Daniel Levy - Former Chairman

[DubaiSpur]

I think we’ll be ok. The annoying thing about our CEO is that he used to run Arsenal. But for the purposes of this conversation, the good thing is that he used to run Arsenal. He isn’t coming fresh off a club with PSR breaches, he’s not joining from a place that took crazy risks for short term gain. He seems to have a sound head around how to act like a top club, and trust in a strategy over the mid term to ultimately lead to some success.

Besides. Look at something like the Sissoko deal. Who’s to say that he was worth that money at the time? Because Levy said so? What about all the players whose values we let plummet because we didn’t sell them at just past their peak? Was it the most financially prudent way to operate? Or had Levy’s MO of always wanting to be seen to ‘win’ every deal just outlived its usefulness, as the league had moved on and was playing a different game around him?

True, but with a caveat imo. Him running Arsenal is absolutely irrelevant to me. Kane was in their youth program for a wee bit as a kid, Gallagher's a Chelsea lad, and so on. As long as you're professional and keep your Goon connections to yourself when you're on the clock (and represent the club well when off it), it makes little difference these days.

What bothers me more is his reluctance, or inability, to read the room when things are going badly wrong. Keeping Frank for as long as he did because it worked with Arteta ignores the many environmental differences between the two situations. Trusting Lange as anything more than a glorified scout, even more so. Couple that with the unforced errors, like promising more communication, and then disappearing for months when the team was in the murk - or agreeing to do that tech conference talk about being CEO at Spurs when the team was desperately fighting against relegation. Hiring Tudor as an interim because he was on Paratici's 'break glass in case of emergency' sticky note, and then getting desperate and giving de Zerbi total control and a fat wage to join just a month later.

If it's true that Nick Beucher was the one who stepped in to get Frank sacked, it doesn't speak well of Vinai's ability to read the room - which should be one of the main survival traits for any leader.

I frankly think we're in a bit of an odd situation at the moment where it seems like the Lewis kids (or at least, Vivienne Lewis) genuinely want the club to act differently to how their dad let Levy run it (and by some accounts, Vivienne didn't like Levy, so it checks out). But they've put trust in Vinai and Lange to run that rebuild (and Charrington to hang around as their eye on things). And I'm not sure that will work out the way the Lewis kids think it will.

 

[K.D.D.D.D.Soc]

I think it's just one of those things you think or say after recently leaving or retiring from a job you've done for years.
When I retired I felt I'd done a good job and felt satisfied with what I'd achieved but as time went on I reflected on what I could have done better and the mistakes I'd made, you're so close to the job you don't always see the wood for the trees.

 

[glasgowspur]

I was asked to name clubs that have managed their finances responsibly while achieving greater success on the pitch, or those that have struck a better balance than us. Arsenal are a clear example. They haven’t always got everything right—ironically, they went through a similar phase to us now, with poor recruitment and an acceptance of top-four finishes rather than consistently pushing for the game’s biggest honours.

Yes phases, every club goes through them and they are also relative to what goes on around them.
Would arsenal have won the PL if city weren't rebuilding and Liverpool collapsed, Chelsea weren't a total basket case. Personally I can't see it.
Arsenal positioned themselves to take advantage, it's what we should be doing.
I can't think of a club that has managed thier resources more responsibly, and yes we have had success, not the level of success that we want but success in relation to our finances.
Chelsea were losing money at a rate that is just obscene.
City could buy our club lock, stock and barrel, close it down, pay out every contract we have and not miss the money.
You can't compete with that.

 

[glasgowspur]

Not every transfer is going to be a success. But it wasn’t a lack of ambition that held Liverpool back.

I never said it was.
There was 20 odd years between Liverpool and arsenals recent and historic titles.
Was that a lack of ambition?

 

[Mikey10]

I think we’ll be ok. The annoying thing about our CEO is that he used to run Arsenal. But for the purposes of this conversation, the good thing is that he used to run Arsenal. He isn’t coming fresh off a club with PSR breaches, he’s not joining from a place that took crazy risks for short term gain. He seems to have a sound head around how to act like a top club, and trust in a strategy over the mid term to ultimately lead to some success.

Agreed. Bottom line is we are not Leeds. We are a London based club with a massive worldwide support, a global brand and a state-of-the art stadium; not a club playing in a past-its-best ground in (relatively speaking) the back end of beyond, with a relatively small support that is almost entirely based around its home turf.

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

In comparison to Russian mafia and literally countries with money to burn we were Mr byrite.
Levy, for better or worse, ran the club on the finances the club had, not on the finances the supporters wanted him to.

Correct, it is also over looked that he was never a rich man himself, so was not using his own money but the money allocated to him. Much easier for the family who actually own the club to say "we will be spending more" than it is for the man tasked with running their company.

Also I think all of this talk always over looks where we came from at the time DL took the reigns to where we are now, all the arguments about ambition and success in the transfer market comes from a base he grew, raising expectations. There is no way in 2001 the same fans would have been arguing for parity with Arsenal, Liverpool, Bayern and Dortmund. And equally, I find people only ever compare us to clubs based on their hugely successful moments, not their bad.

For a club that has won 2 league titles in its life I do find some of this laughable, you can be ambitious, but also being realistic isn't the crime its made out to be. I went down a Hoddle rabbit hole the other day and it re-shocked me to realise we won 3 major trophies in his 12 years here, 3, all coming over 3 years, so for 9 years we did nothing, over a period fondly looked back with him and players as the "Glory Glory" times. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love him and that period too, but again, it wasn't exactly prolific success.

The guy made massive mistakes here, but he also most certainly raised the expectations of the fanbase which for me is a marker of his success.

 

[Jurgen the German]

I never said it was.
There was 20 odd years between Liverpool and arsenals recent and historic titles.
Was that a lack of ambition?

In Arsenal’s case, I think the answer is partly yes. Towards the latter years of Wenger’s reign, they often appeared comfortable with securing a top-four finish rather than genuinely challenging for the biggest honours. While remaining competitive, there was a sense that maintaining Champions League qualification had become the primary objective, rather than pushing to win league titles and major trophies.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Yes phases, every club goes through them and they are also relative to what goes on around them.
Would arsenal have won the PL if city weren't rebuilding and Liverpool collapsed, Chelsea weren't a total basket case. Personally I can't see it.
Arsenal positioned themselves to take advantage, it's what we should be doing.
I can't think of a club that has managed thier resources more responsibly, and yes we have had success, not the level of success that we want but success in relation to our finances.
Chelsea were losing money at a rate that is just obscene.
City could buy our club lock, stock and barrel, close it down, pay out every contract we have and not miss the money.
You can't compete with that.

Would we have finished second if United, Liverpool, and Arsenal had been run better during that period? Probably not. Managing resources responsibly is important, but ultimately it has to translate into success on the pitch. Financial prudence is commendable, but it cannot be the end goal in itself—the objective is to build a team capable of competing for and winning major honours.

 

[BigChiv9]

but we are potentially spunking 52m on a player who is inferior to what we already have

you can back your manager without letting them make stupid mistakes

Potentially almost any signing might turn out to be a bad decision. I don't think that Van Hecke is inferior to what we already have, especially if Romero goes. Potentially I could be wrong.

 

[Baleforce]

Potentially almost any signing might turn out to be a bad decision. I don't think that Van Hecke is inferior to what we already have, especially if Romero goes. Potentially I could be wrong.

Fair, but he’s nowhere near Danso, and seems to have similar issues to VDV but doesn’t have the pace.

I’d play Dragusin ahead of him too.

It’s a lot of money for someone who isn’t going straight into the team.

Just my opinion of course.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Fair, but he’s nowhere near Danso, and seems to have similar issues to VDV but doesn’t have the pace.

I’d play Dragusin ahead of him too.

It’s a lot of money for someone who isn’t going straight into the team.

Just my opinion of course.

Fair, but he’s nowhere near Danso, and seems to have similar issues to VDV but doesn’t have the pace.

I’d play Dragusin ahead of him too.

It’s a lot of money for someone who isn’t going straight into the team.

Just my opinion of course.

We’ve finished 17th twice in a row, and our defence has been a major part of the problem, along with the bargain-basement options we've relied on in attack. Over the last three Premier League campaigns, we have conceded 183 goals—61 in 2023/24, 65 in 2024/25, and 57 in 2025/26. That’s an average of more than 60 goals conceded per season.

Given those numbers, it’s hard to argue that any of our centre-backs are beyond improvement. Some are good players, but every one of them is upgradeable if the club is serious about building a team capable of competing at the top end of the table.

 

[Baleforce]

We’ve finished 17th twice in a row, and our defence has been a major part of the problem, along with the bargain-basement options we've relied on in attack. Over the last three Premier League campaigns, we have conceded 183 goals—61 in 2023/24, 65 in 2024/25, and 57 in 2025/26. That’s an average of more than 60 goals conceded per season.

Given those numbers, it’s hard to argue that any of our centre-backs are beyond improvement. Some are good players, but every one of them is upgradeable if the club is serious about building a team capable of competing at the top end of the table.

Agree other than Danso, I think he’s going to be awesome, Ledley King level.

But we need to be buying better than Van Hecke.

 

[glasgowspur]

Would we have finished second if United, Liverpool, and Arsenal had been run better during that period? Probably not. Managing resources responsibly is important, but ultimately it has to translate into success on the pitch. Financial prudence is commendable, but it cannot be the end goal in itself—the objective is to build a team capable of competing for and winning major honours.

We almost certainly would not have, a combination of others failing, Poch and our best team in many years all fell into place.
Although I would say that city and Chelsea sort of replaced utd and arsenal post Fergie and we get.
When those richer clubs are at their peak it's a huge mountain for us to climb, we need to position ourselves to take advantage of their down years.
That imho is what arsenal have done.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Agree other than Danso, I think he’s going to be awesome, Ledley King level.

But we need to be buying better than Van Hecke.

Not sure what you’re seeing in Danso that shows he’s at Ledley’s level.

 

[Baleforce]

Not sure what you’re seeing in Danso that shows he’s at Ledley’s level.

Not at, but on the way.

Time will tell.

 

[glorygloryeze]

Not sure what you’re seeing in Danso that shows he’s at Ledley’s level.

I love Danso, but one has to be realistic when comparing him to some past greats we've been lucky to have wear Spurs shirts...

 

[Lemonade Money]

Correct, it is also over looked that he was never a rich man himself, so was not using his own money but the money allocated to him. Much easier for the family who actually own the club to say "we will be spending more" than it is for the man tasked with running their company.

Also I think all of this talk always over looks where we came from at the time DL took the reigns to where we are now, all the arguments about ambition and success in the transfer market comes from a base he grew, raising expectations. There is no way in 2001 the same fans would have been arguing for parity with Arsenal, Liverpool, Bayern and Dortmund. And equally, I find people only ever compare us to clubs based on their hugely successful moments, not their bad.

For a club that has won 2 league titles in its life I do find some of this laughable, you can be ambitious, but also being realistic isn't the crime its made out to be. I went down a Hoddle rabbit hole the other day and it re-shocked me to realise we won 3 major trophies in his 12 years here, 3, all coming over 3 years, so for 9 years we did nothing, over a period fondly looked back with him and players as the "Glory Glory" times. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love him and that period too, but again, it wasn't exactly prolific success.

The guy made massive mistakes here, but he also most certainly raised the expectations of the fanbase which for me is a marker of his success.

Well said, but you're arguing with idiots again. They really do stink out this forum. I've got them all on ignore, but I can't avoid people's responses. Just don't give them air to breath.

Idiots is being kind, attention seeking sums.

 

[glorygloryeze]

I'd say it was pretty idiotic for Simon Jordan to leak Levy's texts about how we're "getting our pants pulled down re the JPVH fee".
Unless SJ secretly hates Levy, he's not done him any favours (and Levy's reputation isn't exactly great in that realm these days, hence his axing...)

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

I'd say it was pretty idiotic for Simon Jordan to leak Levy's texts about how we're "getting our pants pulled down re the JPVH fee".
Unless SJ secretly hates Levy, he's not done him any favours (and Levy's reputation isn't exactly great in that realm these days, hence his axing...)

Wouldn't be shocked if it was him doing it for clout and it not being true, looked like a stich up from who else was on the panel, I would have to watch it again TBH, not that it means much to even bother

 

[Mikey10]

Just don't give them air to breath.

Idiots is being kind, attention seeking sums.

Possibly just the English teacher in me, but slightly ironic...