• 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

Summer transfer thread, AvB window wrap up pg 1527

Which player would you like to see take over from Luka Modric?

  • Total voters
    147
  • Poll closed .
dingdongo said:
To be fair the Europa League in Harrys mind equates to the 'Forced To use the youth' point that Rosenthal mentions.

Not many of those that had a good game would ever force their way into his first 11.. they were purely used to rest the main squad.

Jake Livermore is the one exception in that he got a fair few appearances in the PL games.
Click to expand...

What about Kyle Walker?

And how was he forced to play youth in the Europa League?
 
Johnny Ray said:
He bought Parker when we've got Sandro in our ranks. Proof enough for me.
Click to expand...

To be fair Sandro was injured and wasn't really fit for the first half of the season, and Livermore was still unproven at this level. Don't think Harry can be criticised for the transfer, perhaps in his use of the player over the course of the season but getting him in was definitely the right thing to do.
 
Johnny Ray said:
He bought Parker when we've got Sandro in our ranks. Proof enough for me.
Click to expand...

OK. Now bearing in mind the first two matches of the season, what would you have done then? Remember that Sandro and Huddlestone were both injured and couldn't start. Do you believe our team was fine without Parker and do you think we would have gone on our W12 D1 without him?
 
Parker was instrumental in the first part of the season. Didn't he get like 5 or so man of the matches in a row and then follow that up with MOTM for England on international duty? unreal.
 
Sky Sports understands Queens Park Rangers are closing in on the signing of goalkeeper Robert Green.
 
The Moonlit Knight said:
What about Kyle Walker?

And how was he forced to play youth in the Europa League?
Click to expand...

By forced I mean because he's never fully trusted anyone outside of the first team regulars so he never rotates in the Premier League. Therefore he couldn't risk burning out or injuring his favourites so he had to play a complete fringe/youth in the Europa League. It would be better if he had a large enough squad that he could trust in to rotate in the league and therefore be able to play slightly stronger sides in the EL which would benefit the youth players more.

I think everyone would agree that Redknapp has been primarily focused on improving the first team and the achieving CL football. It's not a bad thing, we've had a successful period under him. I think a lot of people see all the alienated fringe players and the lack of talent coming through (Walker, Livermore (and hopefully Caulker) aside) and wonder where the long time planning is. Right now we have around 10 fringe players desperate to leave when it would be nice to have a greater number of young players at the level of Caulker ready to be a part of the squad.


EDIT: Just realised I waffle a lot but you get the jist. Also this topic ain't really ITK related!
 
Naughton16 said:
Wage bill has increased from ?ú53m when Redknapp arrived to ?ú90m. With no CL football the wages will be around 70% of turnover compared to 43% when Redknapp arrived. (Those in the Harry is a miracle worker/ 4-5-4 camp would do well to remember this)

I'm just saying that with Frediel, King, Gallas all needing to be replaced now or in the near future, and currently only one striker in Defoe, there's a huge amount of investment needed in this squad.
Click to expand...

I think this is a bit of a false assumption.

Some recent financial results:

View attachment 697

As you can see, since 2007 the Year-on-Year increase in wages has matched the Year-on-Year increase in Turnover, ie: 18%. Therefore, our increase in revenue generated through other areas of the business is offsetting increases in wage costs. But that includes Champions League! I hear you say. Okay, lets completely strip 2011 out then: it outturns to 13% YoY Wages versa 14% YoY T/O.

I would heavily wager - pardon the pun - that a lot of steep wage increase (36%) is associated with one-off bonus payments, ie: it's not a stepped-increase. Obviously we'll see within the latest financial reports whether this bears true or not, but I would expect wages to drop back to a sustainable ?ú75m or so.

For illustrative purposes, even if we lost ?ú20m from T/O, and wages reduced by ?ú10m - to allow for a figurative one-off bonus amount - that would still only return to 57% wages:T/O which is bang in-line with our average over the last two years. I don't see this great chasm which many are trying to paint - only if you ignore other important factors.

Even in the unlikely event that wages:T/O rose to 70%, you have to bear in mind two things: i) that the club has acted to reduce wages by disposal of registrations, and ii) that the club will also begin to see significant increases in income from the renegotiated media rights deals. So, even if the ratio did rise to 70% it is highly unlikely to be a long-term; more a spike in an otherwise sustainable pattern.

I don't see, either, that wage increase should serve as a criticism of the manager? Because, whilst wages has indeed increased, so has the profitability of the business - therefore it's a bit of an empty claim/criticism. Ironically even, the increase is going to be exponential in relation to the success of the football club: win more, or achieve more - and you'll pay more for it. So, would you rather win less, and achieve less? The criticism would be valid if - as is not the case here - wages were rising, yet revenue was stagnant.
 
Sheikh Ma Nuggets said:
I think this is a bit of a false assumption.

Some recent financial results:

View attachment 697

As you can see, since 2007 the Year-on-Year increase in wages has matched the Year-on-Year increase in Turnover, ie: 18%. Therefore, our increase in revenue generated through other areas of the business is offsetting increases in wage costs. But that includes Champions League! I hear you say. Okay, lets completely strip 2011 out then: it outturns to 13% YoY Wages versa 14% YoY T/O.

I would heavily wager - pardon the pun - that a lot of steep wage increase (36%) is associated with one-off bonus payments, ie: it's not a stepped-increase. Obviously we'll see within the latest financial reports whether this bears true or not, but I would expect wages to drop back to a sustainable ?ú75m or so.

For illustrative purposes, even if we lost ?ú20m from T/O, and wages reduced by ?ú10m - to allow for a figurative one-off bonus amount - that would still only return to 57% wages:T/O which is bang in-line with our average over the last two years. I don't see this great chasm which many are trying to paint - only if you ignore other important factors.

Even in the unlikely event that wages:T/O rose to 70%, you have to bear in mind two things: i) that the club has acted to reduce wages by disposal of registrations, and ii) that the club will also begin to see significant increases in income from the renegotiated media rights deals. So, even if the ratio did rise to 70% it is highly unlikely to be a long-term; more a spike in an otherwise sustainable pattern.

I don't see, either, that wage increase should serve as a criticism of the manager? Because, whilst wages has indeed increased, so has the profitability of the business - therefore it's a bit of an empty claim/criticism. Ironically even, the increase is going to be exponential in relation to the success of the football club: win more, or achieve more - and you'll pay more for it. So, would you rather win less, and achieve less? The criticism would be valid if - as is not the case here - wages were rising, yet revenue was stagnant.
Click to expand...


You should save that into a word document.


I can guarantee that the 'point' will be raised another 10-20 times over the summer..
 
Wriggly said:
Ian Abrahams ‏@Moose_talkSPORT
Hearing reports Steve Caulker set to be Brendan Rodgers first signing at LFC
Click to expand...

The Moose is a WUM.. He's a Spammer and always posts rubbish to wind up Spurs fans. He's only tweeting to stir things. Best to ignore the idiot.


EDIT: Although could you imagine if it was another year loan. What would the scousers think to that lol!
 
africanspurs said:
how is that great business?
Click to expand...

What has he cost us to bring him through/wages? 8m is good money use your head guys ffs it's not hard to understand how 8m for a player whose cost us next to nothing is great business.

For the record I don't want us to sell him but just saying its good money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back