• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Welcome Ange: To Dare is to Didgeridoo

billyiddo said:
That's not an argument against the point GS was making though, he's saying when those players were at their peak they were not attracting the level interest/offer that matches up with what our supporters thought/think they were worth. Poch wanting to sell them later doesn't change that.

Personally I disagree with him, the players weren't getting bid on for the same reasons clubs weren't bidding for Klopps Liverpool players, that's because they were playing for a team that was settled, pulling in the same direction and were on the verge of big things - the players didn't want to leave essentially.
Click to expand...

If word at the time was believed, Barca were prepared to take Eriksen off our hands for a good fee in the summer of 2018, just not as much as Levy wanted. Nobody wanted Eriksen to leave because he was integral, but the moment he had his bust-up and said he would not sign a new contract, he wanted the Barca move, it was over. Poch knew it. we should've done the deal if possible.

I understand the point that perhaps some people had values for our players which didn't match. Much of that was probably driven by Liverpool getting 140 million for Coutinho, which still might be the most amazing deal in modern history.
 
thfcsteff said:
If word at the time was believed, Barca were prepared to take Eriksen off our hands for a good fee in the summer of 2018, just not as much as Levy wanted. Nobody wanted Eriksen to leave because he was integral, but the moment he had his bust-up and said he would not sign a new contract, he wanted the Barca move, it was over. Poch knew it. we should've done the deal if possible.

I understand the point that perhaps some people had values for our players which didn't match. Much of that was probably driven by Liverpool getting 140 million for Coutinho, which still might be the most amazing deal in modern history.
Click to expand...

Eriksen said within months of arriving here that he enjoyed experiencing new cultures and would move on within five years, he never changed that position.
Levy foolishly thought he could persuade him to stay, Eriksen thought he could pick and choose his clubs, both were wrong.
 
glasgowspur said:
Players are no different from any other item, they're only worth what someone was will to pay.
We have a history of selling players, nobody wanted them.
What was Eriksen valued at, what did he end up going for £10m? And clubs weren't exactly lining up to get him.
Lloris, WC winning captain, no serious offers, Toby and Jan far superior to maguire who went for £80m and if we'd had that kind of offer for one of them I suggest we would have snapped their hand off.
But nobody wanted them.


Just looked at the table in the article, suarez is Barcelona most valuable player.
Not Messi, not xavi, not iniesta, but suarez.
Did look at anything else.
Click to expand...
Sorry but that isn’t really true. Eriksen went for £17m with only six months of his contract left. 12 months earlier it probably would’ve been £50m. 18 to 24 months earlier probably even more. We had also stopped selling to ‘rivals’ by them so had removed the biggest and highest paying market for the sale of top players. If we’d been open to sell to the big clubs in England then we would’ve got very high offers I’m sure.

Generally in order for there to be a market for a player the club has to be willing to sell them. It is folly to say that nobody wanted Vertonghen or Toby at their peak, it is just that nobody wanted them for he prohibitive amount we valued them at. I suspect both would’ve gone for around £50m if we’d put the word out via agents that we were willing to sell.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Sorry but that isn’t really true. Eriksen went for £17m with only six months of his contract left. 12 months earlier it probably would’ve been £50m. 18 to 24 months earlier probably even more. We had also stopped selling to ‘rivals’ by them so had removed the biggest and highest paying market for the sale of top players. If we’d been open to sell to the big clubs in England then we would’ve got very high offers I’m sure.

Generally in order for there to be a market for a player the club has to be willing to sell them. It is folly to say that nobody wanted Vertonghen or Toby at their peak, it is just that nobody wanted them for he prohibitive amount we valued them at. I suspect both would’ve gone for around £50m if we’d put the word out via agents that we were willing to sell.
Click to expand...

But they were worth way more than that to us.

It was a shutdown defence that would have been impossible to replace, even with twice the 100m that would have brought in.
 
thfcsteff said:
And you talk about 'revisionist' my friend hahahaha.
Can I ask, do you remember Poch saying it would take several months before Ndombele found his flow, that he was a player who would not hit his full potential for a year? Do you remember that we actually only got GLC on deadline day, and it was on an inital loan? Oh we got close to Dybala but couldn't sort out the 'image rights' (FFS). And then, three months later, we sacked the manager? Do you genuoinely believe that three months would be enough for these panacea signings to 'fix his head'? Sorry, that is ALL on Levy. HE decided to try and make up with Poch in the summer after that tense silence, HE decided that he would not want the ire of some of the fan base roaring at him for sacking a CL finalist, and it is pretty clear that HE made subsequent decisions which were ludicrous given his eventual actions.

(as ever in the spirit of debate :)...I still find this an incredibly devisive topic LOL)
Click to expand...
We had a lot of issues with the squad at that time. More than I thought at the time, I think more than most fans thought. Some parallels with where we have been under Ange.

What we imo got wrong then (and I think that's partly on Pochettino) is that we brought in players for big money that Pochettino surely thought he could turn into great players for us. And not without reason.

But we got exactly zero fixes for here and now issues, and there were many.

We then swung too far the other way, focusing only on the short term.

How we get that balance right going forward, be that under Ange or someone else will be really important.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Sorry but that isn’t really true. Eriksen went for £17m with only six months of his contract left. 12 months earlier it probably would’ve been £50m. 18 to 24 months earlier probably even more. We had also stopped selling to ‘rivals’ by them so had removed the biggest and highest paying market for the sale of top players. If we’d been open to sell to the big clubs in England then we would’ve got very high offers I’m sure.

Generally in order for there to be a market for a player the club has to be willing to sell them. It is folly to say that nobody wanted Vertonghen or Toby at their peak, it is just that nobody wanted them for he prohibitive amount we valued them at. I suspect both would’ve gone for around £50m if we’d put the word out via agents that we were willing to sell.
Click to expand...

Coulda, shoulda, woulda, you think, you don't know, nobody knows until it goes to market.
That market never appeared, so we don't know.
1 year later Eriksen goes for £17m, a player at prime age and there was not a queue of clubs lining up for him, which if he's a £50m you would expect suggests to that valuation is not one shared by other clubs.
Levy did not want to sell Eriksen, but then he didn’t want to sell Bale, modric, Carrick, walker etc, but they wanted out, so did Eriksen, but nobody thought he was worth the money.
Not picking on Eriksen BTW, but he was regarded as our most sellable asset after Harry.
 
Baleforce said:
But they were worth way more than that to us.

It was a shutdown defence that would have been impossible to replace, even with twice the 100m that would have brought in.
Click to expand...

I actually think it is this thought process where we need to be braver in the future.

I would ask fans to really ask themselves what we really got from Toby and Eriksen after these key moments where we were scared to sell them. The answer is not much. The reality is that Toby was pretty average towards the end of his Spurs career. Eriksen played for that last 18 months with such a can't be arsed attitude and frustrated all of us. They weren't worth more on the pitch than in our transfer kitty at all.

There is also an element of failure from our recruitment teams that scares us in these situations as well. It basically took 5 years to replace Walker with Porro. Trips didn't step up from his backup, and Aurier was a mess. Emerson failed whilst perhaps KWP and Foyth weren't given ample opportunities to win the shirt. After the RB debacle, I can see why we were scared to sell. No different from my old man telling me how he watched our double 61 side get replaced one by one with lesser players.

However, that is still not a good reason to shift players when they refuse to sign new deals and start running down the clock. We need the money in our transfer kitty, not players that aren't all in. .
 
glasgowspur said:
Coulda, shoulda, woulda, you think, you don't know, nobody knows until it goes to market.
That market never appeared, so we don't know.
1 year later Eriksen goes for £17m, a player at prime age and there was not a queue of clubs lining up for him, which if he's a £50m you would expect suggests to that valuation is not one shared by other clubs.
Levy did not want to sell Eriksen, but then he didn’t want to sell Bale, modric, Carrick, walker etc, but they wanted out, so did Eriksen, but nobody thought he was worth the money.
Not picking on Eriksen BTW, but he was regarded as our most sellable asset after Harry.
Click to expand...
£17m is a lot of money for a player with 6 months left on their contract.

Markets only get made when an asset is deemed as being for sale. If you think Eriksen with 18 to 30 months left on his contract was not worth much to other clubs then fine, that’s a valid opinion. I just happen to think a lot of clubs would’ve paid £50m plus for him at that point.
 
glasgowspur said:
Coulda, shoulda, woulda, you think, you don't know, nobody knows until it goes to market.
That market never appeared, so we don't know.
1 year later Eriksen goes for £17m, a player at prime age and there was not a queue of clubs lining up for him, which if he's a £50m you would expect suggests to that valuation is not one shared by other clubs.
Levy did not want to sell Eriksen, but then he didn’t want to sell Bale, modric, Carrick, walker etc, but they wanted out, so did Eriksen, but nobody thought he was worth the money.
Not picking on Eriksen BTW, but he was regarded as our most sellable asset after Harry.
Click to expand...
I think you're missing the pint we are trying to make. Levy reported put a 100m price tag on Eriksen, I agree 100% no one would be interested at that price, but 60m maybe even 70m I think we would have gotten some interest. Now you're probably going to counter and say he was worth more but clearly he wasn't.

My stance is, sell the player for what you can get, reinvest that money in newer players and keep it moving. Instead we did neither, held on for figure we were never going to get and had to eventually let him go for 17m due to his contract situation and didn't have any money to reinvest into a replacement ACM which then hampered us for years. t's a stupid way to business I'm sorry.

Even if you look at the form of Eriksen he was terrible for us from that point onwards and we still got 17m for him. Now imagine if we actively tried to sell him whilst he was still considered a WC attacking midfielder?
 
Muttley said:
I actually think it is this thought process where we need to be braver in the future.

I would ask fans to really ask themselves what we really got from Toby and Eriksen after these key moments where we were scared to sell them. The answer is not much. The reality is that Toby was pretty average towards the end of his Spurs career. Eriksen played for that last 18 months with such a can't be arsed attitude and frustrated all of us. They weren't worth more on the pitch than in our transfer kitty at all.

There is also an element of failure from our recruitment teams that scares us in these situations as well. It basically took 5 years to replace Walker with Porro. Trips didn't step up from his backup, and Aurier was a mess. Emerson failed whilst perhaps KWP and Foyth weren't given ample opportunities to win the shirt. After the RB debacle, I can see why we were scared to sell. No different from my old man telling me how he watched our double 61 side get replaced one by one with lesser players.

However, that is still not a good reason to shift players when they refuse to sign new deals and start running down the clock. We need the money in our transfer kitty, not players that aren't all in. .
Click to expand...
I think a big problem here is that the recruitment department had gone to brick having been seriously underinvested in for several years.

Brighton are happy to sell players when an offer comes in over the player’s realistic valuation as they already have a good idea of the replacement either already at the club or who they can purchase for 20 to 40 percent of the transfer fee they receive.
 
Bishop said:
I think you're missing the pint we are trying to make. Levy reported put a 100m price tag on Eriksen, I agree 100% no one would be interested at that price, but 60m maybe even 70m I think we would have gotten some interest. Now you're probably going to counter and say he was worth more but clearly he wasn't.

My stance is, sell the player for what you can get, reinvest that money in newer players and keep it moving. Instead we did neither, held on for figure we were never going to get and had to eventually let him go for 17m due to his contract situation and didn't have any money to reinvest into a replacement ACM which then hampered us for years. t's a stupid way to business I'm sorry.

Even if you look at the form of Eriksen he was terrible for us from that point onwards and we still got 17m for him. Now imagine if we actively tried to sell him whilst he was still considered a WC attacking midfielder?
Click to expand...

I also noticed that it impacted Eriksen massively as well. He had let himself get into such bad habits that when he went to Inter he let better players keep him out of the side. It took him until the middle of the following season to really get that ethic back and he only ever started 28 games for them. Conte just parked his bum on the bench. Eriksen cut a very frustrated figure and surely regrets some of his career choices.
 
Bishop said:
I think you're missing the pint we are trying to make. Levy reported put a 100m price tag on Eriksen, I agree 100% no one would be interested at that price, but 60m maybe even 70m I think we would have gotten some interest. Now you're probably going to counter and say he was worth more but clearly he wasn't.

My stance is, sell the player for what you can get, reinvest that money in newer players and keep it moving. Instead we did neither, held on for figure we were never going to get and had to eventually let him go for 17m due to his contract situation and didn't have any money to reinvest into a replacement ACM which then hampered us for years. t's a stupid way to business I'm sorry.

Even if you look at the form of Eriksen he was terrible for us from that point onwards and we still got 17m for him. Now imagine if we actively tried to sell him whilst he was still considered a WC attacking midfielder?
Click to expand...

I agree, he wasn't worth £100m, we and the rumour monger press inflated the price, hence half a billion squad headlines.
That squad was not worth that.
The article quoted earlier had us with the second most expensive squad, ahead of prime Barcelona, real Madrid, Chelsea and utd.
That is just such nonsense.
 
glasgowspur said:
I agree, he wasn't worth £100m, we and the rumour monger press inflated the price, hence half a billion squad headlines.
That squad was not worth that.
The article quoted earlier had us with the second most expensive squad, ahead of prime Barcelona, real Madrid, Chelsea and utd.
That is just such nonsense.
Click to expand...
I haven't looked at the article but I agree no way did we have a squad just behind the teams mentioned but that doesn't mean we couldn't have used it to generate some really good funds for squad renewal.

That's my beef with ENIC, they just continuously demonstrate their lack of keen football nous.
 
Muttley said:
I also noticed that it impacted Eriksen massively as well. He had let himself get into such bad habits that when he went to Inter he let better players keep him out of the side. It took him until the middle of the following season to really get that ethic back and he only ever started 28 games for them. Conte just parked his bum on the bench. Eriksen cut a very frustrated figure and surely regrets some of his career choices.
Click to expand...

It was the start of the downfall of Poch team Imv, the whole be brave came from that.
Sell Eriksen, invest the money change the direction of play.
We needed to ruthless but so did Eriksen, he was obviously conflicted and it affected his form.
 
glasgowspur said:
I agree, he wasn't worth £100m, we and the rumour monger press inflated the price, hence half a billion squad headlines.
That squad was not worth that.
The article quoted earlier had us with the second most expensive squad, ahead of prime Barcelona, real Madrid, Chelsea and utd.
That is just such nonsense.
Click to expand...
We would’ve easily got half a billion for our squad in a fire sale. it’s not even an average of £50 million per first team player. We also didn’t have players on particularly high wages, which also tends to help inflate the transfer fee further:
 
Bishop said:
I haven't looked at the article but I agree no way did we have a squad just behind the teams mentioned but that doesn't mean we couldn't have used it to generate some really good funds for squad renewal.

That's my beef with ENIC, they just continuously demonstrate their lack of keen football nous.
Click to expand...
Not behind, ahead!
 
Finney Is Back said:
We would’ve easily got half a billion for our squad in a fire sale. it’s not even an average of £50 million per first team player.
Click to expand...
I disagree, especially in a firesale, our second best player went for £17m in a firesale.
Who was going to pay £50m for Sissoko, or lamela?
 
Hugo £30m
Walker £50m
Toby £40m
Jan £40m
Rose £40m
Dembele £30m
Wanyama £30m
Dele £60m
Eriksen £60m
Sonny £50m
Kane £80m

Btw, it's not far fetched at all that in the 2017 market conditions, our team was close to half a billion. I've undercooked some of the numbers above and it still coming to half a billion.
 
Muttley said:
Hugo £30m
Walker £50m
Toby £40m
Jan £40m
Rose £40m
Dembele £30m
Wanyama £30m
Dele £60m
Eriksen £60m
Sonny £50m
Kane £80m

Btw, it's not far fetched at all that in the 2017 market conditions, our team was close to half a billion. I've undercooked some of the numbers above and it still coming to half a billion.
Click to expand...
Indeed and that is before you get beyond the best 11 players. Mourinho was trying to get Dier to Man Utd and prepared to pay £50m for example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back