Daniel Levy - Chairman

[Baleforce]

Just want to circle back to the “mess” comment form earlier
I see a plan here, something I haven’t seen for a while
We’re building a young squad with huge growth (not potential because potential has never scored a goal)
We have significantly changed the technical profile or the team
We have an outstanding crop of youth that the club are planning on developing more
The focus now so clearly on young players and hungry players
That is pretty much what Poch did with his clear out and was admired for it
That is how is see the plan, rather than a mess
It does mean we aren’t finished yet
We’re not close to be, but we’re a decent way down the journey
My opinion on the plan may change after next summer’s window if we haven’t made moves to fill gaps that their clearly aren’t youth players filling (left back and keeper) and the we don’t bring in a few more ready made players but that remains to be seen

I think our transfer policy has been smart for sometime. I wouldn’t call it a mess at all.

Unlike what we see on the pitch fairly regularly.

 

[Bishop]

Don't know abbout now but we used to psy the biggest bonuses in the prem.

The minutes of the meeting read: "Peter Haine mentioned the bonus payments, also. It was felt the bonus structure and incentives should also be considered when discussing players wages as they comprised a significant part of the monies and are the most generous of any club in the Premier League."

Daniel Levy reveals Spurs wage bonuses which help keep Harry Kane & co

Much is made of Tottenham's wage structure but not the bonuses

www.football.london

If you've seen the player quotes about the bonuses they were considered fairly unachievable by common standards so whilst the figures may be attractive if they aren't realistically going to happen then they are kind of irrelevant. But we are kind of going off into the weeds. The main point is we don't and never have been the biggest payers of wages cumulatively or individually and if you want to compete for the most in demand players (I don't necessarily) then you need to match the wages that the big teams are going to offer.

 

[Bishop]

But his salary is huge
People are talking salaries, wages
That’s their measure and he is on £170k a week
And he is a squad player

He's a waste of money.

 

[thfcsteff]

But his salary is huge
People are talking salaries, wages
That’s their measure and he is on £170k a week
And he is a squad player

I’d rather have seen us let Werner go, apply his 170 k a week towards Eze’s wages and paid the transfer fee as we’d have had a player with the quality to play two or three different positions in this squad (including giving Maddison the kick up the arse he needs).
Instead we made a decision.
There is the viewpoint that Werner was a punt worth taking because if he’d converted even half the chances he’s missed, we’re likely 6 points better off at least. We can also simply cut ties and move on with zero investment lost beyond his weekly wage.

You can go round the houses all day trying to make this a binary conversation, but if it’s a serious one, it isn’t about any one aspect in isolation, it’s about a series of actions and directions. I get the impression you don’t like the discussion?

 

[Lilbaz]

If you've seen the player quotes about the bonuses they were considered fairly unachievable by common standards so whilst the figures may be attractive if they aren't realistically going to happen then they are kind of irrelevant. But we are kind of going off into the weeds. The main point is we don't and never have been the biggest payers of wages cumulatively or individually and if you want to compete for the most in demand players (I don't necessarily) then you need to match the wages that the big teams are going to offer.

How can you match what an oil producing country can pay? Or the likes of madrid or barca? Who have much bigger fan bases than us.

 

[Muttley]

The focus now so clearly on young players and hungry players
That is pretty much what Poch did with his clear out and was admired for it

I don't think Poch ever had to work with young players in the way that Ange is having / choosing to though. I find it refreshing that Ange could end up keeping a nucleus together for 6-8 years, perhaps even longer.

At the equivalent time in Poch's tenure he really only had a couple of U21's - Winks and Dele. Kane was already 21 when Poch walked into the club. Ange is nurturing 17-19 year olds that are already in his squad. You gotta love that.

 

[Muttley]

I’d rather have seen us let Werner go, apply his 170 k a week towards Eze’s wages and paid the transfer fee as we’d have had a player with the quality to play two or three different positions in this squad (including giving Maddison the kick up the arse he needs).
Instead we made a decision.
There is the viewpoint that Werner was a punt worth taking because if he’d converted even half the chances he’s missed, we’re likely 6 points better off at least. We can also simply cut ties and move on with zero investment lost beyond his weekly wage.

You can go round the houses all day trying to make this a binary conversation, but if it’s a serious one, it isn’t about any one aspect in isolation, it’s about a series of actions and directions. I get the impression you don’t like the discussion?

Werner costs us £8m this year in wages and probably got a signing on fee for his troubles. There is no future financial commitment. Palace had sold Olise and therefore had no incentive to give us favourable payment terms on a £60m+ transfer fee (guess). They would have wanted a big chunk of that in this financial year and I very much doubt we had the budget for it. I also have no clue whether the player would have wanted to join either. I'd like to think so.

I'm sure we'd all prefer Eze over Werner in this squad, but was that scenario even possible?

 

[thfcsteff]

Werner costs us £8m this year in wages and probably got a signing on fee for his troubles. There is no future financial commitment. Palace had sold Olise and therefore had no incentive to give us favourable payment terms on a £60m+ transfer fee (guess). They would have wanted a big chunk of that in this financial year and I very much doubt we had the budget for it. I also have no clue whether the player would have wanted to join either. I'd like to think so.

I'm sure we'd all prefer Eze over Werner in this squad, but was that scenario even possible?

I believe it was, yes, at the start of the window. Base is his agency. I believe that before the window officially opened, we had the chance. We did not like the payment terms. Olise had not been sold at that point. I believe Eze was willing.

 

[Lilbaz]

I believe it was, yes, at the start of the window. Base is his agency. I believe that before the window officially opened, we had the chance. We did not like the payment terms. Olise had not been sold at that point. I believe Eze was willing.

If they wanted all or most of the money up front and we didn't have it. Then it wasn't possible?

 

[billyiddo]

Werner costs us £8m this year in wages and probably got a signing on fee for his troubles. There is no future financial commitment. Palace had sold Olise and therefore had no incentive to give us favourable payment terms on a £60m+ transfer fee (guess). They would have wanted a big chunk of that in this financial year and I very much doubt we had the budget for it. I also have no clue whether the player would have wanted to join either. I'd like to think so.

I'm sure we'd all prefer Eze over Werner in this squad, but was that scenario even possible?

Im not sure Eze is a wide player in an Ange set up and with Maddison & Kulusevski as current options in the AM role I don't think our interest in him was really there, I was never convinced it was any more than transfer talk based off those photos of him at our ground last season as a guest of Base tbh

 

[harr1984]

Im not sure Eze is a wide player in an Ange set up and with Maddison & Kulusevski as current options in the AM role I don't think our interest in him was really there, I was never convinced it was any more than transfer talk based off those photos of him at our ground last season as a guest of Base tbh

I do agree that Eze isn't the typical Ange wide man, but I do think there was interest there - he ticked most of the boxes for a potential buy. He was likely seen as a Maddison rotation/competition option and is versatile enough to play in different areas dependant on the game situation.

But the emergence of Kulu in the centre might well of changed things hence why we didn't follow up our interest as Eze would have taken a big chunk of our budget - Kulu only emerged in the centre pre season/start of this season, our apparent interest in Eze began well before....

 

[Mrs Vert]

We added Solanke and was in for Neto (& Gallagher/Calafiori?) so I think we're looking to be balanced in our approach to squad building - I think next summer will tell us a lot.

And didn't get. If we buy more youngsters in jan/summer then we may as well wait another 3yrs before we compete. In which case Ange won't be here and we start all over again .
These next windows will show where we are.....not that hopeful

 

[Bedfordspurs]

He's a waste of money.

Not arguing that

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I’d rather have seen us let Werner go, apply his 170 k a week towards Eze’s wages and paid the transfer fee as we’d have had a player with the quality to play two or three different positions in this squad (including giving Maddison the kick up the arse he needs).
Instead we made a decision.
There is the viewpoint that Werner was a punt worth taking because if he’d converted even half the chances he’s missed, we’re likely 6 points better off at least. We can also simply cut ties and move on with zero investment lost beyond his weekly wage.

You can go round the houses all day trying to make this a binary conversation, but if it’s a serious one, it isn’t about any one aspect in isolation, it’s about a series of actions and directions. I get the impression you don’t like the discussion?

I’m fine with discussing anything
But if people are talking the money we spend wages are only a part of it
The transfer fee is a huge part and a commitment too
With eze, who I wanted, palace wanted it all up front. That’s why no one went for him.
How does the club fund that fee?

 

[Bedfordspurs]

I do agree that Eze isn't the typical Ange wide man, but I do think there was interest there - he ticked most of the boxes for a potential buy. He was likely seen as a Maddison rotation/competition option and is versatile enough to play in different areas dependant on the game situation.

But the emergence of Kulu in the centre might well of changed things hence why we didn't follow up our interest as Eze would have taken a big chunk of our budget - Kulu only emerged in the centre pre season/start of this season, our apparent interest in Eze began well before....

Eze is IMO a missing piece of the jigsaw
Another 10 for the games where were dominant or a curve ball in games we aren’t
He can play wide but in a similar way to Maddison where we only, currently, have one option.

 

[thfcsteff]

Im not sure Eze is a wide player in an Ange set up and with Maddison & Kulusevski as current options in the AM role I don't think our interest in him was really there, I was never convinced it was any more than transfer talk based off those photos of him at our ground last season as a guest of Base tbh

I believe it was absolutely real mate. Agreed on your assertion of Eze as a wide player in Ange's ideal set-up (which should sadly make us wonder if Sonny is ever going to get a fair fit/shake). I think Maddison has been upgradable for sometime, I don't think we can say that Deki and Maddison are good enough options as a pair. I'd upgrade one of them, and it isn't Deki (because to your point, he has more uses in an Ange system than Madders).

 

[thfcsteff]

I’m fine with discussing anything
But if people are talking the money we spend wages are only a part of it
The transfer fee is a huge part and a commitment too
With eze, who I wanted, palace wanted it all up front. That’s why no one went for him.
How does the club fund that fee?

It's a fair question, and then it becomes a case of how much was wanted upfront and whether we had the money to do it.

 

[Muttley]

I believe it was, yes, at the start of the window. Base is his agency. I believe that before the window officially opened, we had the chance. We did not like the payment terms. Olise had not been sold at that point. I believe Eze was willing.

I thought the same, but when Brentford came in for Gray we chose to pull forward and prioritise that signing instead. I think we had him in our plans for a future window and decided not to lose out on a player we really wanted for the really long term. So on top of the Olise scenario, I think a lot of that budget shifted to Gray and wasn't there in the second half of the window. We then closed in on Solanke and what was left afforded Odobert.

In the past, I don't think Spurs would have made these incredibly tough decisions in that direction. If Jose or Conte was in charge, we probably would have got Solanke and Eze, and not all of Gray, Yang, Bergval and Odobert.

I have an inkling we'll still be in for Eze though. No way that player is happy at Palace.

 

[thfcsteff]

I thought the same, but when Brentford came in for Gray we chose to pull forward and prioritise that signing instead. I think we had him in our plans for a future window and decided not to lose out on a player we really wanted for the really long term. So on top of the Olise scenario, I think a lot of that budget shifted to Gray and wasn't there in the second half of the window. We then closed in on Solanke and what was left afforded Odobert.

In the past, I don't think Spurs would have made these incredibly tough decisions in that direction. If Jose or Conte was in charge, we probably would have got Solanke and Eze, and not all of Gray, Yang, Bergval and Odobert.

I have an inkling we'll still be in for Eze though. No way that player is happy at Palace.

Gray is a fine signing. I think the true focus has been on cutting the dead weight and our wage bill. I don't see a scenario where we woud ever have got Solanke and Eze in the same window TBH. I think the Eze situation in the summer will be intriguing as there's an argument which says that if Moore fast-tracks the second haklf of the season, we will not need him after all p

 

[Muttley]

Gray is a fine signing. I think the true focus has been on cutting the dead weight and our wage bill. I don't see a scenario where we woud ever have got Solanke and Eze in the same window TBH. I think the Eze situation in the summer will be intriguing as there's an argument which says that if Moore fast-tracks the second haklf of the season, we will not need him after all p

I think that dovetails into the other 2 big conversations on Sonny and Madds though.

We don't really know yet which positions these players settle in. I've read before that Moore wore the number 10 in academy teams and was an attacking midfielder. He's labelled a winger nowadays, perhaps because it's the safest way of fast tracking him into the setup. As he matures perhaps he moves inside. Eze seems to cover both central and wide areas.

In my mind, I have plenty of space for Eze AND Moore in any future squad. I could see them easily playing in the same team as well.