• 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

Modric - No Longer A Spurs Player

All transfers come with a risk. We know Modric is effective in our team, Moutinho might not. There are loads of apparently good transfers that don't work out and its often not clear why. Moutinho's familiarity with AVB is a plus and reduces the risk, but we still don't know it will work.

If we had a choice of Modric or Moutinho playing for us for the next few years, Modric is by far the safer choice. That safety has to be worth more than £2m.

Personally I like the Liverpool method used for Torres and Carroll. We want Moutinho and £10m for Modric. If Moutinho costs £31m, then demand £41m from Madrid, if only £25m then let Modric go for £35m, and so on. I doubt we can link the deals, but if we can get Moutinho for less we can reduce the asking price for Modric to get the deal done.

I think that was a terrible method to be honest. Because they decided to work it like that, they get lumbered with a player that will never, ever be worth that amount of money, and who no club will come close to paying anything like that amount to sign him if they want to sell him. So considering they were buying potential, in the fairly likely event that he doesn't live up to that potential that are stuck with either a humoungous loss or a player that simply isn't worth the ridiculous amount paid for him.

Really can't get on board with praising a Liverpool transfer deal from the last year or so. That method ignores that if they got a better deal for Carroll then they could have spent money in other areas of the squad too, rather than simply saying they wanted to make £15m on that deal alone.

I think if we sell Modric, we do it for the best price we can get, and if we sign Moutinho, we do it for the best price. And we do it as soon as possible so as to not disrupt our season. I understand that it can help hurry up the transfer process, but the risk of massively overpaying for a player that might fail that you are then stuck with is too great IMO.
 
Your arrogance is breathtaking. Some advice. Stop talking in riddles, stop being overbearingly rude to everyone and start making your point clearly so as it's a discussion people can actually have.

Some advice? Please --> :lol:

Steff, I don't know how to break this to you, but your opinion - never mind your advice - ranks very low to me. And as for "talking in riddles", why don't you entertain us all: tell us another wonderfully convoluted story, the details of which only the all-knowing Steff is privy to?

I'm very 'plain English' me, Steff; no riddles or crosswords to decipher. If you can't see that, then I'd suggest the problem lays somewhat closer to home, dear boy. But that's understandable, given that - in almost every single post - you seem utterly at pains, almost obsessed, with presenting yourself as this all-knowing ITK; carried away on the waves of your own, often vivid, imagination. But each to their own.

Leeds is an intelligent gent (...albeit a Tory 8-[) - he has no problem understanding my position, so why are you struggling?
 
I think that was a terrible method to be honest. Because they decided to work it like that, they get lumbered with a player that will never, ever be worth that amount of money, and who no club will come close to paying anything like that amount to sign him if they want to sell him. So considering they were buying potential, in the fairly likely event that he doesn't live up to that potential that are stuck with either a humoungous loss or a player that simply isn't worth the ridiculous amount paid for him.

Really can't get on board with praising a Liverpool transfer deal from the last year or so. That method ignores that if they got a better deal for Carroll then they could have spent money in other areas of the squad too, rather than simply saying they wanted to make £15m on that deal alone.

I think if we sell Modric, we do it for the best price we can get, and if we sign Moutinho, we do it for the best price. And we do it as soon as possible so as to not disrupt our season. I understand that it can help hurry up the transfer process, but the risk of massively overpaying for a player that might fail that you are then stuck with is too great IMO.

They made the wrong choice, but I think its reasonable to praise the conviction they put into their moves. Sold Torres, got monay, had a target and went and got him. Job done. That said target has been terible for them is an aside to that point IMO.

They paid an extreme amount for him. If he was a Rooney like prodigy I would understand but he never was.
 
Some advice? Please --> :lol:

Steff, I don't know how to break this to you, but your opinion - never mind your advice - ranks very low to me. And as for "talking in riddles", why don't you entertain us all: tell us another wonderfully convoluted story, the details of which only the all-knowing Steff is privy to?

I'm very 'plain English' me, Steff; no riddles or crosswords to decipher. If you can't see that, then I'd suggest the problem lays somewhat closer to home, dear boy. But that's understandable, given that - in almost every single post - you seem utterly at pains, almost obsessed, with presenting yourself as this all-knowing ITK; carried away on the waves of your own, often vivid, imagination. But each to their own.

Leeds is an intelligent gent (...albeit a Tory 8-[) - he has no problem understanding my position, so why are you struggling?

your were going really well there mate until you brought up party politics , theres nothing wrong with being Tory , its us tories that pay for you lefty layabouts bellyaching to all and sundry about the stae of the government , when your party bankrupted the country again ........ your probably on your way down to the dhss right now getting more handouts....... ( BASICALLY LETS STOP RUCKING , AND GET ON WITH SOME POSITIVE AND FREINDLY EXCHANGES ABOUT OUR FUKKIN AMAZING CLUB WE ALL LOVE , COME ON ITS EXCITING TIMES FOR US AT LAST ,
 
I think that was a terrible method to be honest. Because they decided to work it like that, they get lumbered with a player that will never, ever be worth that amount of money, and who no club will come close to paying anything like that amount to sign him if they want to sell him. So considering they were buying potential, in the fairly likely event that he doesn't live up to that potential that are stuck with either a humoungous loss or a player that simply isn't worth the ridiculous amount paid for him.

Really can't get on board with praising a Liverpool transfer deal from the last year or so. That method ignores that if they got a better deal for Carroll then they could have spent money in other areas of the squad too, rather than simply saying they wanted to make £15m on that deal alone.

I think if we sell Modric, we do it for the best price we can get, and if we sign Moutinho, we do it for the best price. And we do it as soon as possible so as to not disrupt our season. I understand that it can help hurry up the transfer process, but the risk of massively overpaying for a player that might fail that you are then stuck with is too great IMO.

It's easy to see Carroll as a failure and dismiss the method, but the logic holds up. They made the decision that they thought Torres was worth £15m more than Carroll and they got the deal they wanted. Now, in hindsight, it looks crazy to buy Carroll for £35m, but that's only part of the equation. £50m for Torres looks a pretty bad decision too. However, if the deal had been £25m for Torres and £10m for Carroll the evaluation of the deals in hindsight would be different, although for Liverpool it would be exactly the same outcome. Clearly Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Chelsea get different results, but the point is the logic of Liverpool's decision.
 
I dont imagine that was there logic at all to be honest. Do you really think their method of valuing Carroll was "Whatever we get for Torres - £15m"? I imagine it would have been somewhat different to that.

I would think the logic was more "Sell Torres for as much as possible, get Carroll (#1 target) for as little as possible" with the caveat they would go as high as required because they really wanted him and could afford it.
 
I dont imagine that was there logic at all to be honest. Do you really think their method of valuing Carroll was "Whatever we get for Torres - £15m"? I imagine it would have been somewhat different to that.

I would think the logic was more "Sell Torres for as much as possible, get Carroll (#1 target) for as little as possible" with the caveat they would go as high as required because they really wanted him and could afford it.


It is possible that kkk saw him as a 35m player of the future..


The logic is sound, but only if you've already bartered as low a price as possible for the replacement player, and you deem him worth that amount.
 
presenting yourself as this all-knowing ITK; carried away on the waves of your own, often vivid, imagination.




What do you mean? He only claimed that Modric was in a headlock somewhere in the middle of this lot, being forced to leave Spurs.......but NOT forced to hand in a transfer request, as the mob though that was a bit disrepectful to the fans.

photo_big_109883.jpg
 
What do you mean? He only claimed that Modric was in a headlock somewhere in the middle of this lot, being forced to leave Spurs.......but NOT forced to hand in a transfer request, as the mob though that was a bit disrepectful to the fans.

View attachment 821


Bit silly really. Why would his agent even ask him to hand in a transfer request and lose his loyalty bonus when he would clearly like a cut of it.
 
Modric will still be here in September and thats why hes getting annnoyed. Madrid were never going to spend the money we want on him. Hes just trying to reduce the price by being silly.
 
It's easy to see Carroll as a failure and dismiss the method, but the logic holds up. They made the decision that they thought Torres was worth £15m more than Carroll and they got the deal they wanted. Now, in hindsight, it looks crazy to buy Carroll for £35m, but that's only part of the equation. £50m for Torres looks a pretty bad decision too. However, if the deal had been £25m for Torres and £10m for Carroll the evaluation of the deals in hindsight would be different, although for Liverpool it would be exactly the same outcome. Clearly Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Chelsea get different results, but the point is the logic of Liverpool's decision.

I still think it is terrible.

If Chelsea want to pay £50m for Torres, then Liverpool could have got 3 good strikers for that, all of them would have done at least as well as Carroll and at least 2 of them would have ended up doing a lot better. Or, they could have bought 2 strikers and got a good right winger in. Or strengthened any number of other areas.

I get the logic, but I just find it stupid. Yes they got Carroll, they got the deal done, but what then? A player that is nowhere near close to ever being anywhere near £35m is on their books. So he has to be an absolutely rip roaring success, otherwise he's a failure. And what if they want to sell him? They would have to accept massive loss when they could have put that money into other areas of the team.
 
I dont imagine that was there logic at all to be honest. Do you really think their method of valuing Carroll was "Whatever we get for Torres - £15m"? I imagine it would have been somewhat different to that.

I would think the logic was more "Sell Torres for as much as possible, get Carroll (#1 target) for as little as possible" with the caveat they would go as high as required because they really wanted him and could afford it.

I think there's an interview with John W Henry where he says that indeed that is exactly how they decided to do the deal. I'll try and find it.
 
I still think it is terrible.

If Chelsea want to pay £50m for Torres, then Liverpool could have got 3 good strikers for that, all of them would have done at least as well as Carroll and at least 2 of them would have ended up doing a lot better. Or, they could have bought 2 strikers and got a good right winger in. Or strengthened any number of other areas.

I get the logic, but I just find it stupid. Yes they got Carroll, they got the deal done, but what then? A player that is nowhere near close to ever being anywhere near £35m is on their books. So he has to be an absolutely rip roaring success, otherwise he's a failure. And what if they want to sell him? They would have to accept massive loss when they could have put that money into other areas of the team.


Not on the transfer deadline day. They didn't want to enter the season without a striker to replace Torres. Anyone they would have bought would have had a massively inflated price..
 
http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/story/72124.html

"The fee for Torres was dependent on what Saudi Sportswashing Machine asked for Carroll," Henry told The Guardian. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Saudi Sportswashing Machine.

"Those prices could have been £35 million [for Torres] and £20 million [for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Saudi Sportswashing Machine how much this was all going to cost. They [Saudi Sportswashing Machine] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way."
 
Last edited:
Not on the transfer deadline day. They didn't want to enter the season without a striker to replace Torres. Anyone they would have bought would have had a massively inflated price..

Ok, then spend £35m on a proven player then. At the very least don't spend it on potential that will never be fulfilled.
 
Back