Saw this on Twitter yesterday, which, to be fair, puts a different light on it..... (no idea if it is accurate).
Net Spends since June 2016 (£)
Man City: 343m
Man Utd: 310m
Chelsea: 203m
Everton: 160m
Arsenal: 148m
Brighton: 130m
Wolves: 124m
West Ham: 112m
Bourn: 104m
Fulham: 101m
Palace: 85m
Hudd: 81m
Leic: 76m
LFC: 73m
Burnley: 49m
Watford: 41m
Spurs: 31m
Newcastle: 4m
Southampton: -10m
It feels a bit misleading. The 5 and 10 year figures are here
https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1Huddersfield, Fulham and Cardiff all spend less than Brighton over 5 years and were relegated.
The only others spending significantly less are Spurs, Burnley and Southampton. Southampton have run good on sales, but were in danger of relegation last season. Spurs have run golden getting Pochettino, but also ran pretty well with Gareth Bale. Burnley just seem to be punching above their weight. The other mid-table clubs have all spent amounts in teh same ballpark apart from Everton.
Sure they could have done better, but they likely came from further back than the rest too.
He may well be due a sacking, but I just don't think he has clearly overspent for their position.