Opinion: Is Tottenham failing or not - Is the loss at Inter a further symptom of malaise?

I'm not a Spurs fan - hardly, I'm a Gooner.

But I can be objective when warranted. And I think it is in Tottenham's instance.

They've lost lately two PL games - vs. Liverpool and Watford respectively. And very recently, lost their opening Champions League game to Inter.

And despite having several seasons of being the "nearly" men, I believe they have been close to winning something. This can be galling for Spurs fans, but then this is the best Spurs team we've seen in some time. The last Tottenham team to consistently finish near the top of the table was in the mid-1980s - with stars such as Hoddle, Waddle, Ardiles, and Clive Allen.

But the latest defeat to Inter followed an all familiar pattern:

Tottenham played well overall
Some key lapses cost them a win
A continued narrative of them being "bottlers" and "lacking the gumption" arises
This narrative has existed for several years, and even before Pochettino became the manager in 2014

So is Tottenham in crisis, both on and off the pitch?

Despite their comparative improvement on the field, it seems that they are in a mire at the moment.

They didn't sign anybody in the transfer window. And their new ground won't be finished on time nor budget. Lauded CEO/MD Daniel Levy, who has turned Spurs from underachievers to Champions League regulars and PL top four contenders, has come under much criticism for the handling of the new stadium. Issues such as stadium naming rights, access to Tottenham High Road (the main London road directly adjacent to the old and new grounds), and season ticket distribution, have all seen the club under fire.

Moreover, Harry Kane has not been performing well since the start of the season. Yes, he did exceptionally well at the World Cup, winning the Golden Boot. However, there have been claims that he is tired and not fully engaged. If true or not, losing a double PL Golden Boot winner is not good at this point.

These negatives must be placed in context though. Spurs holistically are in a strong place - with a rated manager, a new ground in the offing, many world class players, and the ability to compete at the highest level. Compared to 10, or 20, years ago this is immense progress.

Is it a failure, or just a hiccup?

Pochettino

Mauricio Pochettino hasn't won anything as a manager before - and this is a continuous stick rivals use to beat him with.

But if this is indeed a failure, then the Liverpool and Inter games are examples.

Another criticism of Poch is that Spurs don't have a plan B. If they are under trouble, then they cannot resort to another playing style or tactical base.

Liverpool exploited this to their cost.

And Inter managed to up the game in the latter stages since it was pretty dominant from Spurs up until then.

So whilst the players must take some responsibility, the manager (Poch of course) has to take the ultimate responsibility. Players don't formulate tactical plans - managers and coaches do. If Spurs lack a plan B, then he has to be called out, not Kane, Alli, Alderweireld, Lloris, Son, or Eriksen.

Pochettino is a top manager, no doubt. But this is an evident failing and something that he needs to correct, for his own sake/reputation if anything.

STADIUM WOES

Tottenham has needed a new stadium for some time since the old White Hart Lane was 36,000 in capacity. This was some way behind other top clubs, and many others have either built or increased stadium capacities in the past 20 years.

But despite the need for a new ground, how Spurs has handled this development has been atrocious.

Could this have an effect on the team or fans? It's very possible. A large number of fans have been given poor season ticket allocations, and the nature of the new ground is still moot. There is to date no scheduled opening date, and for the League Cup, they requested their "home" game be played at MK Dons in Milton Keynes. For those who don't know Britain well, Milton Keynes is a large town about 40 miles north of London. So players, coaches, and fans need to travel this distance for a "home" game. Wembley is at least in Greater London, like Tottenham's old and new ground are. But MK Dons certainly isn't (it's in Buckinghamshire incidentally...)

Players are only human, and the unintended disruption may be having an effect on the team. They may publicly deny this, but it may be a private concern, who knows?

STAGNATION - AND NEW COMPETITION?

The new ground has been in the offing for a while.

But whilst the extra revenues are key, there is a limit as to what they can play players.

Kane is their highest paid player, at reportedly £200k a week.

This, albeit for a proven world class striker, is some way below what other world class players earn. In the PL alone, Sanchez, Ozil, Pogba, etc. earn more.

Tottenham's model is similar to their "friends" Arsenal, in that it's not based on cash injections or intra-business loans like Chelsea. So they need a new stadium, and associated commercial dealings, to compete. Only once the stadium has kicked in, will they be able to spend big.

However, once this happens, their rivals may have surpassed or caught them up.

Arsenal, which has not been as well run as Spurs of late, is changing. Ivan Gazidis is leaving for AC Milan, but Raul Sanhelli is a proven appointment with experience from Barca. Emery is a talented coach, who brings the skills/traits Arsenal need in the contemporary era. The club's commercial dealings, despite recent failings, are also boosting revenues (,e.g. the Visit Rwanda sleeve sponsorship is the country's biggest ever deal of that type).

Liverpool is progressing, as are City, Chelsea, and United. United have issues with Mourinho, but it's unlikely to assume they will be subdued forever.

So let's say it takes three to four years for the stadium to bear fruit. Arsenal could have emerged from their post-Wenger slump by then. City could still be dominant, and United may have won a league, who knows? Liverpool and Chelsea would still be contenders, and maybe Everton with their new monies may compete. Wolves are another potential long-term contender, with new and ambitious owners.

So this current time is a precarious one for Tottenham - and the stadium delays only worsen and complicate things.

FAILURE OR NOT?

It's probably not a failure.

Yes, things are not good at the moment.

But:

They're very strong holistically
No Tottenham team has finished consistently in the top end since the mid-1980s
Pochettino despite not winning anything as a manager, is a lauded coach
The new ground, once done, will be world-class
Their revenues will match those of Arsenal, Chelsea, and Liverpool very soon

So it's not all bad.

However, there are issues that are holding the club back. It's wrong to say Poch should get sacked - who else can or will come in with the current financial restraints? Conte is free, and is a PL champion of course with Chelsea. But I doubt he'd flourish in this environment. Wenger is free - but we know him being Spurs manager won't fly - for self-evident reasons...

It could improve, but possibly being melodramatic is apparent here.

Spurs need to:

get their stadium built as readily as possible
sustain top four
get top players to compete
withstand the competition from a potentially resurgent Arsenal, Chelsea, and Man United
do their best to handle Liverpool and Man City

These are all the key points they can do to sustain their position.

If anything, getting the stadium ready is the critical point, and from there, things can follow.

Edited by Victor R. Lopez M.