In the past 24 years

Dublin Spur

1 - appearance in the champions league
2- league cup trophies
15- the number of fa cup finals played in by arsenal, chelsea and West Ham in that time
0 - the number of top 3 finishes from spurs in that time
0 - the number of appearences in the fa cup final since then
8 - the number of league titles won by arse and chelsea in that time
0- the number of times spurs have finished within 12 points of the top side in that time (actually since 1981)
16 - the number of managers the club has had in that time (15 of them sacked)
500- the percentage increase in ticket prices at spurs in that time

Why ?

Hatch99

You trying to send me to the bottle ☺

Dublin Spur

Haha no mate - just looking to kick off some healthy discussion on hows and whys that have led to us dropping out of the big time

And it began before ENIC in fairness

We just seem to get a lot wrong, signings, managers etc...
We won the cup in 91 and were nearly relegated in 92 for example
The rot set in around then and we've been pretty ordinary ever since then.

mass_debater

Dublin Spur have you ever thought that maybe supporting Spurs isn't making you happy and you should probably get into another sport?

2nd Row Donkey

Another season, another trophy for arsenal, another season in their shadow. It's heart breaking at times.

Dublin Spur

mass_debater wrote: »

Dublin Spur have you ever thought that maybe supporting Spurs isn't making you happy and you should probably get into another sport?

Do you not think its good to have a chat about the things that are frustrating about supporting your team?

For example, when we last won the FA cup, we were on 8 which was a record at the time and Arsenal were on 6, we haven't played in a final since and they have won another 6. That really pisses me off.

Airing frustrations is an important part of being a supporter

Ormus

I just don't get why you think its such a disgrace that we haven't been more successful. Most similar sized clubs in England (Newcastle, Leeds, Villa, Everton, Sunderland) have all had similar or less success than Spurs over the same period. I honestly think you're torturing yourself by demanding Spurs be more successful than is realistic. You're never going to enjoy it if you keep doing this. I think some football supporters go their whole life moaning about the team they support. Some Man City supporters are outraged about finishing second, even though they were down in League 1 a few years ago. We all chose to support Spurs. We could easily have chosen to support United or Pool or whoever was successful at the time if all we were interested in was success. Anyone who chose to support Spurs because they expected them to win tonnes of trophies would want to take a long hard look at themself. We all want Spurs to improve and to challenge for trophies, and hopefully it will happen, hopefully in our lifetime. But we are about where we should be at the moment. Just remember, this is what you signed up for.

Dublin Spur

I don't get the argument that anyone that doesn't like it should support another club. That's just complete b0llox in fairness.

Why shouldn't supporters discuss and debate the things that have gone wrong at the club ? That's part and parcel of what being a fan is about too.

In the 80's we were in the top 3 or 4 every season, we used to win cups regularly and we signed some of the best players in the world. We finished 3rd in 1990 and won the cup in 1991, but since then we have been pretty ordinary and our rivals have left us way behind. Since we last played in a FA cup final Arsenal have won 6.

Is it not right to question how this demise was allowed to happen ?

Ormus

Dublin Spur wrote: »

I don't get the argument that anyone that doesn't like it should support another club. That's just complete b0llox in fairness.

Why shouldn't supporters discuss and debate the things that have gone wrong at the club ? That's part and parcel of what being a fan is about too.

In the 80's we were in the top 3 or 4 every season, we used to win cups regularly and we signed some of the best players in the world. We finished 3rd in 1990 and won the cup in 1991, but since then we have been pretty ordinary and our rivals have left us way behind. Since we last played in a FA cup final Arsenal have won 6.

Is it not right to question how this demise was allowed to happen ?

Part and parcel yeah, most fans have a moan the odd time, but it seems to be all you do. You very rarely say anything positive about Spurs. Spurs average league position in the 2010s is about 3 places higher than in the 80s. Even if you take the last decade, it's still almost 2 places higher on average. How can a club move up in the league during a demise? You don't seem to understand cup competitions. They're knockout. Anything can happen. If you're the 5th best team in the league, you'll generally finish between 4th and 6th. If you're the 5th best team in the cup, you could finish anywhere between winner or going out in your first round. I don't know how else to explain it.

Dublin Spur

What would your analysis be of our failings over the past 24 years.
Have we been unlucky ?
Have we been mismanaged ?

Look at it this way - take the past 48 years in two parts:

In the 24 year period from 1967 to 1991 Spurs won 4 FA cups, 2 UEFA cups and a league Cup.

In the 24 year period since 1991 we have won 2 league cups. It is crazy to think we have improved as a club since 1991. We have fallen back massively on what we used to be (a club that won trophies and signed star players).

Surely you can see this - everyone knows we're not the force we used to be.
The question is why has it happened ?

Ormus

Dublin Spur wrote: »

What would your analysis be of our failings over the past 24 years.
Have we been unlucky ?
Have we been mismanaged ?

Look at it this way - take the past 48 years in two parts:

In the 24 year period from 1967 to 1991 Spurs won 4 FA cups, 2 UEFA cups and a league Cup.

In the 24 year period since 1991 we have won 2 league cups. It is crazy to think we have improved as a club since 1991. We have fallen back massively on what we used to be (a club that won trophies and signed star players).

Surely you can see this - everyone knows we're not the force we used to be.
The question is why has it happened ?

1967, were you even alive then?

Talk about searching for things to moan about.

Dublin Spur

Ormus wrote: »

1967, were you even alive then?

Talk about searching for things to moan about.

if you know your history;)

The 60's were glorious for Spurs and I'm bloody glad of what we achieved back then. Those are the standards all Spurs teams should be measured against, do you not agree ?

You keep making these discussions about me, they're supposed to be about the club. Play the ball not the man.

You can disagree all you like with me, that's fine, I don't mind. But what about answering the question ? Why has Spurs fallen so far from where we were used to be.

Ask anyone over 35 at WHL, they're all sick of what we have become. This is not about ENIC, this poor period for the club started in the early 90's.

Martin567

Dublin Spur wrote: »

I don't get the argument that anyone that doesn't like it should support another club. That's just complete b0llox in fairness.

Why shouldn't supporters discuss and debate the things that have gone wrong at the club ? That's part and parcel of what being a fan is about too.

In the 80's we were in the top 3 or 4 every season, we used to win cups regularly and we signed some of the best players in the world. We finished 3rd in 1990 and won the cup in 1991, but since then we have been pretty ordinary and our rivals have left us way behind. Since we last played in a FA cup final Arsenal have won 6.

Is it not right to question how this demise was allowed to happen ?

You certainly like complaining and the sound of your own voice, there's no doubt about that!

The answers to most of your questions are blatantly obvious. Football has changed a lot in the last 20 years or so. Even more so in the last 10 years. The amount of money in the game now is obscene with sugar daddies throwing around their loose change.

You mentioned, in this and other threads, about how Spurs used to sign some of the best players in the world and break the British transfer record, etc. Gazza in 1988 was an example. The relative cost of doing that in the 1980's was nothing like it is now. Doing the equivalent now would likely involve a transfer fee of about £80m and wages of up to £300k per week. Clearly that is not possible and it is ridiculous to think otherwise. The clubs who might do such a thing have lost hundreds of millions without any consequences and that is to football's great shame.

By any objective assessment, Spurs have improved massively under ENIC. The average final position over the past decade or so has been 5th/6th. Of those finishing above, Chelsea & City have been operating by different rules while Man Utd are one of the wealthiest clubs in the world. Arsenal are by far the most admirable of the Top 4 clubs and the ones Spurs should aim to emulate. In fairness, the gap to Arsenal was very, very small a couple of times in recent years. The main difference between Spurs & Arsenal has been the genius of Arsene Wenger and the stability provided by his reign.

From reading all your posts, it appears that your only real complaint is that Spurs don't have an owner prepared to spend up to £1bn of his own money on the team with no expectation of any return. Chelsea & City have gotten away with murder and your only complaint is that Spurs haven't done likewise.

Dublin Spur

Take city and Chelsea out of the equation.

In 1990 we finished 3rd and beat Man Utd home and away
The following season we won the cup.
We were ahead of arsenal and Man Utd back then
Unfortunately we never built on that and allowed these rival clubs to surpass us and leave us miles behind.

Most of the issues I think are at chairman level. In the sugar years he made plenty of cash availAble to managers (Klinsmanns, popescu, Ginola, rebrov, shearingham, Anderton spring to mind) but he hired a load of duds (Ossie, Francis, gross) graham was wrong for spurs but he did deliver a trophy and European football. Sugar's overall net spend was in the red but by the time he sold up we had fallen miles behind where we were when he took over in 1991

The ENIC years haven't been much better. One trophy and a dozen or so managers. The Harry years were the most enjoyable but alas we didn't build on our CL qualification and invest in trying to maintain our CL status. When we were 3rd in Jan 2012, we bought Ryan nelson and Saha when we really needed better for the run in. Suarez was available in that window and we fcuked it up.

All in all we've just been very unstable on the pitch and in the dressing room. Managers are hired and fired far too quickly and and half decent player that emerges is sold to the highest bidder. The thing is great players want to stay at clubs that win things, that's way Henry and bergkamp stayed at arsenal, if that were spurs they would have been sold because we wouldn't have built a great team around them, they would have been forced to play with the likes of Andy Sinton and Steffan Freund. We are good at getting 4 or 5 good players in a team but always seem to be a work in progress, are we ever going to see the finished article again ?

It's quite frustrating to see how far arsenal and Man Utd have moved away from us since the early 90's when we were all pretty equal. They got it right and we have continually ****ed it up.

Martin567

The biggest difference with Man Utd & Arsenal has been that they had such stability with their managers. My one complaint about ENIC is that they've been too quick to change managers over the years, particularly with Jol & AVB.

Again though, times have changed. Alex Ferguson would have been sacked at Utd without ever winning a trophy if he had been appointed in 2006 rather than 1986. 3.5 years into his reign there, Utd were in the bottom half of the table. Boards & supporters have so little patience nowadays that it is very hard to have stability and things always feel like they are a work in progress.

The other thing I would say is that you can't just take Chelsea & City out of the equation. If every club was forced to run in a stable financial manner (as they should be), Spurs would have been in the Top 4 for most of the last 5 seasons and playing regular CL football.

Dublin Spur

But we have still performed very poorly in comparison with 2 clubs that we were at worst equal to 24 years ago. They got it right and mostly we got it wrong.

City and Chelsea won the lotto so their emergence is via unique circumstances and is not comparable with other clubs

twilight_singer

When we get the stadium built it will be a different ball game lads

Dublin Spur

twilight_singer wrote: »

When we get the stadium built it will be a different ball game lads

I sure hope so

Hatch99

twilight_singer wrote: »

When we get the stadium built it will be a different ball game lads

Hope we're all around to see it

Mr. Guappa

Dublin Spur wrote: »

But we have still performed very poorly in comparison with 2 clubs that we were at worst equal to 24 years ago. They got it right and mostly we got it wrong.

City and Chelsea won the lotto so their emergence is via unique circumstances and is not comparable with other clubs

Leeds and Nottingham Forest were ahead of or near our level 24 years ago and both are far behind us now. We could have done a lot of things better in the last 24 years but we could have done a hell of a lot worse too.

Dublin Spur

Yep it hasn't been good for forest or Leeds

I'm Not sure there are any lessons to learn from their failings for spurs though, our financial security is guaranteed given that our owner is a billionaire, these clubs didn't have the same comfort unfortunately.

I like both clubs and would love to see them back in the top league