• 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

***OMT - Spurs vs FC Barcelona***

StephenH said:
Grealish you are right would not change last nights result but the likes of him would lesson the load on e.g. Dele or Eriksen. Giving us a better chance of getting players fitter quicker. Having quality backups for key areas can have a direct effect on situations like last nights lack of ‘quality’ cover.
Click to expand...
But some of the players (Sissoko, for example) are nowhere near our match day squad when everyone's fit.

So replace Sissoko with Grealish (autocorrects to Freakish) and we've spent a fortune on transfer fees and wages to let a youngster rot and not even make the bench for most of the season. With everyone fit, some of the players who started would have replaced those on the bench. And there's no way in hell Grealish replaces any of them in our squad.
 
scaramanga said:
But some of the players (Sissoko, for example) are nowhere near our match day squad when everyone's fit.

So replace Sissoko with Grealish (autocorrects to Freakish) and we've spent a fortune on transfer fees and wages to let a youngster rot and not even make the bench for most of the season. With everyone fit, some of the players who started would have replaced those on the bench. And there's no way in hell Grealish replaces any of them in our squad.
Click to expand...
But we didn't sign Grealish. That's the whole problem with our season.
 
scaramanga said:
But some of the players (Sissoko, for example) are nowhere near our match day squad when everyone's fit.

So replace Sissoko with Grealish (autocorrects to Freakish) and we've spent a fortune on transfer fees and wages to let a youngster rot and not even make the bench for most of the season. With everyone fit, some of the players who started would have replaced those on the bench. And there's no way in hell Grealish replaces any of them in our squad.
Click to expand...

Grealish or whoever could well have given us greater options and ease pressure on the first team squad.
Yes I agree Grealish’s barnet is dreadful!
 
Last edited:
harr1984 said:
I totally understand where we are in Terms to others, and our constraints/difficulties in terms of adding to the squad. But I don’t buy into the excuses of not signing anyone, and the ‘we kept all our key players’ - so did most other teams who also added to their squad. We have half a team of untouchables, but the other half of our first team we could upgrade on. And we will eventually, it just would have been positive to do so in at least one or two key positions this summer but hey ho...
Click to expand...
I would have liked to see us upgrade on a couple squad players. But I wouldn't be happy to see us pay over the top for someone without the ability to actually challenge our first team players, or with the potential to get there.

We're playing a fairly particular style, demand a high work rate, the right mentality and accepting of fairly limited wages. To find players ticking all the boxes, whilst making financial sense and with the right quality/potential isn't always going to be easy. I'm happy to see us save our money for when the right deal becomes available rather than sign a player that ends up failing.
 
scaramanga said:
But some of the players (Sissoko, for example) are nowhere near our match day squad when everyone's fit.

So replace Sissoko with Grealish (autocorrects to Freakish) and we've spent a fortune on transfer fees and wages to let a youngster rot and not even make the bench for most of the season. With everyone fit, some of the players who started would have replaced those on the bench. And there's no way in hell Grealish replaces any of them in our squad.
Click to expand...

Sissoko is near the squad when everyone’s fit - probably 1 or 2 attacking injuries away. And we will regularly have 1 or 2 attacking injuries.

Doesn’t everyone agree that at this level you want two decent players per position? Decent being better than Sissoko, Llorente and N’koudou.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Agreed

Chelsea fit team has Barkley and Giroud and Loftus Cheek on the bench

Ours has a combination of Lamela, alli, Son and Moura who I’d take every day Of the week, plus of course winks or Dier or Moussa or Wanyama there too as back ups assuming 2 are playing
Click to expand...

Nah it has Giroud, Pedro, Fabregas and ONE of Loftus-Cheek / Barkley / Moses.

I agree our top 6 attacking players represent good quality in depth - as good as Chelsea’s - but it’s the next level of Llorente / Sissoko / N’koudou where there’s a big drop compared to our peers. As illustrated by last night’s bench with 2 attacking players injured.
 
elltrev said:
Sissoko is near the squad when everyone’s fit - probably 1 or 2 attacking injuries away. And we will regularly have 1 or 2 attacking injuries.

Doesn’t everyone agree that at this level you want two decent players per position? Decent being better than Sissoko, Llorente and N’koudou.
Click to expand...
For 3 or 4 attacking roles (depending on our system) we have Kane, Son, Alli, Eriksen, Moura and Lamela that are all in the very good to fantastic range.

Having another option better than Sissoko and Llorente would be... better, yes. But at what financial cost is that too expensive to be worth the investment?

It's not like Levy is siphoning off money not spent on transfers to himself or Lewis. Had we signed an expensive backup player to upgrade on Sissoko last summer we might not have gotten Moura.

The cost of a failed signing is massive. Not just the money, but the opportunity cost and the footballing consequences of playing a player that's not good enough, or not a good enough fit.

I'm happy to wait for the right player at the right cost when that player becomes available. Our squad is very strong, for me that patience is the right approach.
 
elltrev said:
Nah it has Giroud, Pedro, Fabregas and ONE of Loftus-Cheek / Barkley / Moses.

I agree our top 6 attacking players represent good quality in depth - as good as Chelsea’s - but it’s the next level of Llorente / Sissoko / N’koudou where there’s a big drop compared to our peers. As illustrated by last night’s bench with 2 attacking players injured.
Click to expand...

Whose Chelsea next tier?

I can’t think of any to be honest as they never use em
 
StephenH said:
Grealish you are right would not change last nights result but the likes of him would lesson the load on e.g. Dele or Eriksen. Giving us a better chance of getting players fitter quicker. Having quality backups for key areas can have a direct effect on situations like last nights lack of ‘quality’ cover.
Click to expand...
I guess I just don’t see him as much better than what we had on the bench anyway, 4 years ago you may have said the same about Sissoko had we not bought him
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Whose Chelsea next tier?

I can’t think of any to be honest as they never use em
Click to expand...

That is chelsea’s next tier! For 6 positions they have the following 12:

Morata
Hazard
Willian
Kovacic
Jorginho
Kante
Giroud
Pedro
Moses
Fabregas
Barkley
Loftus-Cheek
 
elltrev said:
That is chelsea’s next tier! For 6 positions they have the following 12:

Morata
Hazard
Willian
Kovacic
Jorginho
Kante
Giroud
Pedro
Moses
Fabregas
Barkley
Loftus-Cheek
Click to expand...

And we have:
Kane
Llorente
Son
Lamela
Moura
Alli
Eriksen
Dembele
Dier
Winks
Wanyama
Sissoko

We’re as good as, if not better than them IMO in those positions

They have 3 centre mids, but only one true holder. Moses who suits wing back. This year Willian seems out of favour for some reason and Fabregas too
 
elltrev said:
In that situation their bench would likely have Giroud, Barkley and Loftus-Cheek as attacking options vs ours of Llorente, Sissoko and N'Koudou - I'd argue there's is better, and that's where 1 or 2 signings could have strengthened our squad - our depth in attacking positions when we have 1 or 2 injuries.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's fair. They have a better reserve striker than us in Giroud but only because Morata isn't as good as Kane - it's the price we pay for having one of the best in the world in that position. @imcallingbullsh*t pretty well summarizes the rest - not fair to say Sissoko and N'Koudou are our Barkley and Loftus-Cheek equivalents.
 
StephenH said:
Grealish you are right would not change last nights result but the likes of him would lesson the load on e.g. Dele or Eriksen. Giving us a better chance of getting players fitter quicker. Having quality backups for key areas can have a direct effect on situations like last nights lack of ‘quality’ cover.
Click to expand...

I think we do have quality back ups. The problem is that we had a very unlucky amount of starters out vs Barca - JV, Dele, Eriksen, Lloris only just returning from a difficult time (partly of his own making but the team suffers) and Dier and Dembele rotated out.

You typically don't have that many players out of form or off the pitch at once. Kane, Eriksen, Dele, Son, Lamela, Moura, Llorente is a perfectly accepted group of options to have in the attacking positions.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
Not trying to turn this into a 'is Sissoko a laughing stock or not?' debate but didn't anyone else think we looked a lot more balanced after he came on?
Click to expand...

I thought he looked ok and was fine until the rooster up for the 4th

Would have actually like to have seen Rose come on instead of Llorente
 
BrainOfLevy said:
Not trying to turn this into a 'is Sissoko a laughing stock or not?' debate but didn't anyone else think we looked a lot more balanced after he came on?
Click to expand...
No fan of his but - bloopers aside - that was the best I've seen him play in a Spurs shirt. But it all counts for nothing because of one too many moment of crassness,
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
If he doesn't get into positions where it's worth aiming balls at his head, how can everyone else be expected to adapt to him? There's this mantra that we stop hoofing crosses in as soon as Llorente comes on, but really it's because he tends to replace someone who looked more likely to get into a good place.
Click to expand...
There was one situation where Llorente and Trippier made a perfect runs into the box, and Kane missed them both with about 15 meters.
 
elltrev said:
That is chelsea’s next tier! For 6 positions they have the following 12:

Morata
Hazard
Willian
Kovacic
Jorginho
Kante
Giroud
Pedro
Moses
Fabregas
Barkley
Loftus-Cheek
Click to expand...

You're including players there that in our system would play in the deeper positions. It's a choice between Kane/Llorente and Morata/Giroud, and I go with Kane and Llorente every time.

Then it's a choice between Eriksen, Dele, Son, Lamela, Moura, N'Koudou vs Hazard, Willian, Pedro, Barkley, Loftus-Cheek...Moses?

Then it's a choice between Dembele, Winks, Sissoko, Dier, Wanyama vs Kovacic, Fabregas, Kante, Jorginho.

In the attacking midfield positions, Hazard would obviously get into our side but I don't think their group is way ahead of ours or any more deep at all. Is Moses now playing in the attacking positions again? If so, I'm not really fussed on him.

In the deeper positions, it's probably the weakest part of our squad and they beat us there, but when our players are fit and firing we aren't going to get rolled over by many teams.

Overall, to say that we have some massive depth problem and that Barca proves it, or that other squads are way ahead of us, just isn't fair. We had a heck of a lot of injuries against Barca and that doesn't mean we should have gone for Grealish - or pushed the boat out for him any more than we did. It's easier to look back now with injuries across the board to say he would have gotten some games but we are in an unlucky period, it doesn't mean the decision taken was wrong in the summer. We can't just load up on players so that we have a back up to the back up, however nice it may be. The fact that he could have filled in deeper and further forward, and maybe on the wider positions would have been a bonus, but it really isn't the end of our world.

We haven't just had 'one or two injuries', we've had 2 of our key attacking midfielders out of the side at the same time. That is unfortunate. Often one of them may be out, but most of the time you have 2 or 3 of Lamela, Moura, Son, on the bench and that is bloody good. If Chelsea had Hazard and Willian out, Pedro and Barkley starting, Loftus-Cheek and Moses on the bench, suddenly people start saying the same thing about the depth of their squad, even though it's at that time those players should be playing. As I said, the idea of needing back ups to back ups is just silly. Either way, if we then start getting into a debate about whether Loftus-Cheek and Moses are better than whoever our back ups in the equivalent situation would be, it's a largely pointless one because if neither Chelsea's players or ours aren't playing, they aren't going to be in form, and they will be back ups for a reason. It won't make a grand bit of difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back