ENIC

[Andyandy]

You haven't given a proper answer to Finney's questions. You've just dismissed them and been unable to back up your argument.

You've also made several digs at other people for not understanding risk analysis but have refused to give a risk analysis for your favoured transfer strategy and explain how this is lower risk than our current one.

Do you mean Post #521? Or another question?

The full risk analysis would take hours but they don't consider decisions in absolute terms only in terms of probability. However to quickly summarise, my idea is higher risk but higher gain of course. However my idea has a wider range of potential outcomes. Both policies are most likely to on average yield Europa cup spots, however my idea could fluke the champions league, a cup or conversely mid table. The current policy gets Europa cup every year and can offer no more. Of course it's still a dynamic solution, so if success comes, we can grow the squad to exploit it.


Sent from my iPad using Fapatalk

 

[Andyandy]

No more so than you are by saying these players would have come to us

I am not. Players sign for clubs for different reasons and at different points in their careers. You need to sit in a room with their agent to know what they want. I've never done that, nor have you (I assume) so it's aimless speculation.

However here is somebody who does: http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2914...150942/redknapp-champions-league-is-overrated

Also here is another example of a world class signing who won't sign for a club not challenging for the league or playing in the champions league: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/9377256.stm

As you can see it doesn't ever happen.


Sent from my iPad using Fapatalk

 

[milo]

Do you mean Post #521? Or another question?

The full risk analysis would take hours but they don't consider decisions in absolute terms only in terms of probability. However to quickly summarise, my idea is higher risk but higher gain of course. However my idea has a wider range of potential outcomes. Both policies are most likely to on average yield Europa cup spots, however my idea could fluke the champions league, a cup or conversely mid table. The current policy gets Europa cup every year and can offer no more. Of course it's still a dynamic solution, so if success comes, we can grow the squad to exploit it.


Sent from my iPad using Fapatalk

If you don't have time to conduct a risk analysis and only talk in generalities, I suggest that you don't tell other posters that they don't know anything about it.

 

[Andyandy]

If you don't have time to conduct a risk analysis and only talk in generalities, I suggest that you don't tell other posters that they don't know anything about it.

Ok the answer is 21.


Sent from my iPad using Fapatalk

 

[Jurgen the German]

I'm not his biggest fan but I wouldn't ever deny the right for people to defend Levy. Having said that, it does get a bit tiresome people trotting out the old "do a Leeds" line as if we would go bankrupt if we went £1 over our transfer budget. I also still wonder how many of these signings are Levy signings rather than the DoF/manager's choice. I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting we have the resources or the clout to spend £200m on players every season, but it's just frustrating as a fan to see our net spend be so little and to see Levy hinder past and present managers with his lack of forward thinking (I'm thinking of AVB and Redknapp in particular by not signing strikers in January windows).

 

[jimmyb]

Do you mean Post #521? Or another question?

The full risk analysis would take hours but they don't consider decisions in absolute terms only in terms of probability. However to quickly summarise, my idea is higher risk but higher gain of course. However my idea has a wider range of potential outcomes. Both policies are most likely to on average yield Europa cup spots, however my idea could fluke the champions league, a cup or conversely mid table. The current policy gets Europa cup every year and can offer no more. Of course it's still a dynamic solution, so if success comes, we can grow the squad to exploit it.


Sent from my iPad using Fapatalk

Funny.............I could have sworn that the current policy got us Champions League football once and should have done so again had Bayern Munich not wastefully squandered 30+ attempts at goal in the CL final or had Chelsea not scored from virtually their only good chance. Not to mention that the current policy got us within the narrowest whisker of qualifying for the CL on a couple of other occasions.

Clearly, though, my memory must be faulty. None of these things can have happened.

 

[jimmyb]

I am not. Players sign for clubs for different reasons and at different points in their careers. You need to sit in a room with their agent to know what they want. I've never done that, nor have you (I assume) so it's aimless speculation.

However here is somebody who does: http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2914...150942/redknapp-champions-league-is-overrated

Also here is another example of a world class signing who won't sign for a club not challenging for the league or playing in the champions league: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/l/liverpool/9377256.stm

As you can see it doesn't ever happen.


Sent from my iPad using Fapatalk

Suarez wasn't anywhere close to being world class when Liverpool signed him. In fact, he had less pedigree than Lamela and Soldado, having played in a lesser league.

And Redknapp's comments were about Champions League level players being willing to play for a non (or lapsed) Champions League club if they think it likely that that club will soon be a Champions League club (again). His comments weren't about bona fide, proven, world class superstars wanting to join a club like Spurs which can't afford even half what such superstars would get paid elsewhere and which can only hope (rather than expect) to become a CL club in the near future.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Funny.............I could have sworn that the current policy got us Champions League football once and should have done so again had Bayern Munich not wastefully squandered 30+ attempts at goal in the CL final or had Chelsea not scored from virtually their only good chance. Not to mention that the current policy got us within the narrowest whisker of qualifying for the CL on a couple of other occasions.

Clearly, though, my memory must be faulty. None of these things can have happened.

Jimmy, not disagreeing with this, I just don't see us moving any further forward than we are now, unless we stumble upon the next Fergie. Not saying he hasn't imrpoved us, but I don't think he's the best chairman in the league as some people perpetually claim he is.

 

[jimmyb]

Jimmy, not disagreeing with this, I just don't see us moving any further forward than we are now, unless we stumble upon the next Fergie. Not saying he hasn't imrpoved us, but I don't think he's the best chairman in the league as some people perpetually claim he is.

Different argument, mate.

I was merely responding to andyandy's specific point.

 

[billyiddo]

Suarez wasn't anywhere close to being world class when Liverpool signed him. In fact, he had less pedigree than Lamela and Soldado, having played in a lesser league.

And Redknapp's comments were about Champions League level players being willing to play for a non (or lapsed) Champions League club if they think it likely that that club will soon be a Champions League club (again). His comments weren't about bona fide, proven, world class superstars wanting to join a club like Spurs which can't afford even half what such superstars would get paid elsewhere and which can only hope (rather than expect) to become a CL club in the near future.

+1

That's even without the fact that the examples andyandy gave were all targeted by clubs with : CL football/first team football/title challenge/more money - iirc Liverpool had a free run at Suarez who, as you point out, was nowhere near being considered WC at this point

 

[Superhudd]

I just wanted to say.. I totally see where andy is coming from regarding swapping 25 decent squad players.. to 2 world class players.. 17 decent squad players and 6 home grown players.

 

[spurspinter1]

I think we all agree with the one so insightful they named him twice in the idea that it's good to have world class players but it's more an issue of realism with the discussions I believe.

The term world class does annoy me though, surely there's only 11 world class players ie those that would get in to the world XI. Now it takes a few games and some triffic youtube vids for a player to to become "world class" it seems

 

[Jordinho]

I just wanted to say.. I totally see where andy is coming from regarding swapping 25 decent squad players.. to 2 world class players.. 17 decent squad players and 6 home grown players.

Two home grown world class players? :-k

 

[SteveAWOL]

+1

That's even without the fact that the examples andyandy gave were all targeted by clubs with : CL football/first team football/title challenge/more money - iirc Liverpool had a free run at Suarez who, as you point out, was nowhere near being considered WC at this point

Didn't Redknapp decline the opportunity to sign Suarez, just before Liverpool took a punt on him, because there were doubts raised about his ability to play up front as a striker?

 

[billyiddo]

I just wanted to say.. I totally see where andy is coming from regarding swapping 25 decent squad players.. to 2 world class players.. 17 decent squad players and 6 home grown players.

I don't know - season before last we seemingly had one WC player and a light squad of so-so quality players, which sounds tailor made for andyandy's argument thinking about it- would you swap that squad for the one we currently have?

 

[Bullet]

In recent years we have been right to sign 6 "pretty good" players, as the squad had holes in it all over the place

Right now we have got a balanced squad with 2 decent players in every position... so right now would you rather

(a) Sign 4 more decent players, they wouldn't necessarily oust any first teamers, but they would be good players

or

(b) Sign 1 top notch player for 4 times the price and 4 times the salary? E.g. Ozil or Mata or Ribery or whoever the hell

 

[Jordinho]

In recent years we have been right to sign 6 "pretty good" players, as the squad had holes in it all over the place

Right now we have got a balanced squad with 2 decent players in every position... so right now would you rather

(a) Sign 4 more decent players, they wouldn't necessarily oust any first teamers, but they would be good players

or

(b) Sign 1 top notch player for 4 times the price and 4 times the salary? E.g. Ozil or Mata or Ribery or whoever the hell

Hopefully (and I assume it's the plan anyway) we'll have good enough players come through from the academy to provide the squad filler, meaning we can focus on signing first team players. It's what Wenger and Ferguson have been doing for years. Plus the occasional punt that rarely works out.

 

[Superhudd]

I think we all agree with the one so insightful they named him twice in the idea that it's good to have world class players but it's more an issue of realism with the discussions I believe.

The term world class does annoy me though, surely there's only 11 world class players ie those that would get in to the world XI. Now it takes a few games and some triffic youtube vids for a player to to become "world class" it seems

Yawn.. are you really going to bring that to the table to make a point. Jeez!

 

[Superhudd]

Two home grown world class players? :-k

Preferably yeah. :ross:

 

[Superhudd]

Didn't Redknapp decline the opportunity to sign Suarez, just before Liverpool took a punt on him, because there were doubts raised about his ability to play up front as a striker?

Yeah it proved Arry was/is way behind the modern game. (I will not answer to Harry fans should they reply, as I really cannot be ar$ed!. :-" )