Yes Tottenham have a large net spending the last 5 years, but only 1/5 of Manchester City. Chelsea have spent £30m more, despite already having a world-class squad in 2007/8. Chelsea might have not spent that much in the previous 3 seasons, but this year, when they were struggling they spent masses in January to try and rectify their problem, and this table does not include the £300m Chelsea spent on players in the early 2000s. It is amazing that Redknapp’s side have competed as well as they have done, considering this difference in net spending on transfer fees and wage bills. Harry is frustrated that he could not buy a world-class striker this January. It is this type of player that Tottenham have missed and this kind of player that is hugely significant to a side finishing in the top 4. On Sunday he said, “If the top players get offered a £150,000 a week at Manchester City they are not going to come to Tottenham for £60,000 a week, are they? Their wage bills are far in excess of ours.” Yes, Tottenham have bought a lot of players and spent a lot of money, but what really sets City and Chelsea apart is the signings of proven players for colossal fees and the wages they can afford to pay.
For example City have bought Tevez (£25m), Adebayor (£25m), Dzeko (£27m), Balotelli (£24.5) and Santa Cruz (17.5) all for more than Tottenham’s record transfer fee. Chelsea have bought Torres(£50m), Drogba (£24m), Anelka (£15m) and Schevchenko (£30m). These strikers will also be demanding £100,000 a week and more.
Tottenham have been unable to spend that kind of money. If you take the current Tottenham squad and add to it Tevez and Carroll, I am sure they would finish in the top 4. That is what Redknapp is saying.
Critics might argue that it would have been wise to spend less on players and more on individual’s wages. It could have been wise to save the £14m on Pavlyuchenko and put it towards a £30m bid for the likes of an Aguero, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. Even still, would the Tottenham board have been willing to pay their wages? Additionally, before Christmas, Tottenham’s strength over Liverpool was their strength in depth. However, with Liverpool’s recent acquisitions, and their new found exuberance under Kenny Dalglish, it is only going to be harder for Tottenham to finish in the top 4 next season.
Harry is not making excuses; he is just being a bit more realistic now than he was earlier in the season. The Tottenham board may be generous, but they are not in the same League as Abramovic or Sheik Mansour. Had it not been for Man City, Redknapp’s side would have finished in the top 4. He is not making up excuses, he is presenting facts.
You can follow me at www.twitter.com/joeaustin8
ThisisFutbol.com are seeking new writers to join the team! If you’re passionate about football, drop us a line at “thisisfutbol.com@snack-media.com” to learn more.
Join the fantasy football revolution – for FREE with ThisisFutbol.com. Click here!
He was talking about wages not transfer kitty, so the statistics are irrelevant.
Transfer fees is not the be all and end all when considering financial restraints. Look at the top earners of the above clubs and you will see a huge gap between what Tottenham are willing to pay compared to the rest.
Spending millions does not automatically guarantee success-but relying entirely on growing your own has never once been successful in the EPL either. The problem with Arsenal is their young players are getting the wrong kind of experience- the experience of failing-their fear engulfs them at critical moments. They need a core of more experienced successful players to help them over this hump.
This is not about spending and you would be amazed to find out we have no players costing more than 16 Million. We also spent Money we earned in outgoing transfers 18 Carrick 32 Berbatov Reid Defoe Boteng Malbrangue Bent 16 Millon Kaboul. We bought well Lennon 2 million Bale early payment 5 Millon Huddelstone 4 Millon Walker Naughton 8 Millon Modrick 16 Kranjcar 4 million Van der vaart 8 Million Gallas free Dawson 4 Sandro 6
Subsequently the current financial situation of Spurs makes it more than imperative for the club (given that it misses also the revenue of a big stadium) to set up and outline a proper transfer policy, where there will be no money spend on flops and mediocre players,as well an adequate scouting system which will allow Spurs to buy mainly players with CERTAIN qualities who are in an early stage of their football career and develop them and occasionally some experienced ones who, always, fulfil the same quality criteria.
With driftwood such as Woodgate, Keane, Bentley and King off the books this summer and some youngsters who are showing development such as Walker. The team can be just as strong with less wages.
Transfer fees are a red herring in my opinion. It all comes down to wages. And Harry is right, Levy is not going to pay the 100,000+ a week it would take to sign a top striker. COYS!
Spurs have high net spending over six or seven years – through which the club has gone from relegation survivors to champions league challengers. In the same period ManU have gone from all-conquering to all-conquering – Arsenal have gone from invincible to also-rans – and Liverpool have gone from European Champions to laughing stock.
On top of all that – Spurs have money to spend only because it doesn’t run up huge wages. A rumoured top wage of £70k per week is way below the other four clubs challenging for the top four.
Good article. So many fans and pundits have a poor understanding of this area. Some say its your transfer spend that matters, others say its net spend on transfers. But the truth is it’s neither. Its a simple equation to work out your football budget (transfer fees paid – transfer fees received + wage bill). I get really cheesed off with Gooner muppets saying we spend more, when they fail to take into account that they normally spend about £50m more on wages. Taking into account inflation that probably means that Arsenal have spent over £300m more on wages since Wenger took over. In 2009/10 the wage bills were Spurs £67m, , Arsenal £111m, Manure £132m, Citeh £133m. Spurs top wages are around the £40,000- 60,000 a wk level. For Arsenal their ceiling is said to be around £80,000 -90,000 a wk. But remember as Gooners always tell us, most of their players are kids. In many ways that’s like Manure playing their top pros £120,000 -£150,000 a wk. That enables Wenger to attract some of the best young talent around. They cannot divorce that and say we spend more, its crap.
Unfortunately until we build the new stadium we simply cannot to compete on wages. But there are advantages to this- how often do our players demand a move for more money? Not often, because they could have joined other clubs paying more in the first place. We dont tend to attract the mercenaries that others do eg Newcastle ,Citeh. Look at the problems that creates
You can’t compare how much teams trying to get into CL places spend compared to clubs trying to get into the CL places, as it’s much easier to attract free transfers and players that are coming to an end of their contract that are cheaper, like Spurs have now done with Pienaar