• 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

ENIC

Jurgen the German said:
People used to say we had to wait until our rivals did their business before we did ours. That was a reason why we always left our deals so late apparently.
Click to expand...

I think that has been a factor in some deals. Probably will be again in the future.

Many other reasons too why some deals are done later, for us and other teams.

With more financial power we're able to do more deals earlier. But there will always be deals that take time, for us and others.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
You are clearly missing the point. Where there is a release clause we should simply trigger that on the first day of the window (even though it is the player who has to do it), pay multi-millions up front, and the deal is done. Simples.
Forget that we might want some of the cash reserves in case another deal comes up, or in case I don't know, we want at some point to offer a mega deal to our star player, or an enhanced deal to our manager should he deign to commit beyond the summer. Just pay the damn money.
Click to expand...
I think we should pay an extra 10% just to make sure everyone is happy. It's just Levy being tight.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Only Spurs fans could cry that we need to get rid of players and then cry about the method

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
Click to expand...
I hate us acting decisively and bravely
Imagine a club that’s happy to take a hit… again… to sign a player

then imagine a club signing so many players and then readjusting they can only use 3 of them in the only cup that they can win
 
DubaiSpur said:
Yes, I would much, much prefer we signed players early, instead of waiting 31 days negotiating 50p off the cost and then hilariously screwing up by forgetting we could only loan out so much of our brick, losing that money anyway in mutual termination payouts + lost fees. Real 1000IQ move from us, that.

We spent 31 days sitting on our hands dropping points left, right and center to Villa, City and Arsenal - this after having a whole month and a half with no football beforehand to try to get things going. It's amateurish, and the behaviour of a club that hasn't learned anything about what it takes to pursue on-pitch success, not just balance the books.

Sign 'em early, get them in, and maybe we'd be in a better spot now. Defo worth the cost of paying Porro's release clause on day 1, especially since we had about 50m in liquidity lying around from the cash injection (Ali Gold's words, not mine).

Oh, for a Todd Boehly who understands the value of acting decisively. Coulda been us. Sigh.
Click to expand...
......hold up

thats not Depeche Mode...'I just can't get enough' on the Jukebox again.
 
braineclipse said:
I think that has been a factor in some deals. Probably will be again in the future.

Many other reasons too why some deals are done later, for us and other teams.

With more financial power we're able to do more deals earlier. But there will always be deals that take time, for us and others.
Click to expand...

The argument has never made sense to me. If we want a player who may be on the radar or bigger clubs then strike early, if they see we’ve made a bid and swoop in and the player chooses another club then we move on, at least we tried. Just seems like mental gymnastics to me.
 
LemonadeMoney said:
Well people used to moan that it was always sell to buy, which meant all our buys were last minute, when all the good players had been bought, and no preseason as a result. So which scenario is better? I don't think the strategy is wrong, just those particular players from that period of spending.
Click to expand...

Sell to buy was when we had a zero transfer budget. Yes we can move earlier in the window. We had a whole world cup to sort out deals before the window even opened.
 
Jurgen the German said:
The argument has never made sense to me. If we want a player who may be on the radar or bigger clubs then strike early, if they see we’ve made a bid and swoop in and the player chooses another club then we move on, at least we tried. Just seems like mental gymnastics to me.
Click to expand...

I think clubs keep track of players they're interested in, if a significantly bigger/richer club are saying to the player's agent that they may make a move for the player later in the window I think we would find it difficult to swoop in.

Not to say we can't try, but the process may drag out.
 
braineclipse said:
I think clubs keep track of players they're interested in, if a significantly bigger/richer club are saying to the player's agent that they may make a move for the player later in the window I think we would find it difficult to swoop in.

Not to say we can't try, but the process may drag out.
Click to expand...

In that case, we should move on to a more gettable target. Either go all out for our first choice or get a more realistic option. The overall point I’m trying to make is we need to act quicker and more decisively. That doesn’t mean we still can’t go for a player at the last minute if he becomes available and is a good fit for us.
 
Jurgen the German said:
In that case, we should move on to a more gettable target. Either go all out for our first choice or get a more realistic option. The overall point I’m trying to make is we need to act quicker and more decisively. That doesn’t mean we still can’t go for a player at the last minute if he becomes available and is a good fit for us.
Click to expand...

Agree. But on porro they might have been holding out for the final to be played. It's the only thing they could have realistically won this season.
 
Jurgen the German said:
In that case, we should move on to a more gettable target. Either go all out for our first choice or get a more realistic option. The overall point I’m trying to make is we need to act quicker and more decisively. That doesn’t mean we still can’t go for a player at the last minute if he becomes available and is a good fit for us.
Click to expand...

I think that's a viable strategy in some cases. In others, if there's a big difference between our first choice and others perhaps not so good.

We've made some terrible signings over the years, probably more will be made. But trying the best we can to get the very best player for us in the doors will for me mostly be more important than expediency.
 
braineclipse said:
I think that's a viable strategy in some cases. In others, if there's a big difference between our first choice and others perhaps not so good.

We've made some terrible signings over the years, probably more will be made. But trying the best we can to get the very best player for us in the doors will for me mostly be more important than expediency.
Click to expand...

I agree it’s more important to get the right player than acting quickly. I’m an ideal world we’d do both. Unfortunately we’ve signed bad players slowly which is the opposite of what we should be trying for.
 
Lilbaz said:
Sell to buy was when we had a zero transfer budget. Yes we can move earlier in the window. We had a whole world cup to sort out deals before the window even opened.
Click to expand...

Why do we have a zero spend budget is the question? Don't say stadium as levy said that would not affect any transfer budget and anything made from the stadium would go directly into the team ... so where is the money gone? Genuine ask
 
Someone do a list of transfers since probably the Ndombele Lo Celso window (ie when the restrictions from the stadium build has dissipated somewhat)...dates they signed, just to prove or disprove the last minute haggling/penny pinching/dragging our heels narrative.
 
Gazza said:
Why do we have a zero spend budget is the question? Don't say stadium as levy said that would not affect any transfer budget and anything made from the stadium would go directly into the team ... so where is the money gone? Genuine ask
Click to expand...

We don't anymore. Infact we have one of the biggest net spends since the stadium opened. Even with covid.
 
Gazza said:
Why do we have a zero spend budget is the question? Don't say stadium as levy said that would not affect any transfer budget and anything made from the stadium would go directly into the team ... so where is the money gone? Genuine ask
Click to expand...
Look at the accounts?
Straight away I can tell you I don't think we have a zero spend budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back