* This article was originally posted in late 2015, but the concerns about ownership at Tottenham Hotspur are as relevant as ever

 

Tottenham are the perennial underachievers, forever on the cusp of glory but without the apparent wherewithal to ever achieve it. The club’s recent history is punctuated by painful false dawns; the majority of which are wholly self-inflicted and whose regularity only add to the frustration. The club’s outlook continues to be one of cautious ambition, so cautious in fact that beyond a solitary Champions League place and League Cup triumph, the last 15 years have been devoid of any real sense of achievement.

Financial security was undoubtedly the priority when ENIC took control, but more than a decade on surely Spurs fans have a right to expect more?

Daniel Levy seems to be the target of recent vitriol, and as the public face of Tottenham Hotspur and indeed ENIC it is easy to see why. The Oxford educated Chairman is one of the most ruthless operators in the modern game, and it is under his stewardship that Spurs have recovered from the verge of bankruptcy to one of the most financially stable enterprises in football. On a purely financial basis Spurs are a success by modern footballing standards; their £80m profit last year was a record in the English game and one that underlines their pragmatic approach to the game. Tours across the globe will forever be greeted by scepticism, but these only add to the growing financial presence that Levy’s Spurs continue to enjoy. A presence that will surely soon be expanded ever further by the eventual completion of the Northumberland Park Development Project, and the long awaited new stadium. The business model is self-sufficient, without the constant need for lavish overspends and mass investment; rare sustainability is the theme of modern day Tottenham Hotspur, but is this enough?

Such comparisons to the world of business are as useful as they are misleading, for a club like Tottenham Hotspur accounts for far more than that. Balance sheets are too often given the same status as points on a league table, and this is largely where fan frustration lies. Is the game really about glory as the Tottenham adage goes, or is it all about profit? Financial security remains a pleasing footnote, but the reality is that a club forges its history through successes on the field rather than those off it.

Ambition on the field isn’t necessarily synonymous with ill-advised spending, more a decisive and forceful approach when the time is deemed right. Relentless negotiating has cost the club millions down the years, failing to secure targets only to pay over the odds later down the line for a desperately over-valued alternative. Yet for Spurs it is the outgoings that pose more of a concern, Gareth Bale heading a long list of talented departures from the Lane in recent seasons. Such exits do wonders for the net transfer spend, but little for the clubs footballing progress and ambition lies in player retention as much as it does acquisition.

The Berahino saga was an interesting case-in point; a player that was wildly over-valued and with two chairmen that were unwilling to fold on their increasingly ambitious demands. The envy for Spurs fans is less in the ability to prize the Englishman away, more in the resolute defence shown by an opposing club. How Spurs fans would have longed for Jeremy Peace at the height of the Luka Modric standoff.

It is a genuine clash of ideologies at Tottenham, a clear business strategy that appears at odds with the footballing considerations of its fans. It is easy enough to simplify the blame game at Spurs, and to do so would be an oversight. Years of footballing underachievement have left many fans clamouring for change, change that they would feel is necessary for any possible chance of future success.

It is easy though to be reactive, and Spurs fans would do well to take care when launching a broadside on the ENIC regime. Balance is key, and despite obvious shortcomings there remains a lot to be positive about for Spurs heading into the future.

A clear disconnect between fans and club will only hinder this, and it is surely high time that the club did its up-most to repair this relationship.

Is the ENIC regime broken at Tottenham?

12 responses to “From saviours to sinners: Have ENIC failed Tottenham?”

  1. Mickd Avatar
    Mickd

    Spurs have never been in as sound a financial position and are developing a young largely English squad. That is the future, we cannot compete with man city or Chelsea financially. I suppose you would have the club go bust like Leeds??? Lazy article

    1. thefootballfaculty Avatar

      That in itself isn’t correct; Joe Lewis’ wealth is comparable to Roman Abramovich’s.

      That isn’t actually the point though. To show ambition isn’t to necessarily spend more, player retention and more targeted spending being the important aspects.

      As a Spurs fan surely your aspirations extend beyond finishing 5th or 6th each season?

      1. matthew Avatar
        matthew

        Lewis’ wealth might be, but that doesn’t reflect on Levy does it? He can only spend what he’s given.

        Roman can throw all his money at chelsea, would be nice if Joe did it too. But i guess he wants to build a club that can financially generate it’s own revenues. I think thats a smart, sustainable long-term approach.

        There is more to football than profits and perenially finishing fifth is getting tiresome. But i think the enphasis on youth development and this new stadium really will help us financially compete with the big teams. There are a few studies out there that show a pretty strong correlation between how much a team pays in weekly salaries and how high that team finishes on the table. We don’t have the financial means as a club (Lewis does, but not THFC itself) to pay big wages and attract big players. Hopefully building the brand means generating bigger incomes from sponsors and shirt sales and a 61000 seat stadium will double the matchday revenue. They’re mutually exclusive, on field success and financial success. Give Levy some time

    2. Ady Avatar
      Ady

      Are you Levy? We wouldn’t have gone bust by holding onto Bale etc and paying what they wanted, instead we wasted all the incoming money on rubbish.

  2. markb Avatar
    markb

    Spurs were not on the verge of bankruptcy when Enic took over. Sugar was many things but the club were doing well financially and didnt he tell chelsea to sod off over Modric?? He later moved on to Madrid but there was no stand off. I think it is time for change and our transfer policy has let us down time and again but please get your facts right.

    1. thefootballfaculty Avatar

      I think ‘well’ is an overstatement, but yes Spurs’ worst financial troubles were before Sugar in the early 90s. Modric typifies the selling culture, arguably a much greater loss than Gareth Bale was to the team as a whole.

      1. Jackary James Avatar
        Jackary James

        During Sugar there was some head scratchers too. Sheringham? Barmby? But for someone who has seen the mediocre and down right boring football of the late 90’s, I can’t complain.

  3. Dommo Avatar
    Dommo

    When you ask any fan what does success look like the majority will say their club winning titles and cups. Football especially the EPL has become a massive business with TV revenue going through the roof and making the EPL the richest league in Europe. ENIC and Levy must take credit for stabilizing the club financially however to press on and really compete at the highest level we need more investment not just in a new stadium but in bringing better more experienced players that will invariably cost more and demand more wages. To compete with the top 4 we need to ensure we have managerial stability, youth coming through the ranks and also the ability to spend big when needed so I think time for ENIC to sell and see if a rich buyer can bank roll the budget needed to be a really big team that wins titles and cups.

  4. Jackary James Avatar
    Jackary James

    When Enic took charge European football was the target and increasing the capacity of the lane. I think they have almost achieved both and then some. I do think spurs have been hard done by with the influx of money to certain teams at the wrong time.

    1. Ady Avatar
      Ady

      How long does it take to move on? It’s been close to 2 decades just to achieve Europa League. I’m afraid we’re stuck if we don’t get new owners or change in philosophy.

      1. cyril1964 Avatar
        cyril1964

        what has been two decades?
        spurs fans are great with their rose tinted spectacles and their ability to redefine history but perspective is needed. 50 years i have been following and indeed going to games and while exciting football is fun to watch there is one truth that cannot be challenged, in terms of league position the last six years have been the best in all of spurs history apart from the start of the sixties. and yes, my understanding is the bankruptcy papers had been drafted in 1991 and it was only the sale of gazza that stopped the banks putting us under.

      2. cyril1964 Avatar
        cyril1964

        with respect i do not understand the two decades. stated simply spurs were on the edge of bankruptcy in 1991, i understand the banks had the papers drafted and held off only when the gazza fee was available. the trouble with many today is they want instant success and they also tend to wear rose tinted spectacles. the last 6 years have, in terms of league position, been the second best in all of spurs history, second only to the first half of the ’60’s when i wager you were not watching them.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from The Football Faculty

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading