Which is very different from your original point and discounts the fact that Spurs are, arguably, currently doing exactly that with a turnover substantially lower than ours.
Once you bring resources into the argument you have to face the question of whether we are making the best of ours, regardless of whether that challenges the financially doped or historically bigger. Its tough to argue that we are.
How can you say spurs are successfully challenging the hegemony? If they are, then so are we!
How can you say spurs are successfully challenging the hegemony? If they are, then so are we!
Well, largely by challenging for the title in the last two years and finishing above all of those clubs bar Chelsea last season. You may not consider that challenging the hegemony but I would happily take it as a wooden spoon.
Yes. That's not actually a dynasty, M. A dynasty is a line of hereditary rulers. And sadly Wenger is essentially a jaffa.
A line of trophies is dynastic, in a sense. Everyone always told us that domestic cups would be building blocks for greater things. (though I always maintained this was *******s, as has been proved)
Well, largely by challenging for the title in the last two years and finishing above all of those clubs bar Chelsea last season. You may not consider that challenging the hegemony but I would happily take it as a wooden spoon.
But we finished above them two years ago and you've previously said we've not challenged the hegemony in a decade