The legacy of Martin O'Neill

[KevinGage]

Look at the amount of times Levy has said 'no' to 'arry this summer.

Even with CL qualification on the line, he didn't give him carte blanche to spend, spend, spend. He's well known in the industry to be an absolute bastard to deal with. It doesn't take a huge leap of faith to think that his approach to players wage negotiations is similar.

[hilts_coolerking]

The important thing is that it clearly illustrates that the two figures are not a like for like comparison. You might also want to ask why we have 445 full-time employees and Spurs have only 286.

Have you actually got any proof that Spurs spend more on player wages than we do?  I mean actual proof, as opposed to speculation and innuendo?

[Dave Cooper please]

All this just because some people just can't accept that old melted candle face has proved to be a better manager than Martin O'Neill!

I know it hurts, and I can't stand the tax dodging twunt either, but fourth place and playing in the CL group stages tomorrow night tells me I'll just have to bite the bullet on this one.

[Risso]

If it suited them, £20m+ of that £119.3m could have been signing on fees, which are then amortised of the length of the players contract and wouldn't be reflected in "staff costs". Are you able to understand that?

If you look at the Spurs accounts, you'll find that the total amortisation charge is £38.1m.  Of this, actual amortisation of contracts is £37.3m.  Leaving a whopping £800K for the write off of signing on fees etc, so again, you're barking up the wrong tree there.

As to total costs, well, the admin costs for Villa are as a whole were £105m, of which staff costs were £70.5m.  Total admin costs for Spurs are £95m, of which £60.5m are staff costs.  It all seems quite reasonable when you look at those figures.  There's nothing you can reliably point out to at all that states that the total players costs for Spurs were higher than Villa's, nothing whatsoever.  Even if £10m of Spurs £30m other admin costs were image rights payments, and even if Villa paid nothing at all for image rights, they'd still just be on a par with us.

[Ger Regan]

The important thing is that it clearly illustrates that the two figures are not a like for like comparison. You might also want to ask why we have 445 full-time employees and Spurs have only 286.

Once could reasonably assume that all the highest earners (ie players, board) are included in spurs 286. The shortfall would most certainly be low paid jobs that would, at best, amount to a yearly salary of an average player's weekly wage.

[Reality]

Harry is of course a very good manager, but it usually comes with a very high price.

[PeterWithe]

Their top earners make the same as ours for example. Guys like Bale, Modric and Huddlestone will be on small wages as they have come in from lesser leagues

Found this from last month, (what has happened to the 'quote' options by the way?)

Tottenham Hotspur star Luca Modric has stated he is embarrassed that he earns £70,000 a week at White Hart Lane.

The 24-year-old midfield dynamo penned a new six-year contract extension in May to become the club's highest paid player, but admits he has been left red-faced after his annual salary was leaked to the papers.

[TheSandman]

Yes but as my post was on the figures in the accounts... At that time he was on £25K allegedly.

It will be the same with us for Ashley Young... Coming in from Watford he will have earned less but if he signs a new contract he will be on a similar figure. It was something that should have been clearer in my initial post as I believe all three players in my example have recently got new contracts. The fact remains that they probably earned less than say Habib Beye or Nicky Shorey when they first joined.

[Villa'Zawg]

If it suited them, £20m+ of that £119.3m could have been signing on fees, which are then amortised of the length of the players contract and wouldn't be reflected in "staff costs". Are you able to understand that?

If you look at the Spurs accounts, you'll find that the total amortisation charge is £38.1m.  Of this, actual amortisation of contracts is £37.3m.  Leaving a whopping £800K for the write off of signing on fees etc, so again, you're barking up the wrong tree there.

As to total costs, well, the admin costs for Villa are as a whole were £105m, of which staff costs were £70.5m.  Total admin costs for Spurs are £95m, of which £60.5m are staff costs.  It all seems quite reasonable when you look at those figures.  There's nothing you can reliably point out to at all that states that the total players costs for Spurs were higher than Villa's, nothing whatsoever.  Even if £10m of Spurs £30m other admin costs were image rights payments, and even if Villa paid nothing at all for image rights, they'd still just be on a par with us.

Why couldn't they include the signing-on fee as part of the overall player acquisition cost and include it in the £37.3m? If they were giving a player like Modric a £2m signing on fee couldn't they just agree a contract with "modric ltd", and pay it on a straight-line basis over the term of his initial contract? 

[KevinGage]

All this just because some people just can't accept that old melted candle face has proved to be a better manager than Martin O'Neill!

I know it hurts, and I can't stand the tax dodging twunt either, but fourth place and playing in the CL group stages tomorrow night tells me I'll just have to bite the bullet on this one.

What was it a LC final in his first (half) season and an FA Cup semi in his second too? So matching and then bettering (with 4th place) MON's achievements in half the time.

Aye, he's clearly all talk.

[Chris Smith]

If Spurs have a bigger squad than us and pay less in player wages then our chairman is an idiot. I don't believe that Randy Lerner is an idiot.

[hilts_coolerking]

If Spurs have a bigger squad than us and pay less in player wages then our chairman is an idiot. I don't believe that Randy Lerner is an idiot.

Or maybe Spurs just have a shrewder Chairman.

I'm afraid your personal opinion of Randy has zero bearing on the accuracy of Spurs' accounts.

[KevinGage]

Their top earners make the same as ours for example. Guys like Bale, Modric and Huddlestone will be on small wages as they have come in from lesser leagues

Found this from last month, (what has happened to the 'quote' options by the way?)

Tottenham Hotspur star Luca Modric has stated he is embarrassed that he earns £70,000 a week at White Hart Lane.

The 24-year-old midfield dynamo penned a new six-year contract extension in May to become the club's highest paid player, but admits he has been left red-faced after his annual salary was leaked to the papers.

Good find.

The thing is, if Spurs wage bill actually exceeds Villa's for this or the next financial year (and I'd say there is every chance it will) they will be in a better position to sustain it.

There income was greater than ours  even with their lower wage bill.

[hilts_coolerking]

Why couldn't they include the signing-on fee as part of the overall player acquisition cost and include it in the £37.3m? If they were giving a player like Modric a £2m signing on fee couldn't they just agree a contract with "modric ltd", and pay it on a straight-line basis over the term of his initial contract?

Again, have you actually got any proof that this is what they are doing?

[supertom]

Baseball mit face inherited a much better squad than the barmy leprechaun. That said, Redknapp is an excellent manager, and I'd take him, dodgy dealings and all, over O Neill any day of the week. Better football for starters.