• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Transfers Summer Transfer Thread 2023! - Closed (Maybe)

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Rate this window out of 10

  • 1

  • 2

  • 3

  • 4

  • 5

  • 6

  • 7

  • 8

  • 9

  • 10

Results are only viewable after voting.
vibes_guy said:
Fuck it! I was hoping this wasn't an article from 4 years ago....

:ange-hands-head:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Adjusting for inflation, his fee makes the numbers for Gallagher and Johnson look like bargains.
Both HG, Gallagher has around 100 PL games, Johnson has 40 from around 40 available to him. Both have decent stats and pass the eye test. Both know the league, know Tottenham and seem to be wanted by the coach.

Yet people are losing their fucking minds over their fees. I bet those same fans were collectively pissing themselves because we signed some prick who PSG bought, loaned out twice then sold, then the club that bought him sold him in a matter of weeks. We were utterly conned.
 
Raumdeuterz said:
Brennan Johnson coring more goals than Williams proves nothing other than he scored more goals.

Quick glance at other stats shows that Williams is in a much higher percentile for chance creation, makes far more crosses, has a better cross success rate, assists every 600 minutes or so vs every 990 minutes, is in the 99th percentile for successful dribbles (!!) vs Johnson in 75th percentile, and weirdly enough also looks much better defensively .. if that's your thing.

None of which even means he's better. I haven't watched enough of him to say. But "Johnson scored more goals" isn't exactly compelling when it looks like Williams is being used as a more traditional ball carrier/creative wide player, which is generally what it seems like Ange wants.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Fair enough on those stats! Perhaps you could get a job within the scouting department but I'm pretty sure you wouldn't wanna report to Levy ;)

For what's it worth I do think Johnson would be a good signing. Maybe £50m would be slightly overpriced but when you see Chelsea has just bought Palmer from City for £45m or so I don't think it's bad value in this ridiculous day and age.
 
Spursidol said:
Sadly , yes absolutely agree.

Bossed La Liga for a season with good g/a but totally shown up to be weak in PL
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Not really thought of it much, but who has had good seasons in Spain then come to the PL and continued?
Torres and Aguerro spring to mind. Soldado was shite. Morientes was shite. Xavi Alonso was great.
Hit and miss. I think their league is so vastly different that it's impossible to assume a player or a coach can come from there and succeed here.
 
dragon1 said:
Re Gallagher there were two players ange wanted when he joined one was maddison the other was Gallagher , it says a lot about our board and our ambition that we are waiting on the sale of holberg to get one of the managers main targets in

the other signings ange was happy to leave it up to the new data team we have assembled which is why you are seeing us linked with so many players that Brighton and brentford are because that’s how they work too and why I believe Johnson will happen as well

Trix said:
They've got a real hard on for getting home grown options in during the death throes of this window right now. "Future proofing now due to rising prices" is the key phrase I keep hearing, and very much expect that's the way we are gravitating. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see 2 HG options come through the door in what ever guise that takes.
__________

please be excited, and donate to my bank account
 
Spursidol said:
capable of signing him providing a manager wanted him.

same argument as Conte not wanting Maddison last season
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You're arguing something that I'm not arguing. I'm not even saying we SHOULD have signed Maddison nor blaming the club for not doing so.

The whole argument is "did we have the pull to ATTRACT Maddison pre stadium" and my answer to that is yes, yes we did.

I have no clue if Poch liked or didn't like him, nor do I really care.
 
Raumdeuterz said:
Yes. That's what I'm saying. Absolutely. 100%. Without doubt.

We were consistently in the top 4 for years pre new WHL and even challenged for the league. Maddison would've jumped at the chance to join us back then and we absolutely had the resources to land him still.

Our only competition for his signature was Newcastle. Everyone else had alternate options or already have creative mids.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

But he wasnt the James Maddison he is today.

Lets look at it like this

back in 2016 who were the best MF in the prem?

Hazard? David Silva? Willian? Mata? Fabregas?

Pretty sure we categorically could not sign some of those players
 
Matt1882 said:
Are you saying our net spend is higher than Chelsea who have spunked one billion in a year?
What about wages too.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't blame people for using perfectly normal timeframes to compare net spend, but it's extremely deceptive in our case given how ruinous we'd let the squad situation become through enormous underinvestment at exactly that starting point.

We were miles off our Big Six competition in long-term squad value terms four years ago, our spending since has only partially filled that gap.
 
scarletjim said:
Oh here we go, apparently the factors that impact other clubs are irrelevant for us. Mate you really need to stop pulling out this obviously ridiculous 'whataboutery' card every 5 mins. It's as though you don't understand what it means. Where parallels are being made with other clubs due to factors that must surely impact us as well, it's absolutely not 'whataboutery'. Also where there are plenty of posters who claim that our problems are 'only Spurs' and that other clubs don't have such problems, again it's appropriate, necessary in fact, to compare us with other clubs, in order to prove that the assertion is, quite frankly, utter nonsense (albeit the same nonsense you see on every club's forum).
Also, it's a struggle to have a meaningful conversation with anyone who openly says they are not interested in context unless it is directly about Spurs - surely context is absolutely key to any discussion about anything, including comparisons. :/
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

giphy.gif
 
Things really hotting up - we're now poised to consider moving our position to one of contemplating the initiation of preliminary enquiries with a view to looking into the possibility of approaching the question of whether or not to make a move for ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top