I think he's saying the trade off is worth it.
And let's hope this season doesn't have a worse outcome than last season, as last season was effing terrible.
Eh. If there's a regression and we finish 3rd, 4th or outside the top four entirely, that will mark the end of three years of forward progress in terms of league placings and continuous improvement. Again, just bluntly stating the truth. If he's saying that's a tradeoff worth making, fine - his opinion, and it's as valid as any other. But in that case, don't cite us finishing 2nd with injuries last season as a reason to not spend anything this summer - because by not spending anything, we are increasing the chances of not matching last year's performances.
100% saying the trade off is worth it..
That's fine.
Are we really weaker than last year i disagree, would say their is a good chance
This is where I disagree. We *are* weaker than we were last year. Even if we stand still doing nothing, we have lost a first-team player to a league rival and have lost the comfort of WHL for the unfamiliar turf of Wembley. We're *already* behind where we were last season on that front, imo.
Winks, Lamela, Jansen will have much better or at least off more output
Hypothetically - equally likely that they all get injured on September 2nd, no? In Lamela's case, he won't even be back until October, I think. Janssen may not be able to adapt to the league.
Rest are young and may have a improvement
KWP and a few of the other prospects may step in.
And do worse than their first-team equivalents - again, this is just a fact, and likely to happen, which would lead to a regression overall.
Simple fact is we got here by trusting youth, but not everyone else spends some cash and suddenly all the toys come out of the pram, we finished second!!
We got here through a mix of spending big, buying first-team players and trusting youth - Son didn't grow up in Hemel Hempstead, Eriksen didn't come through our academy, Toby was bought, Verts was bought, Wanyama was bought, Dembele was bought, Rose was bought, and Lloris was bought. And many of those players were bought for significant sums - Son cost 22m, Dembele cost 16m, Lamela cost 30m.
People tend to forget that first bit when they fetishize our academy like it's delivered every single starting player over the last few years. We didn't get here *only* through trusting youth-team players - we would 100% not be where we are if we had (Luke McGee in place of Lloris, Caulker over Toby, Livermore over Wanyama, Mason over Eriksen, Townsend over Son - a better team? Not in a million years). The academy is definitely important to our plans and our long-term future, but it is not an excuse to stay out of the market, and will never be if we are serious about stepping up to regular success.
If we get Barkley for 20-25mil, KWP looks to be a suitable backup, then we have improved.
If we get Barkley, we still have a problem at RB - Trippier is simply not as good as Walker from a defensive perspective, and even if KWP proves a suitable backup to Trippier, that weakness will remain, imo. So *maybe* we improve without another RB, but it's not as clear cut as the fact that we probably will improve if we get Barkley plus another RB at the least - it improves our options, and allows for greater depth.
Would i prefer to go and buy Arnautovic or give Edwards a try in a carling cup, by far id rather see Edwards or Oakley-Boothe
Who said anything about buying Arnautovic, though? I thought your objection was that the market was crazy and so we shouldn't step in. Even in sane markets, we never had an interest in the Arnautovic type - so why would we start now?
Straight question who would you sell and buy and at what value? Do you think we should be competing for Lacazette for example?
I wouldn't buy anyone the manager doesn't identify as a first-choice target. If he identifies that player, I would make it happen - 40m, 50m, 60m, 75m, whatever. I'd trust that he knows our contract situation and our financial circumstances as well as I do, and understands that any signing we make needs to be within those constraints - so if he suggests one, go for it. Even if we spend more money than we make doing so. That's why I was happier with Sissoko than some people here were last season - the intent, and not the player, mattered more there.
As for specific players that we should target, No idea. Barkley seems a good 'un. Mahrez is another one we could go for. We need another CB - Dominique Heintz of Koln would be a good option. An RB is needed - this Toljan bloke sounds good, or Ricardo Pereira if we can get over the ownership issues. Other than that, I don't think we need strengthening anywhere else. And we can then rely on Onomah being our nominal second-choice DM (in a 3-4-2-1 with Dier becoming the permanent RCB), or KWP as a third-choice across both flanks, and CCV as a backup to Dier with Heintz and/or Wimmer as other options should CCV struggle.
That's the less risky way to integrate youth, imo. The game against Roma showed that CCV, KWP and co. are *raw* - very, very raw, and very likely to cost us points, goals and league places if we rely on them as straight second choices this season. Trading up an unspent 40m million pound transfer fee for a 50m loss in revenue from finishing outside the top four (as an example) because CCV gave away a penalty by handballing or something isn't good business, or sensible.
