@AVFC_26 So Villa are ‘bigger than Spurs’, but need the rules removed so their owners can fund spending the club’s own income can’t sustain? You’ve rather proved the opposite.
@Salibasexual02@ajtracey If trophies alone decided it, nobody would have been calling it the “Big Six” for the last 20 years. The term has always been about size, revenue, fanbase, commercial pull and sustained relevance—not a single metric.
@Salibasexual02@ajtracey Spurs finished 17th twice. Arsenal finished 8th twice. Chelsea finished 12th. Man Utd finished 15th. Funny how nobody questioned whether those clubs were “big” until Spurs became the convenient target.
@callmeralph65@SussexTottenham Because one is income generated by the club’s own asset, the other is external subsidy from an owner. Spurs took the debt/risk to build a stadium that creates revenue. “Selling oil” doesn’t mean Newcastle generated that money as a football club. That’s the difference.
@BookofAEGIS This is desperate. Renting Wembley while your own stadium is being rebuilt isn’t being “gifted” revenue. Spurs took the pain, cost and risk of leaving WHL, then invested in an asset that now generates revenue. That’s literally building the club the right way.
@AndyKerrtv The difference is sustainability. NFL/concert money is generated by the club’s infrastructure. Owner money is dependent on one person staying interested/rich/alive/allowed. If they walk away, the costs remain. That’s why generated revenue and owner subsidy aren’t the same thing.
@corbredus Debt liability sounds scary until you remember it funded a stadium generating huge recurring revenue. Most businesses would happily take £30m annual servicing if the asset helped drive £565m turnover. That’s not a payday loan, it’s infrastructure finance.
@avfc_stef@tottenhamdom I get the frustration, but Spurs aren’t a great example. We didn’t start as legacy elite or state-backed. We bridged the gap through consistent finishes, Europe, wage control and taking on the stadium risk. The rules aren’t perfect, but “richest owner spends most” isn’t fairness?
@MichaelHincks So we’re judging spend purely against 3 years of points, not 20 yrs of revenue, Europe, league finishes and stability? Huge turnover and 17 Euro campaigns in that period. That’s why they can spend more. It’s not an insult, it’s the result of being run at a higher level for longer
@TheAthleticFC@David_Ornstein Says the Arsenal fan Ornstein 😂 Eze’s an Arsenal boy – if they showed interest, he was always going to wait. What’s the issue? Move on. Spurs need a Maddison replacement, and he doesn’t fit the bill. Ironically, not sure he’s even what Arsenal need 🤷♂️
@Tgarratt10 Plenty to be positive about under Thomas Frank — last night showed exactly why. We went toe-to-toe and only lost on pens. Time to stop living in the past and start getting excited about what’s ahead. ⚪️💪
@InvertTheWing Surely it’s not Levy deciding who gets loaned out? That’s on the manager and football department.
You can criticise Levy for plenty — but blaming him for every injury or squad choice doesn’t add up. Let��s be fair about what’s actually in his control.