• 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

Bishop said:
I agree that the aim should ultimately be to build a squad and ours was pretty bad due to years of neglect, poor selections and a mush mash of philosophies so yes a total rebuid was necessary. At the same time though sometimes having a stand out player or two can be the difference maker. We had that ourselves in the last 5 years where as our squad and first quality seriously diminished we were held aloft by the qualities of Kane and Son. So sometimes having a stand out is key. I struggle to see Saudi Sportswashing Machine finishing in the CL 2 times out of 3 without Isak, he's their difference maker as an example.

I guess philosophically do you rebuild from a position of extreme quality or do you spread that across the group. If you spread it too thinly you just end up with mediocrity and that's the fine balance that the recruitment team need to find. Improve the squad diligently and I expensively whilst keeping the technical and tactical levels high.
Click to expand...
I think overall we've recruited well in recent seasons.

Ben Davies being the only player left in the squad now since Paratici first came in shows how big the job has been so far. How much business we've had to do.

I guess we've skewed fairly young and more on the quantity side over immediate quality. I think we've kind of had to.
 
Muttley said:
I'm on the fence.

The big pro - We're one signing away this summer from being the 4th highest spender in the PL again. I guess the question becomes whether 6th or 7th is satisfactory when you've caught up with past deficits of squad quality and you're now consistently spending at that level. Eventually, you should gravitate higher than 6th or 7th but clearly not first or second based on this run rate of spending. Also, 5th is CL with the UEFA coefficients.

The big con - it's no longer a top 6 of money clubs with one or two of them having an off season leaving a door open. Saudi Sportswashing Machine are well and truly in the mix nowadays and no clubs have vacated the space. If Utd come back, then it will be as competitive as I've known it.
Click to expand...
I know people keep saying we are one of the highest spenders but what are we spending it on.....I know most clubs make expensive mistakes. But I think we spent so much on what's turned out to be average it's quite amazing.

I didn't want Richie for 60. Solanke was a lot considering he had one high scoring season. (I hope we get to see him produce more now under Frank. 50 for Johnson? 40 for Tel? I just feel our scouting needs to do better. And be willing to spend another 10 on first made team.

I think the mixing of future and present can be done better. We rarely fix the holes. We still haven't addressed problems which Ange had........
 
Last edited:
glorygloryeze said:
Fab is certainly NOT bullet proof, but he has been our best DOF/transfer guru since GHod knows how long.
He is being brought back for a reason. The question is...where is he and is his absence (after all the changes at the top including his mooted return) affecting our transfer window activity?
Click to expand...

He is a very very well connected man and his black book is unmatched, he also had to sit out a large portion of his career because of legal action, I think that alone means he has not been a very good DOF overall, a good edition to the Spurs family, absolutely, but I don't think we have anything long enough to make a statement as a DOF
 
Mrs Vert said:
I know people keep saying we are one of the highest spenders but what are we spending it on.....I know most clubs make expensive mistakes. But I think we spent so much on what's turned out to be average it's quite amazing.

I didn't want Richie for 60. Solanke was a lot considering he had one high scoring season. (I hope we get to see him produce more now under Frank. 50 for Johnson? 40 for Tel? I just feel our scouting needs to do better. And be willing to spend another 10 on first made team.

I think the mixing of future and present can be done better. We rarely fix the holes. We still haven't addressed problems which Ange had........
Click to expand...

braineclipse said:
I guess we've skewed fairly young and more on the quantity side over immediate quality. I think we've kind of had to.
Click to expand...

The problem is that buying quantity has become a permanent state for the last 7 years. Not since the infamous window when we bought nobody have we just bought in 2 or 3 high quality additions. Most of the time we're bringing in between 7 and 10 players each year. When I compare that to the best in the land, Pool, they're operating between 2 and 5 each year.

I just have a feeling that until we break this cycle, we won't see the big change we all crave.
 
Bishop said:
They were in our match day squads last season, they played and started games for us last season. You can try as many mental gymnastics as you want. The reality is they aren't new players to Spurs, they aren't adding anything we did not already have last season.
Click to expand...
That's true. But at the same time if we didn't actually buy them during this transfer window, we'd have had to go out and buy someone to replace them. Would those claiming we've only bought one new player been happier if we did that instead? It would leave us in more or less the same positon (I know we might have ended up getting better players, but we might have also ended up with worse players).
 
Muttley said:
The problem is that buying quantity has become a permanent state for the last 7 years. Not since the infamous window when we bought nobody have we just bought in 2 or 3 high quality additions. Most of the time we're bringing in between 7 and 10 players each year. When I compare that to the best in the land, Pool, they're operating between 2 and 5 each year.

I just have a feeling that until we break this cycle, we won't see the big change we all crave.
Click to expand...
I think the plan was always to address the with issue
It’s been quite grim how short we left ourselves
Now it’s about quality
Arsenal did the same thing
Pool have done that this year too but with a LOT more money available due to not buying anyone last summer
Even city have even doing that with quantity in Jan and this summer
Then you get the mad extreme of Chelsea who have gambled on qty too
 
DubSpur said:
That's true. But at the same time if we didn't actually buy them during this transfer window, we'd have had to go out and buy someone to replace them. Would those claiming we've only bought one new player been happier if we did that instead? It would leave us in more or less the same positon (I know we might have ended up getting better players, but we might have also ended up with worse players).
Click to expand...
It’s that simple in reality
 
Muttley said:
The problem is that buying quantity has become a permanent state for the last 7 years. Not since the infamous window when we bought nobody have we just bought in 2 or 3 high quality additions. Most of the time we're bringing in between 7 and 10 players each year. When I compare that to the best in the land, Pool, they're operating between 2 and 5 each year.

I just have a feeling that until we break this cycle, we won't see the big change we all crave.
Click to expand...
We had so many holes to fill in the last couple of seasons that there wasn't much of a choice but to spread it a bit more thinly. Still think we have at least one more season like that. Hopefully after that we can be a bit more selective with less signings and a couple of young signings alongside them.
 
DubSpur said:
Except it won't be a big fee or big wages. The transfer fee will be in the range of 40-50m and increase his 40-50k a week wages.
The bigger stumbling block is convincing him to move and City to let him go.
Click to expand...
I'm really surprised City might let him go. (Especially if Grealish is going)

Although they are doubling their money on him.
 
DubSpur said:
Except it won't be a big fee or big wages. The transfer fee will be in the range of 40-50m and increase his 40-50k a week wages.
The bigger stumbling block is convincing him to move and City to let him go.
Click to expand...
so that transfer fee is on par with our record signing right, so for us that's big?

reminder only one 'big 6' has never breached £100m signing.
 
DubSpur said:
We had so many holes to fill in the last couple of seasons that there wasn't much of a choice but to spread it a bit more thinly. Still think we have at least one more season like that. Hopefully after that we can be a bit more selective with less signings and a couple of young signings alongside them.
Click to expand...

That's a mentality that Pool never had. They had big gaps at one point in this journey but still only focused on quality. Eventually they didn't have gaps.

One massive reason for that is that they got the right manager in and he stayed for the long haul. Our squad overhauls have come with a revolving door of managers with different philosophies. I would say that there has not been many Bergwijns either. At least with him, one manager wanted him and when another didn't we shifted him and got decent money. That is so rare at Spurs. More likely, our surplus players end up out on loan and we wait for the end of their contracts and get paltry amounts for them.
 
Diamond Lights said:
so that transfer fee is on par with our record signing right, so for us that's big?

reminder only one 'big 6' has never breached £100m signing.
Click to expand...
No, it's not on par with our record signing of £65m. We've several transfers in that range and a few over 60m. We've been signing in the 40+m range for the last few years. Even this window we've already signed Kudus for what will be a bigger fee and bigger wages.
 
Muttley said:
That's a mentality that Pool never had. They had big gaps at one point in this journey but still only focused on quality. Eventually they didn't have gaps.

One massive reason for that is that they got the right manager in and he stayed for the long haul. Our squad overhauls have come with a revolving door of managers with different philosophies. I would say that there has not been many Bergwijns either. At least with him, one manager wanted him and when another didn't we shifted him and got decent money. That is so rare at Spurs. More likely, our surplus players end up out on loan and we wait for the end of their contracts and get paltry amounts for them.
Click to expand...
Most of our gaps have been plugged with young players with big potential.

The majority of Liverpools signings have been in a range that we have bought in. There are a few exceptions, obviously Wirtz this season, Nunez (not exactly money well spent), VVD and Alisson. The main difference is that we can't attract players that they can. They are a bigger name and until we are more or less permanent in the top 4 and win things on a consistent basis we will not be able to compete with them.

Agree 100% on selling players on, but loaning out players can bring in as much money. There will be a loan fee for each player we loan out, but I've no idea how well we do on that front.
 
Muttley said:
That's a mentality that Pool never had. They had big gaps at one point in this journey but still only focused on quality. Eventually they didn't have gaps.

One massive reason for that is that they got the right manager in and he stayed for the long haul. Our squad overhauls have come with a revolving door of managers with different philosophies. I would say that there has not been many Bergwijns either. At least with him, one manager wanted him and when another didn't we shifted him and got decent money. That is so rare at Spurs. More likely, our surplus players end up out on loan and we wait for the end of their contracts and get paltry amounts for them.
Click to expand...
They've had plenty of signings that are hits and misses. BUT importantly some have been massive hits. Theyve also purchased plenty from similar ponds we can fish in. The pull of Liverpool is bigger though, perfectly encapsulated in the Diaz transfer.
As you say the constant of the same face in the managers seat makes a big difference.
We had that at a time where we didn't have the financial clout.
Liverpool got given financial clout by Barcelona, they made a smart move (probably obvious move given the transfer fee) to trade Coutinho for better more important players. Interestingly they spent hardly anything the season after Salah Alisson VVD had all arrived. Probably, I guess, because they thought the additions and squad were good to roll.
(Or if might have been COVID?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back