Give it up for Harry Redknapp

Lukker-

Have to say Niko Krankjar was a bargain, doesn't always start but always looks the part.

JPA

MementoMori wrote: »

I'd imagine they are quite comfortably ahead of both Liverpool and Villa on the wage front. Wage figures tend to be a bit more historic as they tend to be based on published accounts.

Compare the players on Spurs bench to the players on Villa and Liverpool's bench and compare the transfers in and out at the various clubs in the last 18 months and I would be shocked if Spurs weren't pushing Arsenal for the 4th spot in terms of wages.

Liverpool have been trimming their wage bill massively [down around 10 players over all between reserves and first-team squad compared to this time last seaon; plus have about 10 players out on loan at the end of the season] and I wouldn't be surprised when the wages for this season are calculated if they weren't in 7th place for this season.

Villa have a higher wage bill apparently, although that maybe outdated, they did until quite recently, I don't know how. Better to speak in facts rather than speculation.

therecklessone

leninbenjamin wrote: »

O Rhly? You'll be going into the qualifiers pretty much unseeded afaik. You could easily come up against fairly handy teams like AC, Valencia, Sevilla, Bremen etc. it's far from a forgone conclusion. You're as small minded as anyone here if you think the qualifiers are just semantics.

I don't think they are semantics, but I've checked the coefficients...have you? I don't think the qualifiers will be a push over, but they are the Champions League the same way they were when Arsenal played in them last season.

leninbenjamin wrote: »

Oh, so he plucks his management style, his decision making rationale, his valuation of players etc. by throwing dice? Divination? Looking for patterns in the newspapers?

Its looking strikingly similar to previous cycles so far, but lets not let a little thing like past precedent get in the way...

Would you judge Roy Hodgson's achievements this season through the lens of his failure at Blackburn?

Mick McCarthy's through the lens of his Sunderland side being relegated with 15pts?

Brian Clough won two European Cups, you don't hear people cúnting those achievements off because he took Forest down.

Nobody is conducting an assessment of Redknapp's entire career, I believe the OP was commenting on this season and this season only.

twilight_singer

redknapp = cockney jesus

COYS!

everdead.ie

MementoMori wrote: »

I'd imagine they are quite comfortably ahead of both Liverpool and Villa on the wage front. Wage figures tend to be a bit more historic as they tend to be based on published accounts.

Compare the players on Spurs bench to the players on Villa and Liverpool's bench and compare the transfers in and out at the various clubs in the last 18 months and I would be shocked if Spurs weren't pushing Arsenal for the 4th spot in terms of wages.

Liverpool have been trimming their wage bill massively [down around 10 players over all between reserves and first-team squad compared to this time last seaon; plus have about 10 players out on loan at the end of the season] and I wouldn't be surprised when the wages for this season are calculated if they weren't in 7th place for this season.

Based on the latest figures Given we are behind Villa,City,Liverpool and WestHam which is unbelievable really

OPENROAD

Three London teams in next seasons champions league :eek:

London rules!!!!

SuprSi

leninbenjamin wrote: »

O Rhly? You'll be going into the qualifiers pretty much unseeded afaik. You could easily come up against fairly handy teams like AC, Valencia, Sevilla, Bremen etc. it's far from a forgone conclusion. You're as small minded as anyone here if you think the qualifiers are just semantics.

Who cares!!! The aim of this season was to get into the Champions League. We've achieved that with Harry and his squad. Getting past the qualifiers of the Champions League can be another target, for another season. Tonight it's all about Spurs qualifying for 4th, which the team deservedly did.

therecklessone

MementoMori wrote: »

I'd imagine they are quite comfortably ahead of both Liverpool and Villa on the wage front. Wage figures tend to be a bit more historic as they tend to be based on published accounts.

According to the Guardian, the most recent figures for the PL show Spurs salary bill at £52m and Liverpool's at £80 (estimated)

Spurs also have one of the lowest wage to turnover ratios in the PL.

eagle eye

MementoMori wrote: »

I'd imagine they are quite comfortably ahead of both Liverpool and Villa on the wage front. Wage figures tend to be a bit more historic as they tend to be based on published accounts.

Compare the players on Spurs bench to the players on Villa and Liverpool's bench and compare the transfers in and out at the various clubs in the last 18 months and I would be shocked if Spurs weren't pushing Arsenal for the 4th spot in terms of wages.

Liverpool have been trimming their wage bill massively [down around 10 players over all between reserves and first-team squad compared to this time last seaon; plus have about 10 players out on loan at the end of the season] and I wouldn't be surprised when the wages for this season are calculated if they weren't in 7th place for this season.

Liverpool brought in Aquilani, Johnson and Maxi Rodriguez who would all command substantial wages. While they did get rid of players I don't see a huge reduction in their wage bill with those three signings definitely commanding big wages.
Aston Villa spent spent around 50m in the transfer market in 08/09 and 35 this season. I don't know how their wage bill compares but I do know that both Villa and Tottenham had somewhere in the 50/60 million wage bills two years ago. Liverpool's was up around 90 million at that time.

Hatch99

therecklessone wrote: »

I don't think they are semantics, but I've checked the coefficients...have you? I don't think the qualifiers will be a push over, but they are the Champions League the same way they were when Arsenal played in them last season.



Would you judge Roy Hodgson's achievements this season through the lens of his failure at Blackburn?

Mick McCarthy's through the lens of his Sunderland side being relegated with 15pts?

Brian Clough won two European Cups, you don't hear people cúnting those achievements off because he took Forest down.

Nobody is conducting an assessment of Redknapp's entire career, I believe the OP was commenting on this season and this season only.

Nicely put.

rossie1977

OPENROAD wrote: »

Three London teams in next seasons champions league :eek:

London rules!!!!

and how many champions league/european cups between em

MementoMori

Heurelho Gomes £7m
Alan Hutton £9m
Gareth Bale £5m
David Bentley £15m
Tom Huddlestone £2.5m
Aaron Lennon £1m
Jermaine Jenas £9m
Roman Pavlyuchenko£14m
Robbie Keane £16m
Wilson Palacios £12m
Luka Modric £16.5
Peter Crouch £9m
Kyle Naughton £7m
Giovani Dos Santos £4.7m
Jermain Defoe £15.75m
Sebastian Bassong £8m
Ben Alnwick £4m
Vedran Corluka £8.5m
Carlo Cudicini Free
Danny Rose £1m
Ledley King Youth
Dorian Dervite Youth
Benoît Assou-Ekotto£3.5m
David Button Youth
Jonathan Woodgate£8m
Niko Kranjkar £2m
Kyle Walker £4m
Michael Dawson £4m
Jamie O'Hara Youth
Jake Livermore Youth
Ben Alnwick £900k
Adel Taarabt Undisclosed

£187.35m

everdead.ie

therecklessone wrote: »

According to the Guardian, the most recent figures for the PL show Spurs salary bill at £52m and Liverpool's at £80 (estimated)

Spurs also have one of the lowest wage to turnover ratios in the PL.

Only Arsenal and Utd have lower Ratio's and maybe one more like fulham it was in the villa thread a while back i think I'll check it out


EDIT: http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/moneygame.pdf

eagle eye

therecklessone wrote: »

I believe the OP was commenting on this season and this season only.

This is exactly what I was doing, well his time at Tottenham I suppose.

rossie1977

therecklessone wrote: »

According to the Guardian, the most recent figures for the PL show Spurs salary bill at £52m and Liverpool's at £80 (estimated)

the entire liverpool squad on £80 :eek:

MementoMori

therecklessone wrote: »

According to the Guardian, the most recent figures for the PL show Spurs salary bill at £52m and Liverpool's at £80 (estimated)

Spurs also have one of the lowest wage to turnover ratios in the PL.

As I mentioned those are all based on historic figures so are really related to the the season before last as opposed to this season.

I'd imagine on the basis of recent transfer than when the wage bill for this season are calculated Spurs will be much higher - look at 'Arry's previous history with this and look at the nature of the transfers of those who have arrived at WHL. I would be massively surprised if Spurs wage bill didn't shoot up quite considerably the last while.

therecklessone

MementoMori wrote: »

£187.35m

I'm fully aware of what has been spent by the club, my point was that to assign that to Redknapp is disingenuous.

eagle eye

MementoMori wrote: »

Heurelho Gomes £7m
Alan Hutton £9m
Gareth Bale £5m
David Bentley £15m
Tom Huddlestone £2.5m
Aaron Lennon £1m
Jermaine Jenas £9m
Roman Pavlyuchenko£14m
Robbie Keane £16m
Wilson Palacios £12m
Luka Modric £16.5
Peter Crouch £9m
Kyle Naughton £7m
Giovani Dos Santos £4.7m
Jermain Defoe £15.75m
Sebastian Bassong £8m
Ben Alnwick £4m
Vedran Corluka £8.5m
Carlo Cudicini Free
Danny Rose £1m
Ledley King Youth
Dorian Dervite Youth
Benoît Assou-Ekotto£3.5m
David Button Youth
Jonathan Woodgate£8m
Niko Kranjkar £2m
Kyle Walker £4m
Michael Dawson £4m
Jamie O'Hara Youth
Jake Livermore Youth
Ben Alnwick £900k
Adel Taarabt Undisclosed

£187.35m

What is this list? Last five years at Spurs?

I love the figure for Dawson there, crediting half the money that Spurs paid Forest for him and Andy Reid. No chance that he cost half that money.

And this is clearly gross spend too, unlike the net spend lists that are constantly put up in defense of another manager.

nkay1985

I'm delighted for Spurs. They're a bigger club than their achievements over the last number of years reflect and Harry's finally brought some success back to White Hart Lane.

Nobody's debating that he inherited some quality players but the fact of the matter is that Redknapp's gotten those players playing well and made a few key additions too. Fair play to him and I hope the Spurs fans enjoy their time in the big leagues next season.

MementoMori

eagle eye wrote: »

Liverpool brought in Aquilani, Johnson and Maxi Rodriguez who would all command substantial wages. While they did get rid of players I don't see a huge reduction in their wage bill with those three signings definitely commanding big wages.
Aston Villa spent spent around 50m in the transfer market in 08/09 and 35 this season. I don't know how their wage bill compares but I do know that both Villa and Tottenham had somewhere in the 50/60 million wage bills two years ago. Liverpool's was up around 90 million at that time.

In the last 18 months Hyypia, Alonso, Pennant, Arbeloa, Keane, Dossena, and Voronin have all left Liverpool. This is in addition to a definite trimming down of the number of players at reserve/youth level. All the following reserve players have been moved on as well Mihaylov, Buchtmann, Flora, Hammill, Hobbs, Pourie, Leto, Ajdarevic. Overall I would imagine Liverpool's wage bill will have come down significantly this seaon - not really surprising given this is what the CEO said was our aim for this January's transfer window.

carlop

I don't know much about the specifics of what happened at Pompey, but I've always felt that it's harsh to have a go at Harry.

He spent the money he was given to spend, it's not his fault that this turned out to be money that wasn't actually there.

Congratulations to Harry and Spurs. I personally didn't think they stood a chance going into that run of Arsenal, Chelsea and United but they proved me and many others wrong, and did so playing some beautiful stuff. It'll be interesting to see who they bring in over the summer.

Chucky the tree

Delighted they got to 4th. The laughs I'm going to get when they lose in the qualfying round are going to be quality, can't wait!

therecklessone

MementoMori wrote: »

I'd imagine on the basis of recent transfer than when the wage bill for this season are calculated Spurs will be much higher - look at 'Arry's previous history with this and look at the nature of the transfers of those who have arrived at WHL. I would be massively surprised if Spurs wage bill didn't shoot up quite considerably the last while.

When you have figures to back that up come back to us.

MementoMori

eagle eye wrote: »

What is this list? Last five years at Spurs?

I love the figure for Dawson there, crediting half the money that Spurs paid Forest for him and Andy Reid. No chance that he cost half that money.

And this is clearly gross spend too, unlike the net spend lists that are constantly put up in defense of another manager.

Would you like me to push up the price for Dawson to £6m? => increasing the cost of the squad.

Logic fail eagle eye;)

This is the current Spurs squad. The squad of players at Redknapp's disposal this year in order to get fourth.

therecklessone wrote: »

I'm fully aware of what has been spent by the club, my point was that to assign that to Redknapp is disingenuous.

If Redknapp didn't use any of the players he inherited you might have some sort of case but the fact is that the squad that he inherited had some quality players on whom a decent amount of money had been spent.

4th most expensive squad gets 4th place.

How much did Mancini actually spend?

Mr. Guappa

Congratulations to Spurs and very well done to Redknapp:)

The amount of bitterness in this and a few of the other threads in the forum tonight is quite sad.

Yes, Spurs have spent plenty over the years; Yes, we've got a big squad. But 18 months ago we were bottom of the league with players who looked disinterested, tonight we played like a proper team and worked hard for each other, and like him or not Harry has to take credit for the turnaround.

We have talented guys like Bale, Lennon, Huddlestone and Dawson in particular who look like top class players under Harry, give him some credit for giving these lads belief, and the freedom to express themselves.

Finally, if its no great achievement for Spurs to get 4th, how come we only got 20 votes in the Race for 4th thread?

JPA

MementoMori wrote: »

4th most expensive squad gets 4th place.

Don't Liverpool have the 3rd or 4th most expensive squad? *ducks*

MementoMori

therecklessone wrote: »

When you have figures to back that up come back to us.

Come on tro - I already stated that wage figures tend to be available on a historic basis so we should probably get an idea of the various wage bills for this season some time in 2012. Are you saying that you don't expect Spurs wage bill to jump up on the basis of the transfer done especially combined with 'Arry's history with regard to this with Portsmouth?? Or do want me to wait around until 2012/2013 to be able to prove this conclusively?

Sorry to take the gloss off Spurs "awesome" achievement but it's more a indication that Spurs have underperformed previously.

Kirnsy

I don't like 'arry and dislike spurs intensely but fair play to them. To have won their last 10 out of 11 matches is impressive under pressure and to keep city from that Champions League spot is equally so.


Congrats

/through gritted teeth :P

Mr. Guappa

MementoMori wrote: »

Come on tro - I already stated that wage figures tend to be available on a historic basis so we should probably get an idea of the various wage bills for this season some time in 2012. Are you saying that you don't expect Spurs wage bill to jump up on the basis of the transfer done especially combined with 'Arry's history with regard to this with Portsmouth?? Or do want me to wait around until 2012/2013 to be able to prove this conclusively?

Sorry to take the gloss off Spurs "awesome" achievement but it's more a indication that Spurs have underperformed previously.

So Harry gets credit for getting us to perform to the best of our abilities then? Cool

MementoMori

JPA wrote: »

Don't Liverpool have the 3rd or 4th most expensive squad? *ducks*

City,Chelsea and Utd are all in the £200m plus

5th -Current squad cost around £137m to assemble.

A lot closer to Villa's squad at £122m than Spurs at £187m.

Arsenal creep in around the £90m mark.

therecklessone

MementoMori wrote: »

If Redknapp didn't use any of the players he inherited you might have some sort of case but the fact is that the squad that he inherited had some quality players on whom a decent amount of money had been spent.

4th most expensive squad gets 4th place.

How much did Mancini actually spend?

No, I have a point now. Suggesting that Redknapp spent all that money is disingenuous, I'm not the person who introduced money spent into this thread and have never denied that the Spurs squad cost a whole heap of money. I've not use it as a stick to beat City either, I've no interest in beating them for spending money.

Money spent doesn't always mean money well spent, and never results in the simplistic equation of 4th most expensive squad gets 4th place.

I believe Mancini's only purchase was Johnson btw.

MementoMori

Mr. Guappa wrote: »

So Harry gets credit for getting us to perform to the best of our abilities then? Cool

Yup - he's done a very good job but he's been helped by the fact that he's had a lot of decent players in the squad.

JPA

Spurs finances are available for scrutiny if that turns ya on, http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/investor/investor_annual_report.html

MementoMori

therecklessone wrote: »

No, I have a point now. Suggesting that Redknapp spent all that money is disingenuous, I'm not the person who introduced money spent into this thread and have never denied that the Spurs squad cost a whole heap of money. I've not use it as a stick to beat City either, I've no interest in beating them for spending money.

Money spent doesn't always mean money well spent, and never results in the simplistic equation of 4th most expensive squad gets 4th place.

I believe Mancini's only purchase was Johnson btw.

Money spent doesn't always mean money well spent, and never results in the simplistic equation of 4th most expensive squad gets 4th place.

Of course but it helps massively - just look at the correlation between money spent and where a team ends up in the league.

Achieving 4th place with the 4th most expensive squad is not exactly a notable, especially when there is a difference of almost £50m to the next most expensive squad.

MementoMori

JPA wrote: »

Spurs finances are available for scrutiny if that turns ya on, http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/investor/investor_annual_report.html

Sadly it does.

therecklessone

MementoMori wrote: »

Come on tro - I already stated that wage figures tend to be available on a historic basis so we should probably get an idea of the various wage bills for this season some time in 2012. Are you saying that you don't expect Spurs wage bill to jump up on the basis of the transfer done especially combined with 'Arry's history with regard to this with Portsmouth?? Or do want me to wait around until 2012/2013 to be able to prove this conclusively?

I've made the point elsewhere that Harry Redknapp does not do the financial negotiations at Tottenham, and anyone who thinks that Daniel Levy is as naive as Peter Storrie really is a fool.

That is why Spurs have pulled out of the running for many of Redknapp's targets since he came to the club, Levy will not pay the transfer fees or wages demanded by clubs/players.

You talk about historic figures, the Guardian's figures are for 2007-08, a season that would have included high earners like Dimitar Berbatov, Darren Bent (who was rumoured to be one of the best paid players in English football when he signed for us) and Paul Robinson among others...or do you think clubs only increase their wage bill and don't manage to decrease it at any stage by selling on players?

For the record, the most recent yearly accounts released by Spurs show wages of c. £53.5m and another £6m in national insurance contributions, I have no idea what figures the Guardian use for their roundup, whether they include NI payments in their totals or not:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/table/2009/jun/03/premier-league-turnover-wages-debt

flahavaj

I always find it funny how people blame managers for spending money thats given to them, or for the wages that player are given. Managers are ALWAYS going to try and get the best players in that they possibly can, why wouldn't they? Its the people that give them money they don't have to spend or pay wages that the clubs that can barely afford are the problem, not the managers.

therecklessone

flahavaj wrote: »

I always find it funny how people blame managers for spending money thats given to them, or for the wages that player are given.

Do you know what I find funny?

Being told we paid over the odds for the likes of David Bentley and Darren Bent, then when we finally get things right being told it's the least we could do considering what we spent...

cson

It's a remarkable turnaround to be fair to Harry, and with a bit of shrewd dealing Spurs should be challenging for the Premiership next season. They've got a very, very good squad. Good luck to them.

flahavaj

therecklessone wrote: »

Do you know what I find funny?

Being told we paid over the odds for the likes of David Bentley and Darren Bent, then when we finally get things right being told it's the least we could do considering what we spent...

Welcome to the big time. Everyone's gonna hate ye now.:pac:

leninbenjamin

therecklessone wrote: »

I don't think they are semantics, but I've checked the coefficients...have you? I don't think the qualifiers will be a push over, but they are the Champions League the same way they were when Arsenal played in them last season.

I have no idea how the coefficients work, all i know is that Spurs most likely wont be in the top seeds and thus could face a very difficult tie or two.

Secondly, I think you'll find they've been called the "Champions League qualifiers" since the competition was renamed. And if I remember, quite a lot of people here and in the media expected Celtic to beat what was labeled a 'weakened' Arsenal in August.

therecklessone wrote: »

Nobody is conducting an assessment of Redknapp's entire career, I believe the OP was commenting on this season and this season only.

And I was merely pointing out that it wasn't the 'most stunning achievement' that the OP stated, that was until you came in and started calling everyone "small minded" and "bitter".

flahavaj wrote: »

I always find it funny how people blame managers for spending money thats given to them

At the end of the day the football manager is and always has been running a business. He has to ensure that the money he spends brings some sort of a tangible return to the club. Thus, spending will always be used as part of the barometer of the managers success.

therecklessone

therecklessone wrote: »

For the record, the most recent yearly accounts released by Spurs show wages of c. £53.5m and another £6m in national insurance contributions, I have no idea what figures the Guardian use for their roundup, whether they include NI payments in their totals or not:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/table/2009/jun/03/premier-league-turnover-wages-debt

I know the answer to this, the Guardian figures include both salary and NI, meaning a £6.5m increase in wage costs.

I now look forward to the publication of a similar league table this summer for comparison with other clubs.

flahavaj

leninbenjamin wrote: »

At the end of the day the football manager is and always has been running a business. He has to ensure that the money he spends brings some sort of a tangible return to the club. Thus, spending will always be used as part of the barometer of the managers success.

Thats fine. I just don't see why managers get the blame when clubs get into financial trouble though. They're only spending what has been given them by the higher ups at the club.

MementoMori

therecklessone wrote: »

I've made the point elsewhere that Harry Redknapp does not do the financial negotiations at Tottenham, and anyone who thinks that Daniel Levy is as naive as Peter Storrie really is a fool.

That is why Spurs have pulled out of the running for many of Redknapp's targets since he came to the club, Levy will not pay the transfer fees or wages demanded by clubs/players.

You talk about historic figures, the Guardian's figures are for 2007-08, a season that would have included high earners like Dimitar Berbatov, Darren Bent (who was rumoured to be one of the best paid players in English football when he signed for us) and Paul Robinson among others...or do you think clubs only increase their wage bill and don't manage to decrease it at any stage by selling on players?

For the record, the most recent yearly accounts released by Spurs show wages of c. £53.5m and another £6m in national insurance contributions, I have no idea what figures the Guardian use for their roundup, whether they include NI payments in their totals or not:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/table/2009/jun/03/premier-league-turnover-wages-debt

I have no problem with Spurs spending their money but I just think that to suggest that the amount of money spent on wages and players doesn't have a massive impact on the final leagues places is just deluded.

This is part of the reason why I am pleased that Spurs did get 4th this season as I expect City to spend in the summer and the summer after and so on until the Arabs get bored.

On page 47 of the 2009 annual report (note 7) the total for the year up until June 30 2008 was £52.9m which matches the amount in the Guardian report. Basically the Guardian report is related to wages two seasons ago. The fgure of £52.9m is the total wage figure up to June 30 2008. The figure for the year up until June 30 2009 (last season) is £60.5m which is a jump of 14% in wage cost between the 2008 and 2009 season. Given the transfer activity since then I would be very surprised if this figure didn't rise further for the 2010 season.

cson

flahavaj wrote: »

Thats fine. I just don't see why managers get the blame when clubs get into financial trouble though. They're only spending what has been given them by the higher ups at the club.

Relatively speaking it's linked; manager spends €x on player Y -> player Y doesn't perform -> team doesn't perform -> club faces financial difficulty due the combination of the previous.

It's correlated in the sense that generally speaking; the more money you have the less value you seek. Expensive buys that don't work out end up costing the club and it'd be generally the opinion of the manager that would result in the money being spent.

It'd be like absolving your bank manager of any bad loans he gave just because the powers that be gave him the money to lend.... actually... wait a second... :pac:

leninbenjamin

flahavaj wrote: »

Thats fine. I just don't see why managers get the blame when clubs get into financial trouble though. They're only spending what has been given them by the higher ups at the club.

Well, it's not exactly clear cut in every case, but generally speaking it's the guy in charge of the team's job to convince the guy in charge of the money that said money is going to reap some specified return on the pitch. Then the guy in charge of the money has to determine whether the on the field return will result in a tangible off field return.

It's not clear to what extent of control Harry had over wages and transfer fees yet, but without being the root cause he still had some level of responsibility. After all Utaka and co. were bought on his recommendation so he had some level of input into the club's valuation of them.

edit: cson has it.

therecklessone

leninbenjamin wrote: »

I have no idea how the coefficients work, all i know is that Spurs most likely wont be in the top seeds and thus could face a very difficult tie or two.

Seriously, wtf?

http://www.xs4all.nl/~kassiesa/bert/uefa/data/method4/trank2010.html

Based on current league standing the 10 sides will comprise of:

Sevilla (Mallorca could possibly take 4th, and be pushed down to 5th)
Bremen
Spurs 30th
Sampdoria
Auxerre (possibly Lyon who have a game in hand, and would jump to 2nd place)

In order of coefficients.

Plus the winners of the 5 ties in the 3rd round consisting of:

Zenit ranked 26th
2nd in the Romanian league (nobody high enough)
2nd in Portugal, most likely Braga (ranked outside top 30)
2nd in Holland , Ajax ranked 32nd
2nd in Scotland, Celtic ranked 53rd
2nd in Turkey, currently Bursapor but no Turkish side in top 30
2nd in Ukraine, Dynamo Kiev ranked 44
2nd in Belguim, Brugges ranked 57th
2nd in Greece, Olympiakos ranked 33rd
2nd in Czech Republic, no team in top 30

So in all likelihood, we would be one of the seeded teams.

leninbenjamin wrote: »

And I was merely pointing out that it wasn't the 'most stunning achievement' that the OP stated, that was until you came in and started calling everyone "small minded" and "bitter".

I didn't call everybody bitter, if you read my 2nd post you'll see I agreed with your central point, and referenced similar achievements by managers to those you chose yourself.

Fratton Fred

I would say well done Arry, but tbh, I would rather cut off my testicles and let's face it, he will patting himself on the back enough as it is.

Well done Spurs though, I am excira and delira for you. You only have to look at the reaction of the fans to see what it means.

Shame about the FA cup though!!

Soby

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOgTCbz-XmU

Hopefully he will cheer up now :P

leninbenjamin

therecklessone wrote: »

Seriously, wtf?

So in all likelihood, we would be one of the seeded teams.

My bad. I thought Italy and Germany had swapped a place, that AC would be put into the qualifiers instead of Sampdoria.

therecklessone wrote: »

I didn't call everybody bitter, if you read my 2nd post you'll see I agreed with your central point, and referenced similar achievements by managers to those you chose yourself.

At this stage I don't really care tbh, I just hate that type of posting. The problem on these forums is not the general small mindedness, it's posters who take the banter it produces far too seriously.