-
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...
Transfers Summer Transfer thread - 2024
- Thread starter Fattynomates
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Would assume it's £30m + Rodon and/or Skipp or something like that.
Might be an issue if Rodon wants Leicester/ipswich/Southampton move to play PL football? Although maybe that’s short sighted those teams could go straight back down and Leeds up in a year.
Who knows
Until our interest moves from "concrete" to "cemented" i wouldn't get my hopes up.
Apparently Leeds were hoping for big offers for Gnonto and Summerville but the amounts clubs are discussing isn't enough for Leeds to pass FFP and selling Gray is the fallback so looking more realistic he moves as we get closer to their deadline. Rumours online that Brentford are trying as well. Be interesting to see what happens with his brother if he moves. Another really talented player in Leeds' academy, starting striker for England u16s. Would be brilliant if you could end up getting both
Brentford, Leipzig, Dortmund… everyone and their dog in the mix.
I guess Skipp and Rodon are our advantage in the mix. If he does come to Spurs it will be for a spot in the first team squad competing for minutes.
They also have a Welsh midfielder in the Academy called Charlie Crew who I think is an excellent player and should go far in the game.
Waiting on other moves triggering all the action again...dusting off the old fax machine.
Actually think he suits us better than Eze. Ramsey I could at least see playing in the same team as Maddison. And if Lange has seen him up close and thinks his ceiling is very high, I'm all for it.
My concern is over his injury record and price. £50m is too much to spend on a kid who played about 3 games last year.
'Warchest'Keeping our powder dry
Brilliant post! Nail on the head! Post of the year!Keeping our powder dry
Take a bow son!
Why do three years? That can fluctuate.
Here's the last 10:
- Less than Newcastle, who make 1/2 our revenue and spent most of this period circling the drain.
- £400m less than Woolwich, who spent most of the last decade (1) below us in the league and (2) outside of the CL. Now in just two years since we beat them to 4th spot under Conte we've not looked further behind them since the early 00s. Shows the difference between having an owner who understands the concept of investing in your squad versus one focused on investing in infrastructure and milking his cash cow.
- Roughly equivalent net spend to West Ham, who've spent much of this period circling the relegation zone, and Villa, who spent half of it in the Championship.
- Worth noting Spurs' net spend has increased in the last couple of years, but we're still paying the price for the years of underinvestment under Poch. It's not the sort of ambition that justifies charging the highest ticket prices in world football, particularly when we have a massive FFP leeway that would enable us to invest significantly if we wanted. People used to mock Kroenke, he'd absolutely kill it with this club. Take him a million times over Levy.
- Side note, Liverpool show that it's not all about net spend so long as you have incredible data and recruitment set up and one of the world's best managers. We'll see how long they can maintain their overperformance without Klopp. Should also be noted their wage bill dwarfs ours and this is the closest predictor of league finish.
Palacios, Fofana mentioned in the last few days. Onana brought up a few times.
Not sure any of them are the answer, it's hard role to buy. My guess is we'll make do with a Bentancur/Bissouma combo for another year and maybe try and bring in a young English player like Gray or Hayden Hackney we can try and develop for the role.
Basically underperformed for yearsWhy do three years? That can fluctuate.
Here's the last 10:
- Less than Newcastle, who make 1/2 our revenue and spent most of this period circling the drain.
- £400m less than Woolwich, who spent most of the last decade (1) below us in the league and (2) outside of the CL. Now in just two years since we beat them to 4th spot under Conte we've not looked further behind them since the early 00s. Shows the difference between having an owner who understands the concept of investing in your squad versus one focused on investing in infrastructure and milking his cash cow.
- Roughly equivalent net spend to West Ham, who've spent much of this period circling the relegation zone, and Villa, who spent half of it in the Championship.
- Worth noting Spurs' net spend has increased in the last couple of years, but we're still paying the price for the years of underinvestment under Poch. It's not the sort of ambition that justifies charging the highest ticket prices in world football, particularly when we have a massive FFP leeway that would enable us to invest significantly if we wanted. People used to mock Kroenke, he'd absolutely kill it with this club. Take him a million times over Levy.
- Side note, Liverpool show that it's not all about net spend so long as you have incredible data and recruitment set up and one of the world's best managers. We'll see how long they can maintain their overperformance without Klopp. Should also be noted their wage bill dwarfs ours and this is the closest predictor of league finish.
We’re third behind Chelsea and Man Utd for net spend over the past FIVE years.Why do three years? That can fluctuate.
Here's the last 10:
- Less than Newcastle, who make 1/2 our revenue and spent most of this period circling the drain.
- £400m less than Woolwich, who spent most of the last decade (1) below us in the league and (2) outside of the CL. Now in just two years since we beat them to 4th spot under Conte we've not looked further behind them since the early 00s. Shows the difference between having an owner who understands the concept of investing in your squad versus one focused on investing in infrastructure and milking his cash cow.
- Roughly equivalent net spend to West Ham, who've spent much of this period circling the relegation zone, and Villa, who spent half of it in the Championship.
- Worth noting Spurs' net spend has increased in the last couple of years, but we're still paying the price for the years of underinvestment under Poch. It's not the sort of ambition that justifies charging the highest ticket prices in world football, particularly when we have a massive FFP leeway that would enable us to invest significantly if we wanted. People used to mock Kroenke, he'd absolutely kill it with this club. Take him a million times over Levy.
- Side note, Liverpool show that it's not all about net spend so long as you have incredible data and recruitment set up and one of the world's best managers. We'll see how long they can maintain their overperformance without Klopp. Should also be noted their wage bill dwarfs ours and this is the closest predictor of league finish.
The original claim is that our ethos is being cheap. Can a coin whose net spend has been third highest over the past five years really have an ethos of being cheap?
Do you see how the evidence doesn’t support the conclusion?
Of course ten years suits you because you can I corporate a period where our revenues were much lower AND where our spending was reduced as we were building an expensive stadium. The net spend since then has been EXCELLENT.
Im any case our spending in that time was not bad. We had the 6th highest revenues and had the 7th highest spending. Newcastle are the clear anomaly but that is clearly not a good thing. They spent a lot more and got much worse results! Same for West Ham. If anything it shows that while under the constraints of building a new stadium, we in fact spent what we did very wisely and still managed to grow substantially as a club in that time.
And of course 3 years suits you because it removes all those years when we spent nothing. Funny how that works?