Destined for Success: Spurs' 5 year trajectory

A look at Spurs’ 5 year prospects

To gain an idea of Spurs’ 5 year trajectory, let’s look at 7 key factors that could influence a club’s fortunes over this time period. Those factors are: transfer policy, academy, ability of current squad, age profile of current squad, current manager, future managerial prospects, and finances. These factors have been chosen purely subjectively, and some may have more influence than others. More detail will be given under each heading.

With all of these considered, my conclusion is: Spurs are set to be a top four presence in the coming years, with a title challenge a possibility.

Transfer Policy

Here, we’ll primarily do a bit of a retrospective in terms of recent signings. The aim will be to see if the transfer policy or strategy has been successful and coherent. Successful meaning the players have become key players in the starting eleven (or squad if that was clearly their intended role). And coherent meaning the players were signed to suit a certain style, or with certain age profiles that match the objectives of the team.

Let’s look at the last two years of transfers. Courtesy of transfermarkt.co.uk here are the 22/23 transfers arrivals for Spurs.

Overall, I think this is a pretty decent window. The big successes being: Romero, Udogie and Porro (Kulusevski can be added as he was a loan in this year, later to become permanent). The big blemish here would be Richarlison, for me. I didn’t and still don’t really rate him. Static presence and I wouldn’t say is elite in any key facet of being a striker. That is to say: not good enough for a team aiming for top 4 in the most competitive league in world football. I suppose the misstep came about due to a panic over pre-emptively replacing Harry Kane, who eventually left a year later. He has played a role for Ange, but I think there are better options in the squad and that will bear out in the coming seasons. €58m is a massive overpay.

Now for 23/24.

This is an excellent window. I don’t think there is a single miss here. Dragusin hasn’t had the chance to prove himself yet, so that is quite a neutral one. The rest have either been big successes or solid acquisitions. Brennan Johnson was expensive, but you’d have to say has ended up being a regular starter.

Also worth mentioning are the two transfers at the time of writing: Archie Gray and Lucas Bergvall. These are signings for the future, but represent very good value based on their reputations as future stars. Having caught some of Gray for Leeds, he already looks at home in men’s football and is on a path right to the top.

Perhaps outside of the scope of this article, but briefly: my only worry with Gray is that he becomes a jack of all trades and doesn’t nail down a position. This could harm his development if he doesn’t have focus in terms of skills to develop. I think at least to start with, he should stick to one position. I’m interested to see if this happens, and what position is chosen for him if it does (basically right back or midfield).

In terms of coherence, I think we can say that - especially since Ange has arrived - the transfers have had good coherence. The players largely suit a high-line front foot style, with wingers that are functional box threats rather than touchline dribblers. These two things seem to be big parts of the Ange style, with the second one being more uniquely Ange.

Johnson and Werner are the clearest examples of this. Johnson had 10 assists last season, and almost all of them were low cut-backs. He didn’t use great skill or guile to beat his man, he basically tapped it past his defender and used his extreme acceleration to get the job done. Functional.

The only potential worries would be in the case that this style gets “found out”, or if Ange is replaced with a manager who does not favour the same characteristics in his players. This remains to be seen, but if Ange leaves for whatever reason will be something to look out for.

My final consideration is the negotiation skills of the club. Here, Daniel Levy gets top rating: he is known for extracting maximum value from player exits, and on the evidence of the transfer costs above generally buys players for at or below market value. Basically, he drives a hard bargain either way.

Overall, Spurs’ transfer policy gets an A (on a scale from A+ down to D).

Academy

Spurs are known for having a top class Academy.

Looking at the current squad that might not be evident, with only Skipp being an academy player with any real game time. But let’s not forget the €90m man that left last year, Harry Kane: arguably Spurs’ greatest academy graduate. Still, only one academy player is likely a big disappointment for Spurs.

Looking ahead, however, there are very promising signs. Mikey Moore, Jamie Donley, Alfie Dorrington would be some key names. I am not considering Dane Scarlett and Alfie Devine as being of the same calibre, who are slightly older and would in theory be in line for promotion to the premier league squad soon, although they are still good players and indicative of the solid track record of the Spurs academy. Another player worth mentioning is Marcus Edwards, currently of Sporting CP in Portugal, who showed some flashes of brilliance in Europe recently.

Mikey Moore is worth a paragraph of his own. His technical brilliance and maturity in terms of end product is staggering. If you get the chance, watch some highlights. He put on a show at the recent U17s Euros. Pace and power would be his weak points, which is perhaps a worry for the premier league. On the other hand, it could be argued that his profile makes him resistant to injuries, which we have seen affecting players like Ansu Fati and Callum Hudson-Odoi. Finally, I am not sure how he fits in to Ange’s preferred profiles. In particular, I don’t think he fits in at left wing. A star of the future though, for sure.

The academy gets an A+ for me, although this is based on reputation and the unrealised potential of a select few. And Harry Kane.

Ability of current squad

This is where Spurs are potentially quite weak, although this will be weighted on the lower side given the longer time frame in consideration here.

Starting with the ‘keeper, I would rate Vicario as good but with his true level still unconfirmed. According to fbref.com, he conceded 58 goals (not including own goals) from a post-shot xG of 60 in the 23/24 premier league season, which places him 8th out of 40 amongst all ‘keepers that played. This is solid, but keeper stats can be prone to good and bad form more than other advanced stats in my experience.

Looking at the defence, I think we can be a bit more positive. A starting back 4 of Porro, Romero, van de Ven and Udogie is excellent and very well matched to Ange’s tactics. Dragusin aside, though, I worry about the depth. This can be said of the whole defence if we include Vicario. As we’re specifying ability of squad this has to be considered.

The midfield is also quite good. Bentancur and Matar Sarr is top class depth for the more box-to-box of the midfield three. Maddison and Kulusevski is again excellent for the attacking midfielder, while Kulu will also play on the right wing sometimes. The weak point would be in defensive midfield. Bissouma and Hojbjerg have intermittently put in good displays, but neither are of the calibre of the others mentioned. Neither are they comparable to Rice, Rodri, or even Caicedo and Lavia in my opinion.

In terms of attackers, there are solid but not spectacular talents, although they are very good fits for Ange. Since we’re talking current ability, we can say that Son is still elite. He should play as striker though: the younger prospects aren’t ready, and Richarlison is not good enough now and not worth investing minutes in for the future. Johnson and Werner are good players but not special by any means. The replacements behind the three mentioned are good to middling. Kulusevski is a good replacement on the right wing, as long as he isn’t replacing Maddison in midfield. This is especially pertinent given Maddison’s recent injury history, which should be considered when evaluating ability. Manor Solomon is not a great player, and I’ll assume Bryan Gil will be moved on but is not a good fit in any case.

Overall, current squad gets a B. This is largely a depth issue, which could be remedied in the coming months.

Age profile of current squad

Here, we’ll use a little data viz. This was inspired (heavily) by the style used by The Athletic. See this article for an example, as well as the source for the ‘peak age’ figures. And please reuse the code here if you would like: my notebook. The list of players was taken primarily from transfermarkt, with a few of the academy players added manually based on names I am aware of.

The main thing that stands out is the number of players in the pre-peak age area. It could be argued that I have skewed this chart by manually adding players that should not be considered part of the current squad, but I am reasonably confident based on the excitement I have seen elsewhere and limited clips available.

The age profiles of the squad are not perfectly aligned to peak together, so some additional transfers will of course be required, but largely I think the balance makes sense. Especially considering how new Ange is to the club, it makes sense to protect the club’s short to medium term future with some players that are currently in their peak years.

A core of Vicario, van de Ven, Udogie, Matar Sarr, Gray, Moore, Kulusevski and Johnson is very good and will probably all reach their prime in 3-5 years. Moore and Gray would appear to be on the younger age given the peak age boxes defined, but I would consider both to be part of the future of English talent and potential faces of Spurs and England for years to come. They will be ready ‘early’.

A

Current Manager

I’m very high on Ange Postecoglou and rate pretty much everything about him.

Tactically, it is a huge plus for me that he has a defined style and sticks to it. Especially in league football with long term horizons, there are major advantages over utilising a more win-now tactic. Arteta did well playing a style far removed from what the current Arsenal squad employs, but did so with an ageing squad that we can assume he knew would mostly be replaced. Ange has a younger squad that he must ensure learn good principles right from the start.

Personality wise, he gets top marks. Down-to-earth and personable in a manner that Pep and Arteta are not, I believe this will enamour him to players and lead to good development. It also bodes well for the length of his tenure, as he is less likely to clash with the press, media or ownership (as someone like De Zerbi or Tuchel is). All of this is positive for the club as a whole, due to the stability that is likely.

I would also say he has shown good talent identification. At Celtic he platformed fantastic talent, particularly relatively unknown Japanese players (who he personally identified from his time in Japan). And those transfers at Spurs that seem especially Ange-approved, namely Johnson and Werner, have also performed well thus far. His talent ID shouldn’t be too important in a modern director of football-led framework, but he will still have some say.

A

Future Managerial Prospects

Pretty good.

I think Levy can be trusted to choose a good successor if necessary. Whilst the Mourinho and Conte appointments did not work out, they were both great coups. And ignoring the brief Nuno diversion, Ange and Poch have been very good. Both were quite left-field at the time, and Pochettino especially was inspired and not at all obvious.

Levy should not be necessary, though. As previously mentioned, there is no obvious reason that Ange might be sacked, results aside. And, in terms of other offers of employment, I don’t think Ange would leave the project at this stage, especially given the glut of talent that he has the chance to work with and improve.

A

Finances

Another ‘weakness’. With the most respect given to Spurs and the size of the club, they do not have owners with as deep pockets as others in the premier league. Therefore, purely when comparing against other clubs they are competing with, I cannot give them a top rating.

(Their hope would be that PSR etc. means clubs are limited by their commercial revenue, levelling the playing field somewhat especially with the new stadium.)

B

Overall

Considering everything above, Spurs are in a very good position if we look at the next 5 years. Especially toward the end of that period, in 3-5 years, the squad could look quite scary and capable of big things. It is a very exciting project, and one that I expect other young players will be looking to join.

Transfer policy, squad and manager are all aligned. This confluence of factors should enable at least top four for 3 of the next 5 years, and I will be bold and predict one title-challenging season at least. Considering the strength of competition in the league currently this is a lofty expectation, but I think they are one club with a very clear path to at least moderate success. Others, that might be covered later, have more variance in their possibilities - they could succeed in a big way or fail spectacularly.

Overall rating: A. Top four is all but guaranteed in the coming years, and possibly more.