• 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

Chairman's message

It's worth noting that lots of other big money gambles don't pay off. It's not just Spurs where it doesn't always work, there are no guarantees.

E.g. Chadli cost Spurs £7 million in 2013, outscoring the combined efforts of Ozil (4 goals for £42.5 million), Fabregas (3 goals for over £26.3 million) and Di Maria (3 goals for a British transfer record of £59.7 million).

Read more at http://www.squawka.com/news/stats-n...-di-maria-combined/378166#SlBd5PYiDPkuCmFz.99


For a club our size we shouldn't be whacking out huge fees, we should be scouting more carefully, picking and choosing the VALUE because we can't afford the big mistakes, it sets us back years.

We can afford a few duff deals if they were only £7m or so.

Basically what I'm saying is, we should sign nobodies like that Austrian guy that Armchair loves, or free transfers, not big names that even I have heard of.
 
Denmark Spur said:
We are all eager to be challenging at a higher level. Whilst the popular view may be to spend money in excess of earnings or find a philanthropic investor to fund transfers, those scenarios are simply not possible under the new world of Financial Fair Play rules whereby clubs can only spend revenues generated through operations.
Click to expand...

given the latest developments in the ffp rulings released today, is levy suggesting that spending in excess of earnings the way forward? ;)
 
Bullet said:
It's worth noting that lots of other big money gambles don't pay off. It's not just Spurs where it doesn't always work, there are no guarantees.

E.g. Chadli cost Spurs £7 million in 2013, outscoring the combined efforts of Ozil (4 goals for £42.5 million), Fabregas (3 goals for over £26.3 million) and Di Maria (3 goals for a British transfer record of £59.7 million).

Read more at http://www.squawka.com/news/stats-n...-di-maria-combined/378166#SlBd5PYiDPkuCmFz.99


For a club our size we shouldn't be whacking out huge fees, we should be scouting more carefully, picking and choosing the VALUE because we can't afford the big mistakes, it sets us back years.

We can afford a few duff deals if they were only £7m or so.

Basically what I'm saying is, we should sign nobodies like that Austrian guy that Armchair loves, or free transfers, not big names that even I have heard of.
Click to expand...

Just look at Fernando Torres as a great example. The best striker in the league, consistent over 3 and a half seasons in England and proven in Spain another 5 seasons before that. Torres didn't seem like a gamble, he seemed an absolute certianity to suceed at Chelsea yet he was reduced to a figure of fun who couldn't hit a barn door!
 
Craig_J said:
Just look at Fernando Torres as a great example. The best striker in the league, consistent over 3 and a half seasons in England and proven in Spain another 5 seasons before that. Torres didn't seem like a gamble, he seemed an absolute certianity to suceed at Chelsea yet he was reduced to a figure of fun who couldn't hit a barn door!
Click to expand...

Torres, how about Falcao? .. the only good news about Falcao is at least the media has shut up about Bobby .. (funny how that works)
 
Bullet said:
It's worth noting that lots of other big money gambles don't pay off. It's not just Spurs where it doesn't always work, there are no guarantees.

E.g. Chadli cost Spurs £7 million in 2013, outscoring the combined efforts of Ozil (4 goals for £42.5 million), Fabregas (3 goals for over £26.3 million) and Di Maria (3 goals for a British transfer record of £59.7 million).

Read more at http://www.squawka.com/news/stats-n...-di-maria-combined/378166#SlBd5PYiDPkuCmFz.99


For a club our size we shouldn't be whacking out huge fees, we should be scouting more carefully, picking and choosing the VALUE because we can't afford the big mistakes, it sets us back years.

We can afford a few duff deals if they were only £7m or so.

Basically what I'm saying is, we should sign nobodies like that Austrian guy that Armchair loves, or free transfers, not big names that even I have heard of.
Click to expand...

yeah i agree with all that.....tbh the only big money signing that has worked for us was Modric at 16 mil whereas the list of big money flops is horrendously big

other clubs have also been stung by overpaying. Some transfer fees are just disgusting
 
Craig_J said:
Just look at Fernando Torres as a great example. The best striker in the league, consistent over 3 and a half seasons in England and proven in Spain another 5 seasons before that. Torres didn't seem like a gamble, he seemed an absolute certianity to suceed at Chelsea yet he was reduced to a figure of fun who couldn't hit a barn door!
Click to expand...

I don't know, anyone who watched him in his last season at Liverpool could see he was finished. Benitez playing him through injury cost him his pace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
Craig_J said:
Just look at Fernando Torres as a great example. The best striker in the league, consistent over 3 and a half seasons in England and proven in Spain another 5 seasons before that. Torres didn't seem like a gamble, he seemed an absolute certianity to suceed at Chelsea yet he was reduced to a figure of fun who couldn't hit a barn door!
Click to expand...
I seem to remember Torres was on the decline long before he left Liverpool, if my memory serves. Did he have a bad injury in his last season at 'pool?
 
Raziel said:
Torres, how about Falcao? .. the only good news about Falcao is at least the media has shut up about Bobby .. (funny how that works)
Click to expand...

Both great examples. I don't doubt that, if by some crazy stretch of the imagination we'd have broken the bank only to be the ones who suffered the failures of those seeming nailed-on certainties, that would've been Levy's fault too...
 
I am really puzzled about Falcao's failure here in England. I thought he was absolutely nailed on to succeed here.

I wonder whether his downturn was related to his serious injury?
 
Parklaner81 said:
Both great examples. I don't doubt that, if by some crazy stretch of the imagination we'd have broken the bank only to be the ones who suffered the failures of those seeming nailed-on certainties, that would've been Levy's fault too...
Click to expand...

You know it.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I am really puzzled about Falcao's failure here in England. I thought he was absolutely nailed on to succeed here.

I wonder whether his downturn was related to his serious injury?
Click to expand...
He doesn't work well in a long ball team.:D

I think Di Maria has been a bigger flop. 60mil for tinkle all.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_association_football_transfers

Count how many of those have been 'failures' and how many have succeeded. I'd wager you'd get a 66-33 percent split in favour of successes over failures. But hey, let's keep buying Stamboulis and Fazios. Why bother even building the mythical revenue-boosting stadium, then? We can buy endless lists of 7 million pound players with the cast iron guarantee that statistically speaking, enough of them will come good to cover our losses: thus, we can happily float around mid-table for all eternity, trophy-less but self-sufficient in an era where even UEFA have announced their intentions to water down their FFP rules to allow more clubs to spend in an attempt to win things and show ambition.
 
DubaiSpur said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_association_football_transfers

Count how many of those have been 'failures' and how many have succeeded. I'd wager you'd get a 66-33 percent split in favour of successes over failures. But hey, let's keep buying Stamboulis and Fazios. Why bother even building the mythical revenue-boosting stadium, then? We can buy endless lists of 7 million pound players with the cast iron guarantee that statistically speaking, enough of them will come good to cover our losses: thus, we can happily float around mid-table for all eternity, trophy-less but self-sufficient in an era where even UEFA have announced their intentions to water down their FFP rules to allow more clubs to spend in an attempt to win things and show ambition.
Click to expand...
Having looked through the list of 100 players I'd say it's probably more like 65% - 25%.... With the two players we have purchased making up 2% of that 25%.

I think the problem for us in buying players in this category lies in the fact that we haven't got the wage budget to be bringing in the more guaranteed, proven players and therefore we are shopping at the level below that and having to take on expensive gambles. I'm not sure that we can afford to take on another expensive gamble that fails, therefore in our current state I think we can only take a player on for a top 100 transfer fee if that player is already proven in the Premier League.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Having looked through the list of 100 players I'd say it's probably more like 65% - 25%.... With the two players we have purchased making up 2% of that 25%.

I think the problem for us in buying players in this category lies in the fact that we haven't got the wage budget to be bringing in the more guaranteed, proven players and therefore we are shopping at the level below that and having to take on expensive gambles. I'm not sure that we can afford to take on another expensive gamble that fails, therefore in our current state I think we can only take a player on for a top 100 transfer fee if that player is already proven in the Premier League.
Click to expand...

With 10% undecided? Maybe. Point being, a majority of big-money transfers have succeeded, and it's dishonest to suggest otherwise. And by all means, advocate taking a gamble on a player proven in the Premier League if you feel that'll involve less risk on our side: but filling the side with 7 million pound players based on the assumption that enough will come good to cover our losses is an absolutely abhorrent idea, and is the sort of thinking that leads to Fazio and Stambouli-type buys.
 
DubaiSpur said:
With 10% undecided? Maybe. Point being, a majority of big-money transfers have succeeded, and it's dishonest to suggest otherwise. And by all means, advocate taking a gamble on a player proven in the Premier League if you feel that'll involve less risk on our side: but filling the side with 7 million pound players based on the assumption that enough will come good to cover our losses is an absolutely abhorrent idea, and is the sort of thinking that leads to Fazio and Stambouli-type buys.
Click to expand...
Sorry my bad, I meant 75 - 25 (you can blame either a typo or my poor maths!).... And even in that 25% there are probably 5 to 10 who are still in the "undecided" group....

I think our policy should be to take two PL 'proven' players, one or two few experienced freebies and perhaps 2 reasonably priced gambles from overseas, but to maximize our chances perhaps those 'gambles' should come from leagues where players tend to be able to adapt to PL football (i.e. Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Scandinavia or players of African descent).
 
i don't think that policy leaves much room for improvement - buying experienced players from the premiership or from abroad, with our draw as a club generally will mean buying players who aren't good enough for the top 4 anymore and will not be in the future. we might luck out and get a VdV type bargain every now and again but unless we're actively scouting/targeting players who have the potential to improve to where we want to be over a couple of years then we'll just be saying 6th is good enough.

of course buying experienced players can be a good thing - but they need to supplement players with a potential higher ceiling, not be the focus of our transfer policy.
 
billyiddo said:
i don't think that policy leaves much room for improvement - buying experienced players from the premiership or from abroad, with our draw as a club generally will mean buying players who aren't good enough for the top 4 anymore and will not be in the future. we might luck out and get a VdV type bargain every now and again but unless we're actively scouting/targeting players who have the potential to improve to where we want to be over a couple of years then we'll just be saying 6th is good enough.

of course buying experienced players can be a good thing - but they need to supplement players with a potential higher ceiling, not be the focus of our transfer policy.
Click to expand...

Crouch, Defoe, Kranjcar, Bassong, Keane, Palacios. End of the 09/10 season, we'd hit 4th spot and CL football. Looking back, I'd say that was a very deep squad compared to what we now have. However, the central point is that buying those players paid off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back