• 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

Paulo Dybala

AjaxDeSuperYids said:
Think the shipped has sailed personally now.
Click to expand...

I agree with that. He was always on the edge of someone we would sign age-wise given he turns 26 in November. In 12 months' time, he'll be 3 months form his 27th birthday and we just don't pay that sort of fee for someone that age. Frustrating as I think we're short up front; hopefully we won't be selling Eriksen
 
Pirate55 said:
Listen folks. We were NEVER going to sign him. Not in a month of Sundays. Not just the price, but his wages were well beyond our structure. The image right issue is simply not solvable without bucketloads of cash being thrown at it. If Man U with their muscle couldn't do it - do you really think Spurs could? Don't beat yourselves up over this pipe dream. We are still not at the very top table yet.
Click to expand...
I don't think his wage demands from us were the same as from Manure. He probably asked more from them because they are in the EL and are still a couple of years away from challenging for honors. No point in wasting his career there. As far as whether he would fit into our salary structure, if Levy thought his wage demands fit, then they fit. As far as we know that wasn't the reason why this fell through. But the image rights would have been a killer. An additional 40 million was probably a bridge too far.
 
AdamB said:
I agree with that. He was always on the edge of someone we would sign age-wise given he turns 26 in November. In 12 months' time, he'll be 3 months form his 27th birthday and we just don't pay that sort of fee for someone that age. Frustrating as I think we're short up front; hopefully we won't be selling Eriksen
Click to expand...
Am I the only one who thinks we're OK up front? Assuming we lose Eriksen, we have Kane, Sonny, Moura, Dele, Lamela. Lo Celso can play as an AM, if needed, or in CM. And with Ndombele, Winks, Sissoko, Dier for 2 CM slots, he'll likely play further up. That doesn't look too light to me.
 
alekaras said:
Am I the only one who thinks we're OK up front? Assuming we lose Eriksen, we have Kane, Sonny, Moura, Dele, Lamela. Lo Celso can play as an AM, if needed, or in CM. And with Ndombele, Winks, Sissoko, Dier for 2 CM slots, he'll likely play further up. That doesn't look too light to me.
Click to expand...
It’s not
 
alekaras said:
Am I the only one who thinks we're OK up front? Assuming we lose Eriksen, we have Kane, Sonny, Moura, Dele, Lamela. Lo Celso can play as an AM, if needed, or in CM. And with Ndombele, Winks, Sissoko, Dier for 2 CM slots, he'll likely play further up. That doesn't look too light to me.
Click to expand...

I think we are because of Lamela likely getting injured at some point. He's not a player we can rely on. Dele is going to be a worry too if this hamstring issue continues to reoccur.

I'd have liked to know that even with injuries to those two we'd still have the depth to cope. GLC from all I've seen is more suited to the #8 role than the tip of the diamond.
 
Pirate55 said:
Listen folks. We were NEVER going to sign him. Not in a month of Sundays. Not just the price, but his wages were well beyond our structure. The image right issue is simply not solvable without bucketloads of cash being thrown at it. If Man U with their muscle couldn't do it - do you really think Spurs could? Don't beat yourselves up over this pipe dream. We are still not at the very top table yet.
Click to expand...

The wages were NOT an issue. Neither was the fee. It was absolutely the image rights. It as simple as it looks. People could not conclude a negotiation. the third-party wanted more than we were prepared to pay. Wages/fees all of that was agreed. Who knows what the exact figure they were asking for image rights was (the third party) but it was likely enormous and despite all the good will, could not happen within a prudent non-oligarch/oil Barron framework. I am going to guess he will end up at PSG. On the continent, a player can keep his image rights.

If your definition of "top-table" is "oligarch or oil-baron" then yes, obviously correct.
 
alekaras said:
Am I the only one who thinks we're OK up front? Assuming we lose Eriksen, we have Kane, Sonny, Moura, Dele, Lamela. Lo Celso can play as an AM, if needed, or in CM. And with Ndombele, Winks, Sissoko, Dier for 2 CM slots, he'll likely play further up. That doesn't look too light to me.
Click to expand...

I think we're light at CF, but ok for AM. Need Parrott to replace Llorente
 
alekaras said:
Am I the only one who thinks we're OK up front? Assuming we lose Eriksen, we have Kane, Sonny, Moura, Dele, Lamela. Lo Celso can play as an AM, if needed, or in CM. And with Ndombele, Winks, Sissoko, Dier for 2 CM slots, he'll likely play further up. That doesn't look too light to me.
Click to expand...


I agree.
 
AdamB said:
I think we're light at CF, but ok for AM. Need Parrott to replace Llorente
Click to expand...

Barring injuries, I doubt that we will see Parrott in the PL this season. Kane's cover is Moura, Son And possibly Lo Celso.
 
Pirate55 said:
Listen folks. We were NEVER going to sign him. Not in a month of Sundays. Not just the price, but his wages were well beyond our structure. The image right issue is simply not solvable without bucketloads of cash being thrown at it. If Man U with their muscle couldn't do it - do you really think Spurs could? Don't beat yourselves up over this pipe dream. We are still not at the very top table yet.
Click to expand...

I am not sure I agree that it NEVER was going to happen, but I am not crestfallen it didn't work out. More importantly, I think at the start of the widow if we'd been told we'd get N'Domble, Lo Celso, Sessengnon and a couple of prospects and off load some deadwood, then almost everyone would have been delighted. The fact that the window ended with all the Dybala craziness has deflated some folks, but I am not among them.
 
Pirate55 said:
Listen folks. We were NEVER going to sign him. Not in a month of Sundays. Not just the price, but his wages were well beyond our structure. The image right issue is simply not solvable without bucketloads of cash being thrown at it. If Man U with their muscle couldn't do it - do you really think Spurs could? Don't beat yourselves up over this pipe dream. We are still not at the very top table yet.
Click to expand...

You keep telling yourself that to make yourself feel better.

We did agree wages. We agreed the fee.

The reason United pulled out is he demanded 350k a week because he didn't fancy the club and on top of that his new agent demanded 15m from United to negotiate with his old agent.

If we had another few days the deal and image right would have been done.
 
Modric THFC said:
You keep telling yourself that to make yourself feel better.

We did agree wages. We agreed the fee.

The reason United pulled out is he demanded 350k a week because he didn't fancy the club and on top of that his new agent demanded 15m from United to negotiate with his old agent.

If we had another few days the deal and image right would have been done.
Click to expand...

A few days on top of the 21 we’d apparently already had? 3 weeks is long enough to get a player signed up if you’re determined enough to sign. I still don’t believe this ever went far or even began.
 
Huddy said:
A few days on top of the 21 we’d apparently already had? 3 weeks is long enough to get a player signed up if you’re determined enough to sign. I still don’t believe this ever went far or even began.
Click to expand...

Because it didn't happen?
Convenient thinking mate.
 
Huddy said:
A few days on top of the 21 we’d apparently already had? 3 weeks is long enough to get a player signed up if you’re determined enough to sign. I still don’t believe this ever went far or even began.
Click to expand...

This, but I'm also very tired of hearing about how we allegedly almost pulled off big deals because we ran out of time. That article by Delaney about us 'almost doing the deal of the window' hurts, because it's always 'almost'. But some convenient thing always stops us from spending big on deals like this - this time, it's that we simply ran out of time.

There are three months, or twelve weeks, to do business after the end of the season.

If it got to deadline day and then died because of a lack of time, that's on us. It's not even like we don't have precedent - Moutinho et al should have been ample warnings as to what happens when you leave something late.

There's also a precedent for us throwing fake bids around to look like we're doing something (Rossi, Llorente, Aguero on deadline day in January 2011), so you may well be right. But on this one, it looks like there was a concerted attempt - no smoke without fire. Just ran out of time, annoyingly.
 
DubaiSpur said:
This, but I'm also very tired of hearing about how we allegedly almost pulled off big deals because we ran out of time. That article by Delaney about us 'almost doing the deal of the window' hurts, because it's always 'almost'. But some convenient thing always stops us from spending big on deals like this - this time, it's that we simply ran out of time.

There are three months, or twelve weeks, to do business after the end of the season.

If it got to deadline day and then died because of a lack of time, that's on us. It's not even like we don't have precedent - Moutinho et al should have been ample warnings as to what happens when you leave something late.

There's also a precedent for us throwing fake bids around to look like we're doing something (Rossi, Llorente, Aguero on deadline day in January 2011), so you may well be right. But on this one, it looks like there was a concerted attempt - no smoke without fire. Just ran out of time, annoyingly.
Click to expand...

So, I agree with you in one regard - Moutinho. That was the lesson as it was a very similar case study. The thought was that the third party owner would compromise at the 11th hour when pushed to do do. They didn't. I believe this deal was in the offing longer than three weeks BTW, and I don't doubt there was a lot of work done to try and get it across the line. The one thing I don't (and will never) know, is how willing the third party owner presented themselves as with regards to negotiation. Did they say they would play ball and baulk at the last moment, or was it always going to be tough? In which case why would it all have been so public? There was definitely a strategic gamble made there, and I am guessing we will never kn ow what that was. IF Dybala is still in Turin on sept 1, I'd say "maybe" there's a chance it could happen in January...we shall see eh?
 
metalgear said:
Said image rights is a company owned by his agent? If so it leaves more questions than answers

Sent from my SM-G975F using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...
Think it's owned by his old agent. It would be nice to know if this is indefinitely or a period of time.

Iirc he pays 20% of his wages to this agent. I can't think why a loan wouldn't have worked with Juve continuing to pay this 20% and us picking up the rest. I suppose if there was an obligation to buy, although we'd kicked the image rights can down the road, it could still become complicated to solve when we came to sign permanently. And imagine if he'd had a stellar season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back