euro Trivia , we bring to you another tricky question..!
Which is the only team in Euro 2012 who have not called up a single player from their own domestic league?
A. Denmark.
B. Poland
C. Czech Republic
D. Republic of Ireland.
Test your knowledge with Goal.com and send in your response. -
Euro 2000 Legends: Zinedine Zidane, France
Zinedine Zidane led France to their second European success with his vital goals and important assists. Zizou masterminded the French revolution from his midfield throne...