• 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

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Muttley said:
Yeah, it's a great question. I think if you're a profile of player that we try to attract you see a few key areas.
Click to expand...
What profile of player is that? How is that profile any different to what who we would have targetted before, i.e. in the Ramos to Poch eras?

Muttley said:
One is the amazing facilities that we have at The Lodge and our amazing stadium. I also think we are sending out the message that younger players will get a chance in our setup, which definitely wasn't the case before.
Click to expand...
Haven't we always been a club that sends such a message to younger players? E.g. Modric, Bale, Eriksen, Son, Sessegnon etc? there was some variance in the peak Poch era (when it would have been very difficult to dislodge any of that starting 11-13 players), Jose and Conte comapred to now but that was because we were heavily chasing trophies/top 4 (or at least those appointments gave the impression we were). But i'm not sure there's been a massively new attraction for us to younger up-and-coming players..

Muttley said:
A new player would also have the belief that we're always going to add more good players into the squad, which was clearly not the case in the past. We shouldn't forget the commercials as well. We're paying the signing on fees including those greedy agents and our salaries are growing over time.

There are obviously downsides, but I think we've made huge leaps in the last 5 years to attract players. I can see why a Frenckie de Jong may not have wanted to join us when he was 21/22. I think the equivalent player might now though.

I still look at Jose, Nuno and Conte's squads and compare to Ange's current one. Players have joined us in all areas of the team and will continue to do so.
Click to expand...

If we are turning our model 'back' to targeting up-and-coming younger players, then it would seem we developed our stadium to become a souped-up, more blingy Brighton...imo, we should be more than that at this point
 
glorygloryeze said:
What profile of player is that? How is that profile any different to what who we would have targetted before, i.e. in the Ramos to Poch eras?


Haven't we always been a club that sends such a message to younger players? E.g. Modric, Bale, Eriksen, Son, Sessegnon etc? there was some variance in the peak Poch era (when it would have been very difficult to dislodge any of that starting 11-13 players), Jose and Conte comapred to now but that was because we were heavily chasing trophies/top 4 (or at least those appointments gave the impression we were). But i'm not sure there's been a massively new attraction for us to younger up-and-coming players..



If we are turning our model 'back' to targeting up-and-coming younger players, then it would seem we developed our stadium to become a souped-up, more blingy Brighton...imo, we should be more than that at this point
Click to expand...
There have been times in the past where we have looked a very good place for young talented players to come. Other times not so much. We're now in a good time for that, not sure if it's better than the better periods in the past.

Where we perhaps seem a bit stronger now compared to the past is going for elite talents that are actively being pursued by the biggest clubs around. Bergvall reportedly chose us over Barcelona. Vuskovic was reportedly seen within football as a really special talent being looked at by all the biggest clubs, he chose coming to us.

Modric and Bale in particular turned into world class players and were of course highly rated when we signed them. But I'm not sure we attracted them with similar competition to what we now seem capable of. But, very difficult to compare and judge. Don't think there's a massive difference (to when we've been attractive in the past).

The difference now is that we can combine signing very talented young players (Sarr, Udogie, Gray, Bergvall etc) with signing quality first team players (Solanke, Maddison, VdV) who we sign for quite a lot of money with some regularity. And we're able to do that without being in the CL.

A souped up Brighton would be a really well run club that would be likely to take really good steps in a good direction imo.
 
braineclipse said:
There have been times in the past where we have looked a very good place for young talented players to come. Other times not so much. We're now in a good time for that, not sure if it's better than the better periods in the past.

Where we perhaps seem a bit stronger now compared to the past is going for elite talents that are actively being pursued by the biggest clubs around. Bergvall reportedly chose us over Barcelona. Vuskovic was reportedly seen within football as a really special talent being looked at by all the biggest clubs, he chose coming to us.

Modric and Bale in particular turned into world class players and were of course highly rated when we signed them. But I'm not sure we attracted them with similar competition to what we now seem capable of. But, very difficult to compare and judge. Don't think there's a massive difference (to when we've been attractive in the past).

The difference now is that we can combine signing very talented young players (Sarr, Udogie, Gray, Bergvall etc) with signing quality first team players (Solanke, Maddison, VdV) who we sign for quite a lot of money with some regularity. And we're able to do that without being in the CL.

A souped up Brighton would be a really well run club that would be likely to take really good steps in a good direction imo.
Click to expand...

I think we overrate our 'advancement' in signing ability if we are using Solanke, Maddison and MVDV as examples. Firstly, i'm not sure we were beating the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, Man Utd etc to those signings.
Secondly, this last summer we NEEDED to sign more than one immediate first-teamer and we didn't.
Thirdly, it's not as if we haven't signed such players before, i.e. signings from lower-level PL clubs for whom we are a step-up. It isn't anything novel, certainly no different to pre-stadium transfers.
So on the evidence of that, i'm not sure much has actually changed. If in the last transfer window (when there were clear needs if we wanted to step-up from last season) we had signed two or three immediate first-teamers of the kind of profile of Solanke, Eze, Neto etc (to use as examples, due to profile, how much they'd improve the first team and age/experience) alongside the likes of Bergvall etc then i'd look at things differently.

But on that basis, i see no difference as i say to pre-stadium transfers and so i wonder why people think we are 'more attractive' to players than we used to be...surely if we were, we would be taking full advantage
 
glorygloryeze said:
What profile of player is that? How is that profile any different to what who we would have targetted before, i.e. in the Ramos to Poch eras?


Haven't we always been a club that sends such a message to younger players? E.g. Modric, Bale, Eriksen, Son, Sessegnon etc? there was some variance in the peak Poch era (when it would have been very difficult to dislodge any of that starting 11-13 players), Jose and Conte comapred to now but that was because we were heavily chasing trophies/top 4 (or at least those appointments gave the impression we were). But i'm not sure there's been a massively new attraction for us to younger up-and-coming players..



If we are turning our model 'back' to targeting up-and-coming younger players, then it would seem we developed our stadium to become a souped-up, more blingy Brighton...imo, we should be more than that at this point
Click to expand...
Who do you expect us to be 'at this point'? The Goons who were/are bigger when paying off their stadium debt were not big spenders again until eight years later in 2014 - But of course the far superior Spurs having to take on a hell of a lot more debt should be so much more by now....
 
Bedfordspurs said:
They talk about it on the athletic this week
He inherited Hugo, Walker, Verts, rose, Dembele, eriksen, Kane, who were al part of his peak side
We added Toby, Dier, Wanyama, Son and Dele to the group
And we had players like Lamela, Chadli and winks here all rest
Wimmer came and went
Trippier and Davies joined under his watch too
The key is he did inherit the core of his team. They were here. Others were added as Shiism be the case in backing him
The issue was that when we frank backed him in the summer before he left, he was given no time with those players
Click to expand...

The players that are not mentioned on that list that he moved on don't paint such a rosey picture.
We had a core of senior chances and malcontents that he had to move on.
 
harr1984 said:
Who do you expect us to be 'at this point'? The Goons who were/are bigger when paying off their stadium debt were not big spenders again until eight years later in 2014 - But of course the far superior Spurs having to take on a hell of a lot more debt should be so much more by now....
Click to expand...

Right, so the stadium re-build has effected the football side? I remember being told by Levy/ENIC etc that it wouldn't....
 
glorygloryeze said:
I think we overrate our 'advancement' in signing ability if we are using Solanke, Maddison and MVDV as examples. Firstly, i'm not sure we were beating the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, Man Utd etc to those signings.
Secondly, this last summer we NEEDED to sign more than one immediate first-teamer and we didn't.
Thirdly, it's not as if we haven't signed such players before, i.e. signings from lower-level PL clubs for whom we are a step-up. It isn't anything novel, certainly no different to pre-stadium transfers.
So on the evidence of that, i'm not sure much has actually changed. If in the last transfer window (when there were clear needs if we wanted to step-up from last season) we had signed two or three immediate first-teamers of the kind of profile of Solanke, Eze, Neto etc (to use as examples, due to profile, how much they'd improve the first team and age/experience) alongside the likes of Bergvall etc then i'd look at things differently.

But on that basis, i see no difference as i say to pre-stadium transfers and so i wonder why people think we are 'more attractive' to players than we used to be...surely if we were, we would be taking full advantage
Click to expand...
First and third point... I didn't use those players as an example of us being more attractive. I used those as examples of us being able to spend more and sign both first teamers and younger talents. I used Bergvall and Vuskovic as examples of us maybe being somewhat more attractive to elite level young talents.

On the second point. We did that last summer, we know we can. Somewhere in the club a decision was made to go younger this season. I think that was a footballing decision, not a board or Levy decision.

As a slight aside the young player we did sign who seemed closest to being ready for the first team quickly was Odobert (little bit older, full season of PL football behind him) has more or less been injured all season so far.

I too wanted 2-3 first team ready players this summer. We ended up spending enough money on Odobert and Gray that we could instead have signed Eze or Neto (financially at least).

If that was a forced decision by Levy and the board to go that young I would be very much against that. If that was a decision made by the "transfer committee" and that included Ange I'm very much in favour of that. The time to evaluate if that was a good decision or not has not come for me. So far we've seen the expected downside of that, but we haven't seen the (hoped for) upside.

And had we spent that money on (for example) Eze and Neto we would have other issues to fix now. We would have been even shorter at full back (or had a cheap squad option type player). Had we signed Neto we would have that dribbly winger, but also an injury prone expensive player. Had we signed Eze we would have great competition for Maddison, but would he be an effective winger in this system? Similar for most players we could have signed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back