Antonio Conte - officially NOT the coach of THFC

[DubSpur]

Don't you think everybody wants to sign the right player? What big spenders are doing is încreasing their chances of getting that right player through spending a bigger amount of money. A team spending an 100m/signing will EVENTUALLY have a better team than one spending 30m/signing.

Nobody is spending 100m per player, not even City. Our best signings have been cheaper signings. Our most expensive have tended to be flops.
There's no guarantees in football (see the list of expensive footballers that haven't been worth it that @Lilbaz posted)

 

[Raziel]

I don't think he's changing at all, he always spent what we could afford. The belt had to be tightened when the stadium was being built and when covid hit. It can now be loosened again (and is being). The only thing that has changed is our income and what we can afford to spend. A lot of fans don't take into account the circumstances around a particular time frame and what was spent.

Fans/media and people in general lack the ability to grasp nuance.

Spurs has always spent whatever money we make, the point of the stadium was to increase that ability to spend. The caveats were the Government/London/Tottenham council dragged out approvals on the stadium for years, then we had the build, then we had Covid, so the income stream expected from stadium is probably 6-8 years behind the original planning. Add in the complexity of since the concept of the stadium was even thought of, Chelsea, City & Saudi Sportswashing Machine have got their own cheat codes.

But back to the point of Conte, I'm still not understanding people's point on him which seems to be -> if you don't back him to every player he wants in every position he wants, he can't beat Aston Villa? how is this a zero sum game?

For me, you can blame Levy all day long on Jose/Conte not being a fit, but lets be clear, there is a huge sample of games from both of them that I'd expect a better result from Mason in charge, they simply have not lived up to expectation/reputation and there is a real conversation of are their tactics/styles outdated and being exposed?

 

[Raziel]

Nobody is spending 100m per player, not even City. Our best signings have been cheaper signings. Our most expensive have tended to be flops.
There's no guarantees in football (see the list of expensive footballers that haven't been worth it that @Lilbaz posted)

Just fyi, while City's strategy for years was to buy in the £60M range with high salaries, they spent way more on Haaland than £100M (despite the bs reported)

 

[Baleforce]

Don't you think everybody wants to sign the right player? What big spenders are doing is încreasing their chances of getting that right player through spending a bigger amount of money. A team spending an 100m/signing will EVENTUALLY have a better team than one spending 30m/signing.

no they won’t, we could pay 100m for 10 players from league 2, doesn’t make them any better

the cost is irrelevant, it’s about athleticism and ability

the market value isn’t always correct

 

[billyiddo]

Then why get such manager-favorite specific signings? Who didn't do the diligence on them beyond the pitch? Or are you suggesting that Hitchen/the club identified those two, because that was not my understanding mate. Pochettino complained of only being ' a coach' in the spring of 2019; why did Levy make amends with him? It was a really poor bit of planning and business. The truth is, Levy's head was swiveled not just by the Portuguese whisperer but by his own ego being under attack. Anyway, this is all probably a bit sideways...I really hope the current situation works out, but it feels like I'm watching Titanic again i.e. we know the ending. Here's hoping Leo and Winslett sail off in an escape speedboat at the end of this screening!

He complained later than the spring, it was after Ndombele had been signed and whilst on the presesson tour iirc and he was quick to say he was 2 years from being at the level required - doesn't really scream of a ringing endorsement of an exprnsive player that you wanted imv.

I don't really want to go down this rabbit hole again but i think if you split our transfer business as pre Hitchen, Hitchen and then post Hitchen there's a pretty strong case to be made that things were at their worst, player recruitment wise during that specific spell. I also think there was an argument to be made he had some connections with France, we picked up several players from that league during his time, Moura Aurier and Lo Celso all from PSG (though obviously links to Poch there too tbf), Nkoudou & Njie, maybe others too? - links obviously build up at director level which facilitate such deals, like Paratichi will have his contacts in Italy and at other clubs/agents that he has a good relationship with.

I just don't see how you spend big in the market, supposedly on the managers choices and then get rid before he's had a chance to work with them - if they were his choices then it's just as big a mark on the club for calling it quits so soon after making the investment.

 

[glasgowspur]

I think the worrying thing right now should be the patterns. Sackings occur only when it would leave the chairman looking unpopular NOT to sack a manager. He does not seem to make decisions based on anything beyond that metric. The time for Poch to have gone was that summer; I would've been flouncing around like an old tart (as opposed to my usual flouncing!) BUT it would've been the fair, decent and brave thing to do. It would also have been very unpopular for a hot minute with a tract of the supporters (i.e. your friendly flouncer-in-chief) but there we go. A big decision. Even Mourinho was done largely when it would've seen mutiny not to sack him (again, flouncer here was delighted, but that is hardly the point)...I desperately hope this is not the wave we're riding...

A section of the fans have never accepted conte, they have become more vocal recently but i don't think they the number of them has grown significantly.
When we first went for conte i was dead set against it, i don't think he is a good fit.
After the car crash that was nuno i was desperate for conte, something isn't right at the club and if we need a disruptor to sort it out then good, get conte in sort it out and move on.
Whether we move on with or without conte is another matter, but we need someone who is not going to taje any nonsense or worry about upsetting people.
I did think conte was that man, must admit that I've been disappointed in some respects.

 

[glasgowspur]

Nobody is spending 100m per player, not even City. Our best signings have been cheaper signings. Our most expensive have tended to be flops.
There's no guarantees in football (see the list of expensive footballers that haven't been worth it that @Lilbaz posted)

Jack grealish says hello.
I know hard to believe, especially as he's spent a lot of time on the bench.

 

[DubSpur]

Jack grealish says hello.
I know hard to believe, especially as he's spent a lot of time on the bench.

He's the only player City have paid 100m for and one in the list of players not worth it from Lilbaz

 

[Gutter Boy]

A section of the fans have never accepted conte, they have become more vocal recently but i don't think they the number of them has grown significantly.
When we first went for conte i was dead set against it, i don't think he is a good fit.
After the car crash that was nuno i was desperate for conte, something isn't right at the club and if we need a disruptor to sort it out then good, get conte in sort it out and move on.
Whether we move on with or without conte is another matter, but we need someone who is not going to taje any nonsense or worry about upsetting people.
I did think conte was that man, must admit that I've been disappointed in some respects.

I was a bit neutral about his appointment. He was a hell of a lot better than the last two guys, but I had concerns about his volatility, and most importantly style of football.

Over time I've slightly warmed to him as a person. However I've grown more convinced that his football is ineffective. He also now seems to have lost the buy-in of the players and we are just getting progressively worst. Most of all though I've just grown despondent with just how joyless our games are. I'm just so desperate now for a bit of flair, creativity, possession and pro-activity. Its been four years since we've seen any of that.

In short, I'm out - we need something different now.

 

[billyiddo]

Don't you think everybody wants to sign the right player? What big spenders are doing is încreasing their chances of getting that right player through spending a bigger amount of money. A team spending an 100m/signing will EVENTUALLY have a better team than one spending 30m/signing.

When you have a lot of players to bring in it's going to be hard to do that if you looking to spend close to record fees on several of them. That said there's certainly been enough young punts (Sarr/Gil/Spence etc) that aren't really getting any sort of look in that shows we may have been better off signing 1 player of higher quality ready to step in to the team straight away and not suffered through less numbers in the squad.

 

[Lemonade Money]

No it isn't a popularity contest and I'm sure Levy has realised, long ago, he's pushing water up a hill on that front.
I can't believe it's a negative that he sat down with a manager, that he clearly rated and had a close connection with (still does) to discuss refocusing and going again. Sentimentality getting in the way probably is the criticism here. Porch simply went because that refocus didn't work. Results and performances were poor...Poch went in those circumstances just like a 100 other managers (has Frank gone yet).
Jose went because he became a prick. Most likely via dressing room unhappiness, and the standard dreadful performances. I doubt Levy was aiming for 100% popularity with that one, being it was a week before a final.

You would've thought that @thfcsteff of all people would give Levy credit for one last expensive throw of the dice to help fix broken Poch.

 

[Lilbaz]

Don't you think everybody wants to sign the right player? What big spenders are doing is încreasing their chances of getting that right player through spending a bigger amount of money. A team spending an 100m/signing will EVENTUALLY have a better team than one spending 30m/signing.

What bigger spenders can do is retain their good players and recycle those not up to it. Chelsea were very good at it, utd offered too much wages so got lumbered. Liverpool has been excellent at identifying players making few mistakes. City have become better but made a lot of mistakes along the way.

 

[Raziel]

He's the only player City have paid 100m for and one in the list of players not worth it from Lilbaz

Haaland says hi! -> sign on fee +father bonus + agent fees = £120M+ plus £34M/yr in wages (and he can leave after 2 years for £128M)

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Don't you think everybody wants to sign the right player? What big spenders are doing is încreasing their chances of getting that right player through spending a bigger amount of money. A team spending an 100m/signing will EVENTUALLY have a better team than one spending 30m/signing.

Unless you're Man Utd.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

What bigger spenders can do is retain their good players and recycle those not up to it. Chelsea were very good at it, utd offered too much wages so got lumbered. Liverpool has been excellent at identifying players making few mistakes. City have become better but made a lot of mistakes along the way.

And that's the main point....£50m mistakes don't mean a thing at cheat code clubs. They just keep rolling the dice.

It's why Conte says we can't make mistakes in the market. we can compete but we can't have windows like 2/3 years back. More Liverpool like, yes, and recent evidence looks like we are improving in this area.

 

[DubSpur]

Haaland says hi! -> sign on fee +father bonus + agent fees = £120M+ plus £34M/yr in wages (and he can leave after 2 years for £128M)

Where did you get these figures? The buyout clause was a little over 50m. The highest I've ever seen quoted was 85m and that gave no breakdown of how that figure was arrived at. Can't argue that he's not worth it though.

 

[glasgowspur]

He's the only player City have paid 100m for and one in the list of players not worth it from Lilbaz

Imho there's not many that are worth £100m, but that's a different conversation.
Can't for the life of me understand why city chose grealish as the guy to break thier policy for.

 

[Baleforce]

Imho there's not many that are worth £100m, but that's a different conversation.
Can't for the life of me understand why city chose grealish as the guy to break thier policy for.

It was madness when we were looking at him for around 30m.

 

[Raziel]

Where did you get these figures? The buyout clause was a little over 50m. The highest I've ever seen quoted was 85m and that gave no breakdown of how that figure was arrived at. Can't argue that he's not worth it though.

£51M rising to £85M w/add ons
Agent fee is supposedly £42M, his dad's fee £25M
his yearly salary is £34M, so in his first year he will cost City >£152M (likely more with add ons)
Real buy cost min £118M, rising to £152
And has a release clause that says he can leave after 2 years for £128M (so less than his first year cost, quite possible they would sunk more than £220M in at that point)

City got absolutely rinsed on this deal, and it's why even Madrid wanted nothing to do with it.

What's absolute trash is how they have their PR and media mouthpieces constantly harping on the £51M number. If you do a search a few places reported the details early on (there is even some talk about UEFA looking at agent fee max % as a problem out of this deal), but City has obviously done some damage control to keep it quiet.

Edit: P.S this is why I'm very cautious when people go "oh, we missed out on x player by £5M", IIRC Martial was another one of those where the reported number was way low vs. actual because of all the same bs.

 

[IulianSteaua]

no they won’t, we could pay 100m for 10 players from league 2, doesn’t make them any better

the cost is irrelevant, it’s about athleticism and ability

the market value isn’t always correct

Who said spent 100m on League 2 players? I thought we all understood I was talking about players like Bastoni, Gvardiol, Skriniar and that is just for CB. Yet people stay here with a Davies, Dier and Tanganga defensive line and talk about the right player and Antonio Conte. Just BUST the bank and get us just 2 of those 3 and we would be în a lot better position. Levi is dragging his butt în buying A KID with potențial and low wages, Porro(which Levi himself is what the club wants) and WE STILL don't spend the £39m release clause. This is embarrassing if you want to compete at this level, Levi is embarrassing, ENIC is embarrassing, Lewis is embarrassing. Chelsea is preparing to pass £200m spent this January and we can't fork out 39m for a player WHO EVEN MEETS Levi's unambitious plan. Gvardiol and Bastoni also meet his young and not on HUGE wages "plan", why aren't we after them?