25-26 is still a young team to be honest.
I think the fact most of the players are under 28, leaves the expectations of improvement. Which is probably quite exciting given they are not a million miles away from a title winning team.
I'm pretty sure Spurs are still one of the youngest in the league, along with Liverpool.
So while they might not be particularly young, they are still young compared to everyone else.
Once you have guys 25/26 with 100 epl games they are probably players who are not to be underestimated.
Yep as others said, it's a comparison thing
Spurs are statically the youngest side in the league. This is mathematics. I understand Chelsea fans might not understand this.
Chelsea have spent 1 billion pounds on player transfers since 2003.
Chelsea as an entire club were previously worth £1.00 in total.
Chelsea fans repeatedly tell me they have always been a big historic club.
Your aptly named, the star wars jar jar talks a load of crap as well.
Like i said they ain't called Sours for nothing hahaa
comment by jar jar winks (U21185)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs are statically the youngest side in the league. This is mathematics. I understand Chelsea fans might not understand this.
Chelsea have spent 1 billion pounds on player transfers since 2003.
Chelsea as an entire club were previously worth £1.00 in total.
Chelsea fans repeatedly tell me they have always been a big historic club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have a point re money to be fair. Its impossible to compete against clubs who spend more money. That's why Atletico and Leicester couldn't win the league and can't make a good fist of CL footy
comment by Returning managers (U1762)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by jar jar winks (U21185)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs are statically the youngest side in the league. This is mathematics. I understand Chelsea fans might not understand this.
Chelsea have spent 1 billion pounds on player transfers since 2003.
Chelsea as an entire club were previously worth £1.00 in total.
Chelsea fans repeatedly tell me they have always been a big historic club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have a point re money to be fair. Its impossible to compete against clubs who spend more money. That's why Atletico and Leicester couldn't win the league and can't make a good fist of CL footy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't humour them, they couldn't win it when they had money so of course they are bitter when others do.
I do more reading that commenting here and this is because there are a lot of stupid people here that can't argue logically always trying to WUM.
there are a lot of stupid people here
____
Yes, most of them are from the Spurs board.
I have never commented on any other board other than here. I see no need for it. Their team will be playing any they will be here commenting.
I comment sometimes on the Sours board to point out their stupidity. It's a full time job to be honest.
Talking about how Chelsea was worth £1, he obviously doesn't have a clue of how business works. And if we have spent a lot of money on players only a fool will say we haven't got the returns.
Yes. Stupidity. But they're a dime a dozen over on that board.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
They're not known stupid sours for no reasons
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
No guys...
Forget the money....
Spurs are the youngest team, in terms of mathematics.
I know taxi drivers and such have a "gut feeling" about such things. But I'm just speaking statically. I can't do do anything about the ignorance of mockneys.
Much like i can't revise history to pretend Chelsea were once purchased for £1.00.
comment by jar jar winks (U21185)
posted 37 seconds ago
No guys...
Forget the money....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation: now someone has shown me example's of winning teams with a smaller budget than Spurs i am comically backtracking.
Sign in if you want to comment
Spurs's young team?
Page 1 of 3
posted on 30/4/17
25-26 is still a young team to be honest.
posted on 30/4/17
I think the fact most of the players are under 28, leaves the expectations of improvement. Which is probably quite exciting given they are not a million miles away from a title winning team.
posted on 30/4/17
I'm pretty sure Spurs are still one of the youngest in the league, along with Liverpool.
So while they might not be particularly young, they are still young compared to everyone else.
posted on 30/4/17
Once you have guys 25/26 with 100 epl games they are probably players who are not to be underestimated.
posted on 30/4/17
Yep as others said, it's a comparison thing
posted on 30/4/17
Spurs are statically the youngest side in the league. This is mathematics. I understand Chelsea fans might not understand this.
Chelsea have spent 1 billion pounds on player transfers since 2003.
Chelsea as an entire club were previously worth £1.00 in total.
Chelsea fans repeatedly tell me they have always been a big historic club.
posted on 30/4/17
Your aptly named, the star wars jar jar talks a load of crap as well.
posted on 30/4/17
Haha
posted on 30/4/17
Like i said they ain't called Sours for nothing hahaa
posted on 30/4/17
Lo!
posted on 30/4/17
comment by jar jar winks (U21185)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs are statically the youngest side in the league. This is mathematics. I understand Chelsea fans might not understand this.
Chelsea have spent 1 billion pounds on player transfers since 2003.
Chelsea as an entire club were previously worth £1.00 in total.
Chelsea fans repeatedly tell me they have always been a big historic club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have a point re money to be fair. Its impossible to compete against clubs who spend more money. That's why Atletico and Leicester couldn't win the league and can't make a good fist of CL footy
posted on 30/4/17
comment by Returning managers (U1762)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by jar jar winks (U21185)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs are statically the youngest side in the league. This is mathematics. I understand Chelsea fans might not understand this.
Chelsea have spent 1 billion pounds on player transfers since 2003.
Chelsea as an entire club were previously worth £1.00 in total.
Chelsea fans repeatedly tell me they have always been a big historic club.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You have a point re money to be fair. Its impossible to compete against clubs who spend more money. That's why Atletico and Leicester couldn't win the league and can't make a good fist of CL footy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't humour them, they couldn't win it when they had money so of course they are bitter when others do.
posted on 30/4/17
I do more reading that commenting here and this is because there are a lot of stupid people here that can't argue logically always trying to WUM.
posted on 30/4/17
there are a lot of stupid people here
____
Yes, most of them are from the Spurs board.
posted on 30/4/17
Haha
posted on 30/4/17
I have never commented on any other board other than here. I see no need for it. Their team will be playing any they will be here commenting.
posted on 30/4/17
I comment sometimes on the Sours board to point out their stupidity. It's a full time job to be honest.
posted on 30/4/17
Talking about how Chelsea was worth £1, he obviously doesn't have a clue of how business works. And if we have spent a lot of money on players only a fool will say we haven't got the returns.
posted on 30/4/17
Yes. Stupidity. But they're a dime a dozen over on that board.
posted on 30/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/4/17
They're not known stupid sours for no reasons
posted on 30/4/17
Bite
posted on 30/4/17
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/4/17
No guys...
Forget the money....
Spurs are the youngest team, in terms of mathematics.
I know taxi drivers and such have a "gut feeling" about such things. But I'm just speaking statically. I can't do do anything about the ignorance of mockneys.
Much like i can't revise history to pretend Chelsea were once purchased for £1.00.
posted on 30/4/17
comment by jar jar winks (U21185)
posted 37 seconds ago
No guys...
Forget the money....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation: now someone has shown me example's of winning teams with a smaller budget than Spurs i am comically backtracking.
Page 1 of 3