Transfer speculation

[JerusalemMan]

Tottenham Hotspur‏Verified account@SpursOfficial 3m3 minutes ago
Something's coming. Reply with #SpursITK to get a notification... #COYS

433 replies33 retweets94 likes

are you all ready?

http://new-stadium.tottenhamhotspur.com/interact/

Now a new camera pointed at the banner with #SpursITK as the title

 

[We are Tottenham]

That 'experience, stability and youth' thing is a bit of a false alley, imo. *Every* team will claim the same thing. Every one.

Mourinho has settled in at United, his players will have bought into his methods, Pogba, Martial, Rashford and Bailly are all young and will improve.
Conte has settled in at Chelsea, his players will have bought into his methods, Zouma, Batshuayi and Alonso will all improve, and they have a bajillion young players they can recall to aid them since they will all have gotten better as well.
Pep has settled in at Chelsea, his players will have bought into his methods, Stones, Jesus, Sterling and Sane will are all young and will improve.
Klopp has settled in at Liverpool, his players will have bought into his methods, Coutinho, Firminho and Mane will all improve.
Wenger has been settled in at Arsenal for a long time, but Bellerin, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Iwobi and Holding are all young and will improve by dint of experience and a winning mentality brought by their FA Cup victory.
Koeman has settled in at Everton...


...you get my point. It's not that such an effect doesn't exist, only that it doesn't exist in a vacuum, and that others have the same reasons to expect the same improvement as we do. So, really, it is standing still relative to everyone else - worse if, as I said, we swap WHL for Wembley, which will definitely bring wobbliness we didn't experience at the Lane last season.

I certainly don't think we won't sign *anyone* - it's becoming increasingly clear that we're going to be pretty much forced to be the last in line waiting until August and everyone has had their fill of the available talent. Then we can pick from what's left - and, possibly, we might have to wait even longer before moving as even clubs our size (Roma, Dortmund, Sevilla and co.) pay wages we won't and get players we can't. That seems like the pattern we're going to be forced into, and there are positives and negatives to such a reality - but it certainly doesn't mean we won't sign *anyone at all*, per se. But I don't think we can get away without signing anyone and expect a significant improvement on last season, or even an on-par season. So while we may have to wait, and that's acceptable, I think ending the window *without* any movement would be a bad move on our part.

As for Chelsea's weak squad, I disagree, because they have the aforementioned bajillion players out on loan that they still pay wages to and can recall if necessary, many of whom are at or above the level of our comparable squad players (Andreas Christensen, for example, is probably better than Wimmer, Mario Pasalic was on loan at AC Milan and became an integral component of their midfield last season, and Marco Van Ginkel has accumulated more multinational experience than the majority of our squad while being a consistent loan ranger). Yet, they're going for the more expensive option of beefing up with first-team players good and early, which indicates more than just filling squad gaps, imo - it indicates a desire to improve and not stand still on their part.

 

[We are Tottenham]

Not exactly, no - I am aware it exists, but I've never had the inclination to actually visit it. If you're basing it on something I'm not aware of, then carry on, I suppose.

Sorry Dubai.. A bit trigger happy there.
Yes ,the other clubs around us are not going to stand still.
Have we got the money to add players to are very good Team this coming season.
There lies the problem...we have done miracles really..as our main rivals have billionaires
Backing them.
It's like trying to win the Grand Prix with BHS and Woolworths as our Sponsor,s.
Obviously we are not a poor club but as I have said before ..No money ..few trophies..
I wish the game was how it used to be!

 

[StephenH]

I wish the game was how it used to be!

How far are you going back?

You would need to go back to the sixties!

Money has always called the shots........but that goes back to Romen times...

 

[Legohamster]

Sorry Dubai.. A bit trigger happy there.
Yes ,the other clubs around us are not going to stand still.
Have we got the money to add players to are very good Team this coming season.
There lies the problem...we have done miracles really..as our main rivals have billionaires
Backing them.
It's like trying to win the Grand Prix with BHS and Woolworths as our Sponsor,s.
Obviously we are not a poor club but as I have said before ..No money ..few trophies..
I wish the game was how it used to be!

We have a billionaire owner, he just doesn't spend the money

 

[StephenH]

We have a billionaire owner, he just doesn't spend the money

How do you know this?
I think this is a general misconception, rich owners don't in general spend their own money on players/wages especially in the EPL.

 

[DubaiSpur]

Sorry Dubai.. A bit trigger happy there.
Yes ,the other clubs around us are not going to stand still.
Have we got the money to add players to are very good Team this coming season.
There lies the problem...we have done miracles really..as our main rivals have billionaires
Backing them.
It's like trying to win the Grand Prix with BHS and Woolworths as our Sponsor,s.
Obviously we are not a poor club but as I have said before ..No money ..few trophies..
I wish the game was how it used to be!

Well, as @Legohamster points out, we do have a billionaire owner ourselves - but unlike most clubs we rolled the dice and ended up with a *stingy* billionaire, which has to be another famous example of our amazing luck over the years.

I agree, though - we are now in a market where we literally cannot compete with some of the prices being bandied around and offers being thrown about, given our self-imposed restraints. So it puts us in the back seat with regard to wages, transfers and overall competitiveness - we can wish for more brilliant seasons like 16-17, but it would require consistent brilliance on a relatively shoestring budget, while our rivals can afford bad decisions by the bucketload because they can spend hundreds of millions to rectify any errors. I'm not particularly upset over it because I feel we have a relatively strong sense of equilibrium at the moment and thus can afford to wait and see what's left at the end of the window (provided we don't lose anyone, of course), but that seems like it's the likely reality - not much to be done about it there. I only think we shouldn't end the window without making *any* signings and expect improvement or even stagnation, because that would be a wrong move in our situation, imo.

There was definitely a time when a club could build a team entirely from local lads and win the European Cup without spending a dime on transfers - Celtic in 1967 marked the high point of this era. That time is long gone now, of course, and in recent decades football has followed along in the zeitgeist that gripped the world in the aftermath of the Reagan/Thatcher era - a zeitgeist which is only now thankfully dying a long-overdue death.

 

[DubaiSpur]

To take a few of your points here:

I didn't see anything from Mourinho's Man Utd last season that makes me think they will be champions this year (or any time soon). I didn't see Mourinho developing much of a style of play for them . it seemed to me that Mourinho doesn’t really get/trust Martial as a player and they have lost their top scorer from last season and it is always VERY difficult to replace a top scorer. That being said Man Utd obviously have the funds both in terms of transfer fee and wages to go out and attract a top level player to replace Ibrahimovic.

All true, but my point was that they could feasibly expect improvement from Martial, Pogba, Bailly, Rashford and co. in the same way that we can expect improvement in our young players - ergo, we're not really moving ahead of them if we end the summer with no incoming players whatsoever.

True. But it looks as though Costa is off and if he isn't off he will be staying there as a very disillusioned player. So another contender that need to replace their top goalscorer.

True, but that new striker will likely be in addition to Bakayoko and possibly Alex Sandro, not instead of them - which indicates forward progress despite that need to replace Costa.

I think we will definitely see an improvement at Emirates Marketing Project this year. They have very good players and a very big and deep squad. They are my clear favourites to win the title.

Agreed. And if they don't at least put up a strong challenge for the title, Pep's credibility will be severely dented, imo. His miracles at Barca are receding into history, and he didn't really do anything spectacular at Bayern - he took the best squad in the league by far and did pretty much what you'd expect the best squad in the league to do, namely win titles. Didn't win another CL trophy, which was sort of the point of his appointment there. And if he doesn't win the PL after spending 500,000,000 pounds on new players, it will be an even greater black mark on his record.

I’m still not 100% convinced about Klopp’s Liverpool. They can be devastating, but it seems they are very susceptible to teams who sit back and don’t give that space in behind for Mane to exploit and then go long, bypass the midfield and seek to outnumber Liverpool around their penalty area after they have over committed players to attack. I hope we see Pochettino pay them a bit more respect this season (especially away) and look to play deep and on the counter to combat them.

That was their problem last season, admittedly, but I think they'll adapt tactically and negate that weakness this time around - much like our pressing last season was far more tactical and targeted than it was in 15-16, which I suspect helped us preserve energy for the run-in and made us more solid when facing teams that liked to break pressing systems by going long. I agree, though - Poch would be well served by setting up a bit more cautiously when playing them, since they've been perhaps the only team in the league that has consistently dominated us during Poch's tenure here.

Perhaps.... However it looks quite likely that they will be losing their top goal scorer and talisman – Sanchez. Another team who will be having to replace their man goalscorer. Probably the hardest thing to do in football.

We'll see, but that is tangential to my point, which is that this natural improvement that we expect Alli, Dier, Winks et al to have will also come to those young players I mentioned - Bellerin, Iwobi, Holding et al. We're not likely to move ahead of these teams just by relying on our improvement by dint of gaining age and experience - if they lose Sanchez, we might move ahead of them a bit more, but if all things remain the same, they'll have improved as much as we will come the end of 2017-2018, since gaining age and experience applies fairly equally to all young players given sufficient playing time.

I have no doubt that we will sign some players this summer. I think we will end up with a right back to replace Walker, another option at centre half (to take Wimmer’s place in the squad) and an additional attacking midfielder who will take Sissoko's squad place and can operate across any of the 7, 10 or 11 positions. I really don't think we need any more than that. We are strong in every position in the first team and have very good cover for most of those positions as well. I guess the icing on the cake would be a better option than Janssen to cover Kane. However I still think that Janssen can be successful at Spurs and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him be this season’s Son and show how good he is now that he has settled in.

I actually wouldn't mind Sissoko or Janssen staying, since I didn't judge them on last season's contributions anyway - this season will be the year I cast a more critical eye on their performances, if Poch ends up keeping them around. I also think Wimmer might end up staying if his agent's latest quotes ('Spurs still see him as a future regular', I believe) hold true. Personally, if and when Walker goes, replacing him with a similarly talented, physical, pacy option would be one key move, and adding another similarly pacy but technically-gifted winger/inside forward would be the other key addition (and in both areas, I agree with you). Do both and we'd be set - then it's just a case of replacing Vorm if he goes and maybe getting someone young like Sessegnon in if possible.

But doing nothing wouldn't help, imo. Even if we ended up keeping Walker, I think that pacy-but-gifted attacking midfielder is a minimum requirement if we want to try and match last season's standards, never mind exceed them - and although I don't mind waiting until the end of the window to see action in that regard, concluding this summer without such an addition would be a grave mistake, imo.

 

[parklane1]

We have a billionaire owner, he just doesn't spend the money

Of course he spends money, just not as much as some needy fans want and demand.

 

[DubaiSpur]

How do you know this?
I think this is a general misconception, rich owners don't in general spend their own money on players/wages especially in the EPL.

? I don't think you're right on that one, mate. The majority of clubs are in debt to their owners (usually via interest-free loans, but it's still debt), and most of that debt has come from owners putting money into the club to fund wages and transfer fees. Ellis Short at Sunderland, Mansour at City, Abramovich at Chelsea, Allam at Hull, FSG at Liverpool, Ashley at Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Liebherr at Southampton, the Dildo Brothers at West Ham...

I disagree with the notion that Joe Lewis hasn't put *any* of his own money into the club - he did expand his ownership share and correspondingly gave us some money that we used to buy land for the stadium, iirc. But as a proportion of the investment into their clubs that other owners have undertaken, that's a very great way down the list.

 

[StephenH]

? I don't think you're right on that one, mate. The majority of clubs are in debt to their owners (usually via interest-free loans, but it's still debt), and most of that debt has come from owners putting money into the club to fund wages and transfer fees. Ellis Short at Sunderland, Mansour at City, Abramovich at Chelsea, Allam at Hull, FSG at Liverpool, Ashley at Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Liebherr at Southampton, the Dildo Brothers at West Ham...

I disagree with the notion that Joe Lewis hasn't put *any* of his own money into the club - he did expand his ownership share and correspondingly gave us some money that we used to buy land for the stadium, iirc. But as a proportion of the investment into their clubs that other owners have undertaken, that's a very great way down the list.

I think they invest in the club but not by directly buying players. I think they act as financial guarantors and help with the likes of infrastructure, stadia etc
Chelsea and City are doped by thier owners that is mainly due to a woefully inadequate implementation of FFP.

Joe Lewis is not in the same league as the above two, he is a pauper by comparison.

 

[DubaiSpur]

I think they invest in the club but not by directly buying players. I think they act as financial guarantors and help with the likes of infrastructure, stadia etc
Chelsea and City are doped by thier owners that is mainly due to a woefully inadequate implementation of FFP.

Joe Lewis is not in the same league as the above two, he is a pauper by comparison.

Again, I'm not entirely sure that's true, mate. Ellis Short is one example - Sunderland haven't really invested anything into their infrastructure during his tenure there, but he's still given them 200m that is still listed in club accounts as debt to him (or his holding company, iirc). Difficult to see where that money's gone other than towards players, given the enormous turnover there over the last few seasons. Ditto Alam at Hull City, Ashley at Saudi Sportswashing Machine and FSG at Liverpool, to name just three more - FSG at least have the Anfield expansion to point to as infrastructure spending, but that only cost them 50m as per David Conn (https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ue-finances-club-by-club-breakdown-david-conn) and doesn't account for their other investment into the club, which likely went towards transfer fees and wages.

And, of course, Abramovich and Mansour spent more than a billion quid each on their respective teams, and it's hard to see where that's gone if not into the players - the new training grounds and youth team setups can't have cost a billion each, surely.

Joe Lewis isn't as rich as Abramovich or Mansour, no. But he is worth a lot more than Ellis Short, a lot more than Mike Ashley and and even a lot more than John W.Henry over at Liverpool. Nonetheless, he hasn't spent anywhere near what those owners have spent on their teams (including Ashley, believe it or not), and thus he (deservedly, imo) gets the title of unfortunately being the stingiest billionaire we could possibly have secured as an owner.

 

[Glenda's Legs]

? I don't think you're right on that one, mate. The majority of clubs are in debt to their owners (usually via interest-free loans, but it's still debt), and most of that debt has come from owners putting money into the club to fund wages and transfer fees. E But llis Short at Sunderland, Mansour at City, Abramovich at Chelsea, Allam at Hull, FSG at Liverpool, Ashley at Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Liebherr at Southampton, the Dildo Brothers at West Ham...

I disagree with the notion that Joe Lewis hasn't put *any* of his own money into the club - he did expand his ownership share and correspondingly gave us some money that we used to buy land for the stadium, iirc. But as a proportion of the investment into their clubs that other owners have undertaken, that's a very great way down the list.

Not necessarily arguing with your point, but when I look at most of the examples given, I'm pretty glad we have Levy, Lewis, and the ENIC model.

 

[glasgowspur]

Well, as @Legohamster points out, we do have a billionaire owner ourselves - but unlike most clubs we rolled the dice and ended up with a *stingy* billionaire, which has to be another famous example of our amazing luck over the years.

I agree, though - we are now in a market where we literally cannot compete with some of the prices being bandied around and offers being thrown about, given our self-imposed restraints. So it puts us in the back seat with regard to wages, transfers and overall competitiveness - we can wish for more brilliant seasons like 16-17, but it would require consistent brilliance on a relatively shoestring budget, while our rivals can afford bad decisions by the bucketload because they can spend hundreds of millions to rectify any errors. I'm not particularly upset over it because I feel we have a relatively strong sense of equilibrium at the moment and thus can afford to wait and see what's left at the end of the window (provided we don't lose anyone, of course), but that seems like it's the likely reality - not much to be done about it there. I only think we shouldn't end the window without making *any* signings and expect improvement or even stagnation, because that would be a wrong move in our situation, imo.

There was definitely a time when a club could build a team entirely from local lads and win the European Cup without spending a dime on transfers - Celtic in 1967 marked the high point of this era. That time is long gone now, of course, and in recent decades football has followed along in the zeitgeist that gripped the world in the aftermath of the Reagan/Thatcher era - a zeitgeist which is only now thankfully dying a long-overdue death.

Although Celtic deserve great credit for their European cup triumph citing them as the high point for clubs with low budgets and local players is doing multiple and consecutive winners Ajax a disservice.
It takes many things to align for these clubs to rise, and in my view playing in a strong domestic league, regardles of the spend, is one of them.
We shouldn't forget that when Celtic won the European cup in 1967 rangers also played in a European final, two teams from the one city playing the euro finals in the same is a feat that I don't think has ever been matched, and feynoord won the European cup before Ajax.
This pushing each other on to improve I believe can lead to the clubs with less financial muscle developing and peaking.
The problem now is that instant success is demanded and the club's don't have the time to allow these plans to nurture.

 

[DubaiSpur]

Not necessarily arguing with your point, but when I look at most of the examples given, I'm pretty glad we have Levy, Lewis, and the ENIC model.

You'd have ENIC over Mansour, Abramovich or FSG (who are basically a more generous ENIC, more or less)? On a philosophical level of standing on our own two feet or avoiding money soaked in blood and petroleum, sure, I completely get and respect that. But on an objective level in terms of money spent versus rewards gained, those three have probably been better for their clubs than ENIC has been for us, mate.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I think they invest in the club but not by directly buying players. I think they act as financial guarantors and help with the likes of infrastructure, stadia etc
Chelsea and City are doped by thier owners that is mainly due to a woefully inadequate implementation of FFP.

Joe Lewis is not in the same league as the above two, he is a pauper by comparison.

Lewis is probably worth about two thirds of what Abramovich is worth so pauper isn't quite the right comparison there (I take your point about mansour though, especially if you are considering the entire family wealth there)

 

[DubaiSpur]

Although Celtic deserve great credit for their European cup triumph citing them as the high point for clubs with low budgets and local players is doing multiple and consecutive winners Ajax a disservice.
It takes many things to align for these clubs to rise, and in my view playing in a strong domestic league, regardles of the spend, is one of them.
We shouldn't forget that when Celtic won the European cup in 1967 rangers also played in a European final, two teams from the one city playing the euro finals in the same is a feat that I don't think has ever been matched, and feynoord won the European cup before Ajax.
This pushing each other on to improve I believe can lead to the clubs with less financial muscle developing and peaking.
The problem now is that instant success is demanded and the club's don't have the time to allow these plans to nurture.

Fair enough, I forgot Ajax as a far more recent example.

I don't think the strength of the league is as conclusively good for developing European Cup winners as you portray it as being, because to my mind there's also the argument that an overly competitive league forces clubs to concentrate on domestic competitiveness over European performances, and thus actually saps clubs simultaneously competing on both levels. We see that with the Prem now, although Liverpool getting to the EL final last year and United winning the EL this year may signify the start of a reversal of the trend.

As for the argument about instant success, I don't disagree, but that's also simplifying a far more complex argument to an extent - in some ways, instant success may set the stage for sustained success while long-run plans may fail and leave the team as trophyless as it was before it embarked upon them.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

I think they invest in the club but not by directly buying players. I think they act as financial guarantors and help with the likes of infrastructure, stadia etc
Chelsea and City are doped by thier owners that is mainly due to a woefully inadequate implementation of FFP.

Joe Lewis is not in the same league as the above two, he is a pauper by comparison.

He is also the only businessman among them, the first is a gangster from Russia who stole oil and then cossied up to a megalomaniac and the second inherited wealth through oil fields and are looking for assets in different countries where over a 20 year period the asset will still be worth what it is when they first invested.

 

[Glenda's Legs]

You'd have ENIC over Mansour, Abramovich or FSG (who are basically a more generous ENIC, more or less)? On a philosophical level of standing on our own two feet or avoiding money soaked in blood and petroleum, sure, I completely get and respect that. But on an objective level in terms of money spent versus rewards gained, those three have probably been better for their clubs than ENIC has been for us, mate.

Maybe I'm trying to be more of a 'purist' (in inverted commas as we are still beneficiaries of a very rich owner), but I do prefer the build-your-own over the buy-your-own ethos. Sure, it's hard to argue against the fact that some other rich owners have achieved higher levels of success in a shorter period of time compared to ENIC and if we were stagnating mid-to-lower table I might look upon those clubs with envy. But right now I'm happy with where we are, happy with the way our owners are running the club and happy for our long term future, and wouldn't swap ENIC for Mansour or Abramovich or similar.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Joe Lewis isn't as rich as Abramovich or Mansour, no. But he is worth a lot more than Ellis Short, a lot more than Mike Ashley and and even a lot more than John W.Henry over at Liverpool.

how much of his own money has John Henry spent at liverpool? Other than buying the club originally