• 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

Marcos Senesi

robp135 said:
Very comfortbale recieving and passing the ball on his weak foot. King was right footed but almost always played LCB during his career.
Click to expand...

I've only seen him playing twice in Germany and he looked comfortable in 1 game but had little to do in other, he looks a great prospect but doesn't need to be mentioned in the same breath as Ledley af this stage of his career.
 
Raziel said:
We will see at the end of the window, the concern really is (I'm with @Gutter Boy on this one)

- Last summer, we spent 150M net, 220M total
- Since Levy left, the signings look like (making assumptions on widely reported), Johnson out, Gallagher in, Romero/Davies out, Robertson, Senesi, Savino in.
- That's is a zero net spend (probably), for "new" owners who keep telling everyone the last guy was the fault and they are going to invest, I'm not seeing the investment (happy to be wrong at end of window)
Click to expand...
The last guy was at fault. We spent money terribly over most of the last 8 to 10 years or so or so of his reign.

If you think the amount of money we have spent is the problem we've had at Spurs then I don't think you've honed in on the real problem.
 
Raziel said:
Yes, but lets all assume we want better than Levy, and we want some kind of honesty from our owners.

If after 5 years of spending 100M-150M net every summer, we suddenly go (the two windows after Levy's departure) to net spend zero, it tells you a lot.

I similarly don't put a ton into costs of players (Harry was free, Son/Eriksen/Bale were "cheap"), but if we end up at net spend zero it only means the owners have lied, and the real reason this have stepped in is to asset strip club and sell.
Click to expand...
I honestly couldn't give a fudge if we spend £200m or £2m net. All I care about is us improving our squad.

My guess is that we'll spend about £80m net this summer but increase the wage bill quite significantly. The key for us it not to spend more it is to spend better
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
The point I am making is there is a downside to Robertson that doesn't exist with Senesi which comes with age. Having a 32 year old sat on a large wage does you no favours if he is injured, fee or no fee.

With Senesi that risk is lower because even if he had a year out he comes back at 30/31/32 and you get some of the peak time out of him
Click to expand...
There is no difference if a 32 year old player on a large wage is injured or a 25 year old player on a large wage is injured.
 
Finney Is Back said:
The last guy was at fault. We spent money terribly over most of the last 8 to 10 years or so or so of his reign.

If you think the amount of money we have spent is the problem we've had at Spurs then I don't think you've honed in on the real problem.
Click to expand...
Finney Is Back said:
I honestly couldn't give a fudge if we spend £200m or £2m net. All I care about is us improving our squad.

My guess is that we'll spend about £80m net this summer but increase the wage bill quite significantly. The key for us it not to spend more it is to spend better
Click to expand...

Our squad is significantly worse than those we want to compete with (top 6), so we need to catch up and improve beyond that.

Being conservative, we need 1st team ready, top 6 talent for CF, LW, CM, probably RW and GK. And that's if RDZ doesn't decide to move on a couple of players that don't suit him in one way or other (talent or attitude)

Our owners have claimed they have identified the gaps (assume part of that is the spending badly) and they are going to invest (more money). I am saying we should expect more money spent better.

I'm amazed that you don't think it would be odd, after spending a consistent >120M-150M net a season to suddenly go 2 windows with zero to limited net spend is not only a hinderance to our improvement, but a more telling indication that these owners are just fudging liars.
 
You lot moan about everything, the players are free, its 0% risk. You lot are the type of people who would complain about the colour of the car you have just been gifted.
 
Finney Is Back said:
There is no difference if a 32 year old player on a large wage is injured or a 25 year old player on a large wage is injured.
Click to expand...
Course there is, because once the 25 year old recovers you have the upside of having their better years still. At 32 an injury basically has you done for, beyond it taking more out of you that you dont have, you lose time that yhr player has little of left.

If a 25 year old on a 4 year free contract does his ACL you are sticking by him, at 32 you are looking to get rid and do a deal to get him off your books
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back