Discussion in 'Tottenham forum' started by Jesper, February 19, 2020.
any thoughts on the reported £30m buy back clause for KWP?
I always thought it was a bit premature to sell him, should’ve just get loaning. However I don’t like players coming back to clubs so I am not convinced. I’d rather a new guy who is as good or better
Any comments on the first pre-season game. Bit of Sunday league score. Some of our defending looked bad. Think it was Sanchez “ competing “ for the header, very poor
I read the following......in regards to players Conte is happy to let go.....
There are some relatively big names among the list: Bryan Gil, Harry Winks, Sergio Reguilon, Tanguy Ndombele and Giovani Lo Celso have all been deemed surplus to requirements by Antonio Conte, who is also prepared to sell Japhet Tanganga, Matt Doherty and Emerson Royal.
Its taken a while for a manager to really make Levy do something.
Just suprised Sanchez isn't on the list as well
Add to thats Alli, Bergwijn & Lamela..... and he really is trying to get rid of our rubbish
I said a few seasons back that 14 had to go...... I will have a recount once the season starts
Think he will have trouble getting rid of all of those, especially this late in the window. In theory there is a decent amount of money to be recuperated there.
I’d keep Doherty, I think he was coming into his own before he was injured. I think there is a good player in Regulion as well but think Conte prefers sessignon
The problem being that if we sold all those players at below considerate market rate(which of course levy won't) you could actually use the money whilst saving millions upon millions to go out and buy 2 quality quality players that would actually contribute more than ALL the aforementioned players combined. That money lost which wouldn't be all that much given some may be sold for a slight profit and wage savings could be recouped in CL qualifying or even maybe win a damn trophy. Keeping players that the manager doesn't want, are useless, clog up wage and homegrown quarters whilst hampering team spirit is a massive false economy. Only levy doesn't see it. I'd rather have 15/16 players of use plus homegrown kids than a bloated squad of deadwood. At present we have around 7 centre halves, 3 right wing bks, 3 left wing backs and 7 centre mids it's ridiculous and unmanageable. Get em gone!
To read you, everything is easy in professional and modern football... Parting with a player like Ndombele or Lo Celso is not done in a snap. The goal is to sell them at an attractive price for Spurs and not too expensive for clubs to be interested in. The players concerned are going to leave us but it will take as long as it takes... And to leave for a new season with the desire to shine in the league and in the Champions League with only 15 or 16 executive players is ridiculous. If we count on the natural fatigue plus that linked to the World Cup in the middle of the season + the inevitable injuries, it is a minimum of 22-24 senior players plus the young players that are needed. Personally, I am happy with the transfers made so far. It still lacks 1 very good central defender and a creative midfielder. The rest will be up to Conte!
Ndombele and Lo celso are only going to depreciate in value especially the former. His spell at former club ensured that. Now I don't mind Gio I think there is a player in there somewhere UT he's constantly injured until Argentina come knocking (ring any bells to another former argie) and has failed to live upto expectations in particular his goals tally. Now it's common sense to me to sell these 2 players for a combined fee of say 40m no matter what the loss is overall of you replace with a player who will compete for a spot and produce the goods ie Tielemens or Maddison to name two. Also its paying one wage rather than two. If that player plays a significant part in a trophy win or CL qualifying again brings in income and will offset the loss of the aforementioned players. If you had 2 broken cars that were beyond repair and got the chance to swap for one that actually worked what would one do in that situation...
Trossard really??? An improvement don’t think so
What is the verdict on this Raya fellow? It would appear he is going to be our next goalkeeper.
I understand that he is good with his feet, which the manager will appreciate, but 40 million for an undersized keeper with one year left on his contract whose club career only spans Blackburn and Brentford?
I see he has been capped but I am not entirely convinced. Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what I am missing?
It doesn't really matter. Levy won't pay the asked price.
So glad Levy has signed Kulu on a permanent basis. If this lad plays his cards right he could become the next Malbranque. Legend!
Noted, he rarely does. But I guess my question is, in this instance, should he?
Still not convinced by Kulu signing.Needs to up his pace and closing down .Maybe he will play no10
And I thought we were the masters of gouging.
Leicester apparently want 50 million for a now Championship midfielder with 12 months left on his contract? And Brentford want 40 million for their goalkeeper who also has a year left on his contract? Neither of these fellows will resign with their respective clubs.
I actually back our chairman in this case. If we were prepared to sell Eriksen for 10 million at the end of his contract, it would be madness to pay these ludicrous fees being asked.
I agree that for once that Levy is being sensible in not paying the inflated price for Maddison and the Brentford keeper.I only hope that he does not think that way on other players who are worth the asking price or we will miss out to other clubs.I would love Maddison at our club but Leicester are taking the ****
Agree! I would like Maddison here too. It would seem to be a natural fit. But it’s pure absurdity to pay 50 million for a Championship midfielder whose contract is running out. Levy can let Newcastle pay that ridiculous fee if they like, no worries whatsoever.
I’m surprised at this comment.
You are basically saying he should make a business decision when negotiating the price. That what he always does and gets criticism for
if Maddison has 3 years left on his contract, wanted to come to us and was 50m, if we then bought him it would seem like a good bit of business
ignore the background and decide how much a player is worth to us. If it’s 50 m for a madison standard player then we pay that if needed because other people, our competition will get him instead. If we do t get him then we will end up playing more for an equivalent player or less for a worse one
No that’s not what I mean.I just think that some fees you have to pay to get what you want but there are some that are over the top.40 million for Brentford keeper and 50 million for Maddison.If maddison was cheap Newcastle would have already bought him.I would love to have Maddison but do we know what Postelogou has said about it.This is a player who was relegated and was injured a fair bit.Its not very often I agree with Levy but I believe leicester are asking too much just as Brentford were for their keeper I still agree with you that Levy does go to far sometimes trying to reduce fees but how much do we really know or is it all paper talk.One thing I do know this time we have paid a lot less for a keeper and Brentford are left with egg on their face
Are you suggesting we should pay 50 million for Maddison under the current circumstances because we would be happy to pay 50 million for him under different circumstances?
On face value, it would seem to have no bearing on us but that is not the case. Maddison’s market value is now naturally suppressed given the financial constraints of the league he is in and Leicester’s tenuous grip on his contractual rights. To pay well over the odds for him in this situation would skew the market and have a ripple effect on every other transfer we might ever wish to make.
Perhaps the Saudis will pay the ridiculous figure and egregiously inflate the market; this sort of business has been going on for some years now after all, and is why FFP was introduced. We should not cater to it, no matter the player.
I’m not necessarily saying we should do that but what I’m saying if it ends up the alternative is we either get someone else at 50m that wasn’t our first choice but is “worth” 50m because he has a long contract and is in a higher league or else we get someone for less than 50 m but isn’t as good, then how does that help us?
I think we will end up getting him at an “ok” rate but my point initially was that we are always criticised for not getting a player because we play hardball on the price, this is just a clearer example to understand why getting players is a negotiation based on numerous factors.
Guest comments allowed! Use 'Add your comment' button