Transfer Window Thread

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Janssen's wages for the rest of the season could be £2m. And the ongoing depreciation in his value double or treble that.

Getting rid of them now is more so we have the squad places and cash in the bank for the summer, so we don't have the same issues for the 3rd window running

£2m in the scheme of things is far from a deal breaker.

He isnt in our plans, and hasnt been in the squad for ages, so leaving him out - nothing changes.

Chances are he will find a move, most likely loan, as a shop window for a transfer in the summer.

NKoudou will be on peanuts, is also regularly touted for loan moves.

Wanyama is fit again (for now) and we are desperate in midfield. While Im not against selling/replacing him my money would be on him staying until the summer at least.

If, and its an if, we have the chance to bring in Rabiot (or someone else who would improve us) then we must take it, none of this "Oh but Jansen is taking a squad place" gonads.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Janssen's wages for the rest of the season could be £2m. And the ongoing depreciation in his value double or treble that.

Getting rid of them now is more so we have the squad places and cash in the bank for the summer, so we don't have the same issues for the 3rd window running

If we cant get rid of them on loan or sold then buying players in has no impact vs. not. No one is saying we shouldn't get rid of them people are saying we need to do business regardless, the cost to Jansen is a sunk cost it will happen regardless, getting someone in should be a benefit.

 

[MKSpur]

£2m in the scheme of things is far from a deal breaker.

He isnt in our plans, and hasnt been in the squad for ages, so leaving him out - nothing changes.

Chances are he will find a move, most likely loan, as a shop window for a transfer in the summer.

NKoudou will be on peanuts, is also regularly touted for loan moves.

Wanyama is fit again (for now) and we are desperate in midfield. While Im not against selling/replacing him my money would be on him staying until the summer at least.

If, and its an if, we have the chance to bring in Rabiot (or someone else who would improve us) then we must take it, none of this "Oh but Jansen is taking a squad place" gonads.

Footballing wise Janssen has no impact but his cost to us is the remaining life of his contract. While to us he is worthless Levy won’t write off his value over the remaining years of his contract. Personally I’d offer him a free just to get his wages off the books but we kept Bentley and Gomes until their contracts expired even thought they had 0 chance of playing.

If Janssen was a machine that we’d paid £18m in our factory and wasn’t working after one year, rather than continue to write down his value but pay maintenance over 5 years until it is not seen as a cost, surely you scrap it and get a machine that can improve the output now.

 

[LesMedley]

£2m in the scheme of things is far from a deal breaker.

He isnt in our plans, and hasnt been in the squad for ages, so leaving him out - nothing changes.

Chances are he will find a move, most likely loan, as a shop window for a transfer in the summer.

NKoudou will be on peanuts, is also regularly touted for loan moves.

Wanyama is fit again (for now) and we are desperate in midfield. While Im not against selling/replacing him my money would be on him staying until the summer at least.

If, and its an if, we have the chance to bring in Rabiot (or someone else who would improve us) then we must take it, none of this "Oh but Jansen is taking a squad place" gonads.

I agree with most of what you are saying. Jansen doesn't and will not take a place up in the squad for either CL or PL. Pochettino has made that clear on a number of occasions. K'Koudou can play in the EPL but is not registered for the CL. Levy will decide what to do with players no longer in Pochettino's plans. He will either maximise our profit or minimise our loss whichever is appropriate, because he knows that money matters, even "peanuts" or a "mere" £2 million.
Dembele leaving means Foyth comes into the CL squad, for however long that lasts. Pochettino has made this clear. That means that we have filled our quota of overseas players for the CL. If we want to "improve our squad" with a foreign player then another foreign player has to be removed. Pochettino has also said on a number of occasions that we won't get anyone in merely to cover for injuries or suspensions.
We are up to our limit of 17 foreign players in the EPL squad, but this includes both N'Koudou and Vorm.
In my view we have no chance whatsoever of Rabiot signing, because he can see out his contract with PSG for the next four months or so playing with their under-23's and then leave for wherever he wants on a free ( or at least a cheap sale, as his age might be a factor.) I'd doubt whether we've even spoken to him. I suspect it's all paper talk.
I do think though that a re-organisation of the squad will be necessary in the summer, because we are right on the limits of player eligibility, though I suspect that Luke Amos (if fit), Cameron Carter-Vickers (if retained) and Kyle Walker-Peters will be eligible by age as home-grown for senior squads by then.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Footballing wise Janssen has no impact but his cost to us is the remaining life of his contract. While to us he is worthless Levy won’t write off his value over the remaining years of his contract. Personally I’d offer him a free just to get his wages off the books but we kept Bentley and Gomes until their contracts expired even thought they had 0 chance of playing.

If Janssen was a machine that we’d paid £18m in our factory and wasn’t working after one year, rather than continue to write down his value but pay maintenance over 5 years until it is not seen as a cost, surely you scrap it and get a machine that can improve the output now.

I understand depreciation, and I understand its much better to let Jansen go that have him hanging around costing us.

All Im saying is that THAT should not, in any way, impact us getting improvements into the squad.

Of course, ideally, we find a club that wants him for a reasonable price and everyone moves on.

If, however, a move is impossible for him - that should in no way stop us from moving on targets we can aquire that will benefit the team.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

I agree with most of what you are saying. Jansen doesn't and will not take a place up in the squad for either CL or PL. Pochettino has made that clear on a number of occasions. K'Koudou can play in the EPL but is not registered for the CL. Levy will decide what to do with players no longer in Pochettino's plans. He will either maximise our profit or minimise our loss whichever is appropriate, because he knows that money matters, even "peanuts" or a "mere" £2 million.

As stated, ideally it all works out. I am speaking explicitly against the notion we should have to sell Jansen before getting someone in. £2m might be a lot of money, but in trying to save that - what would the cost to our season be if we refuse to improve our team because it?

Dembele leaving means Foyth comes into the CL squad, for however long that lasts. Pochettino has made this clear. That means that we have filled our quota of overseas players for the CL. If we want to "improve our squad" with a foreign player then another foreign player has to be removed. Pochettino has also said on a number of occasions that we won't get anyone in merely to cover for injuries or suspensions.
We are up to our limit of 17 foreign players in the EPL squad, but this includes both N'Koudou and Vorm.

Maybe we drop Vorm from CL, maybe Aurier, maybe Lamela - it doesnt really matter. What does matter is having the best possible squad going forward.

I refute the idea of not improving because of technicalities around having the optimum balance of players to make sure everyone has a space.

In my view we have no chance whatsoever of Rabiot signing, because he can see out his contract with PSG for the next four months or so playing with their under-23's and then leave for wherever he wants on a free ( or at least a cheap sale, as his age might be a factor.) I'd doubt whether we've even spoken to him. I suspect it's all paper talk.
I do think though that a re-organisation of the squad will be necessary in the summer, because we are right on the limits of player eligibility, though I suspect that Luke Amos (if fit), Cameron Carter-Vickers (if retained) and Kyle Walker-Peters will be eligible by age as home-grown for senior squads by then.

Rabiot? I think its 50/50/ The point for me isnt "Rabiot" exactly, rather "A Rabiot".

If there is a player we can sign to strengthen the side, we must.

 

[Dicko]

Could we drop Vorm from the PL squad then just call him an emergency gk if we get injuries between now and the end of the season

 

[LesMedley]

As stated, ideally it all works out. I am speaking explicitly against the notion we should have to sell Jansen before getting someone in. £2m might be a lot of money, but in trying to save that - what would the cost to our season be if we refuse to improve our team because it?



Maybe we drop Vorm from CL, maybe Aurier, maybe Lamela - it doesnt really matter. What does matter is having the best possible squad going forward.

I refute the idea of not improving because of technicalities around having the optimum balance of players to make sure everyone has a space.



Rabiot? I think its 50/50/ The point for me isnt "Rabiot" exactly, rather "A Rabiot".

If there is a player we can sign to strengthen the side, we must.

"I refute the idea of not improving because of technicalities around having the optimum balance of players to make sure everyone has a space."
I don't see it as a technicality. If we remove someone from the squad without removing him from the club, there is a danger of unrest, which has already been apparent with Jansen. Our inability to sign any one in the summer was due in no small part to our inability to get rid of those who were unwanted then.
It might be the only way but it's certainly something to avoid if possible, especially in the middle of the season; and the new player would have to be able to hit the ground running; something notoriously difficult in the middle of the season.
"Rabiot? I think its 50/50/ The point for me isnt "Rabiot" exactly, rather "A Rabiot"." I was thinking we'd have to agree to differ on him, but then you moved the goalposts!
"If there is a player we can sign to strengthen the side, we must." I don't doubt we will, but only if we can afford it and Pochettino thinks the squad will be improved.

 

[Finney Is Back]

We've still got too many - Foyth couldn't play in the CL and Janssen I don't think was in either the PL or CL squads.

So I think we're now (minus Dembele) down to 17 overseas players for the EPL and 18 for the CL (with the maximum for both being 17)

We cannot be deciding our squad for the second half of the season based solely on the Champions League (which there is a reasonable likelihood that we'll only be in for another 2 games anyway).

Janssen has no future at Spurs, Poch has made that clear. He won't be included in the squad even if there is a space for him. Dembele leaving has therefore opened up a place in the PL squad for another overseas player. The only question is whether the club choose to make use of that. My thoughts are that it is worth doing only if we can get a player who we want for the long term. There is no point in bringing in a stop gap only to have to try to get rid of them in the Summer (which would be likely to be difficult due to them likely improving their wages coming to Spurs).

 

[Finney Is Back]

Janssen's wages for the rest of the season could be £2m. And the ongoing depreciation in his value double or treble that.

Getting rid of them now is more so we have the squad places and cash in the bank for the summer, so we don't have the same issues for the 3rd window running

The depreciation doesn't really matter. In fact Levy seems to prefer to selling/releasing players later in their contracts when their net book value is lower to avoid showing losses on players. I can't remember Janssen's full contract details at Spurs, but for ease of numbers let's assume it was a 5 year deal and £15 million. Now 2.5 years into his contract would've amortised half his value with him showing as being worth £7.5 million. In the summer his book value will be £6 million. Selling him now for £6 million would be a £1.5 million loss on the asset. Selling him in the summer for the same £6 million amount would show as no loss on the asset.

If the club are using Janssen being on the books as an excuse not to sign a player then I we can be sure that we really are up against it in a big way financially due to the stadium.

 

[mudshark]

I'm starting to suspect the football gods aren't working in base 10.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

"I refute the idea of not improving because of technicalities around having the optimum balance of players to make sure everyone has a space."
I don't see it as a technicality. If we remove someone from the squad without removing him from the club, there is a danger of unrest, which has already been apparent with Jansen. Our inability to sign any one in the summer was due in no small part to our inability to get rid of those who were unwanted then.
It might be the only way but it's certainly something to avoid if possible, especially in the middle of the season; and the new player would have to be able to hit the ground running; something notoriously difficult in the middle of the season.
"Rabiot? I think its 50/50/ The point for me isnt "Rabiot" exactly, rather "A Rabiot"." I was thinking we'd have to agree to differ on him, but then you moved the goalposts!
"If there is a player we can sign to strengthen the side, we must." I don't doubt we will, but only if we can afford it and Pochettino thinks the squad will be improved.

At no point have I said its a desired or optimal outcome, only that it is not a deal breaker.

It is indeed a technicality. Its not a law prohibiting us, its a not a rule we mustnt break - its a choice to make IF it comes to it.

So, IF we can sign "A Rabiot", and IF we cant offload the like of Jansen, then yes - I wouldnt name him in the squad rather than have that situation result in not signing the player that can improve us.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Footballing wise Janssen has no impact but his cost to us is the remaining life of his contract. While to us he is worthless Levy won’t write off his value over the remaining years of his contract. Personally I’d offer him a free just to get his wages off the books but we kept Bentley and Gomes until their contracts expired even thought they had 0 chance of playing.

If Janssen was a machine that we’d paid £18m in our factory and wasn’t working after one year, rather than continue to write down his value but pay maintenance over 5 years until it is not seen as a cost, surely you scrap it and get a machine that can improve the output now.

I think it depends. If you had an £18 million machine with a 5 year amortisation, that machine would have a net book value of 9 million half way through it's anticipated useful life. It would depend on what it was that you wanted to show in your accounts whether or not you were prepared to write off that £9 million as a loss. It seems to me as though Levy doesn't like to show those losses, hence us retaining the player (probably unless an offer comes in that is more than the remaining book value). He then tries to loan out the player to cover the running costs.

 

[Finney Is Back]

At no point have I said its a desired or optimal outcome, only that it is not a deal breaker.

It is indeed a technicality. Its not a law prohibiting us, its a not a rule we mustnt break - its a choice to make IF it comes to it.

So, IF we can sign "A Rabiot", and IF we cant offload the like of Jansen, then yes - I wouldnt name him in the squad rather than have that situation result in not signing the player that can improve us.

There are very few footballers (Winston Bogarde excepted) who will turn down a loan move away when told they will not be getting a place in the squad so playing no football if they turn down other moves and choose to stay. I expect that even Winston Bogarde might have opted to move earlier in his career when not just concerned about that final pay day.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

There are very few footballers (Winston Bogarde excepted) who will turn down a loan move away when told they will not be getting a place in the squad so playing no football if they turn down other moves and choose to stay. I expect that even Winston Bogarde might have opted to move earlier in his career when not just concerned about that final pay day.

Jansen has already gone out on loan as well.

Personally I think he is a good player for whom there should be interest. Admittedly at a lower level, but I am absolutely sure there will be loan/buy options for him.

You can bet your life there have been scouts at our U23 games watching him scoring.

So Im reasonably confident we can offload him, and that it wouldnt come to a situation of leaving him out.

Similarly Vorm, NKoudou and even Llorente.

All Im saying is that ultimately not being able to do so (unlikely IMO) should not and I hope will not stop us from improving the squad if that opportunity is there.

 

[parklane1]

But what if we DID try, and it didn't work out? What else are we supposed to do?

Does not compute for some.

 

[Jordinho]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1089917050707939330

 

[Gutter Boy]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1089917050707939330

Chelsea clearing the decks for Janssen?

 

[LesMedley]

At no point have I said its a desired or optimal outcome, only that it is not a deal breaker.

It is indeed a technicality. Its not a law prohibiting us, its a not a rule we mustnt break - its a choice to make IF it comes to it.

So, IF we can sign "A Rabiot", and IF we cant offload the like of Jansen, then yes - I wouldnt name him in the squad rather than have that situation result in not signing the player that can improve us.

"At no point have I said its a desired or optimal outcome, only that it is not a deal breaker." I'm not entirely sure what the "its" in this statement refers to but I suspect it's to do with the money involved. If it is I've never suggested otherwise, only that you give the impression that it doesn't matter.

"I refute the idea of not improving because of technicalities around having the optimum balance of players to make sure everyone has a space." You are arguing to improve by disrupting the squad, rather than selling or loaning a player that isn't needed. We have tried to do that in the summer and, in the main failed. We were able to loan out Ogilvie and Carter-Vickers amongst other junior players. We could possibly have sold Ogilvie, but you will note that he had to be in the EPL squad even though he is at Gillingham and has never played a first team game game for us. Otherwise we would have had to have one fewer foreign player in that squad too.

A choice would have to be made because of the Laws and regulations of both the EPL and the CL. To that extent you are right, we are dealing with technicalities, but your statement that it is indeed a technicality because it's not a rule we mustn't break is clearly wrong, because the rules we must not break are by definition technicalities. Anyway, perhaps I misunderstood what you originally meant by technicality, which I interpreted as "a small detail of little importance". I would think that was an unnecessarily cavalier approach.

Your point about having or not having Jansen in the squad is neither here nor there. He's not been in either squad since the beginning of the season. The problem with getting another foreign player in, is that either another foreign player (not Jansen) would have to be discarded from the squads or the new player would not be allowed in either of them. That player could be N'Koudou for the EPL squad but not the CL squad. That may not be a problem for you, but it would be for the player concerned, and it might well be for Pochettino.
You might well argue that the club has been mistaken in having the large amount of foreign players we have in the squads already, but it gives a problem in getting other foreign players in without getting rid of the players they would replace.

You don't care about that. So be it.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

@LesMedley , I suspect you have mis read my intention.

Gutter Boy was speaking in absolutes, as he likes to, in that we cant buy anyone until we have shifted off Jansen and Co.

That is simply not true, IMO.

Ive stated numerous times, it is not my preference in any way to have to not name players in the squads and have them rot - but that if it came down to a choice of doing that and signing quality to improve the team, or not doing that and missing out - then they must rot. Simple as that.

It is, really, a fairly extreme situation, and (as Ive also stated) the chances are most likely we would be able to offload unwanted players (even if only on loan) and avoid it.

Jansen in the U23s doesnt effect squad harmony. He isnt in the squad. He basically doesnt exist. That whole argument is a non starter (as evidenced by the situation already being realised, if you hadnt noticed).

If we add NKoudou to that (another I think it likely we could at least loan out), then so be it. Yes, I doubt he will like it. And yes, just as with Jansen, I doubt it will be an issue for anyone else.

I havent made comment on the money, others have. My only view was that paying Jansens wages the rest of the season, if it came to it, wouldnt be significant enough to prevent any transfers happening.