• 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!

Match Spurs v Barcodes. Saturday 4 January 2025 KO 12:30. Live on TNT

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Deuterz said:
You don’t have to - the results speak for themselves.

Tonali was signed while Ange was here wasn’t he?

The point is that we’ve had the resources to strengthen even more than they have. We’ve spent a lot of money under Ange in comparison to the same time period under Howe.

If we haven’t improved the squad much at all with that, then he should be criticising the business. He says he’s very happy with it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes Tonali was signed in summer 23 - feels like he's been around forever with that suspension.

We both know Managers at Spurs and Newcastle have only a limited input into final say on transfers - the simple fact is that Isak, Guimares, Gordon and Tonali have taken their first 11 ceiling above ours. And everyone knows it even if they pretend not to right now.

The results of 22/23 speak for themselves 😉


None of which means that Postecoglou should be excused for the current level of results

Edit: But I do think it's evidence to suggest he massively overachieved in 23/24. The tune he got out of Madders and Bissouma in those first 3 months gave us all a false sense of where our squad is at imo.
 
Last edited:
Deuterz said:
You don’t have to - the results speak for themselves.

Tonali was signed while Ange was here wasn’t he?

The point is that we’ve had the resources to strengthen even more than they have. We’ve spent a lot of money under Ange in comparison to the same time period under Howe.

If we haven’t improved the squad much at all with that, then he should be criticising the business. He says he’s very happy with it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If we had bought Isak instead of Richy and Palmer instead of Johnson we would be so much better off than we are now, really good examples of why despite all the noises about "modernising" the department I still believe our scouting system completely lacks any sense of cohesion, feels as if the modus operandi is too stat-focused if anything, eg Solanke gets 17 PL goals in a season and we rush out and splash £60m on him despite not really doing a lot to warrant that kind of money in any other season, Richy puts up consistent numbers in a couple of PL seasons at Everton and represents cover for multiple positions as well as a potential answer to the Kane issue so we line up in our queue of 1 to mug ourselves off to the tune of £60m. BJ puts in decent numbers at Forest and we throw nearly £50m their way, without considering how vastly different the two systems are?

Who else seriously looked at GLC? N'dombele? Part of me wonders if we fear having to compete for signings because of the obvious implication that has on wages paid to said player in question, but targeting players who no one else is really seriously interested in because they're easier to sign is surely an arse-backwards way of approaching the market?
 
Mostly wrong said:
If we had bought Isak instead of Richy and Palmer instead of Johnson we would be so much better off than we are now, really good examples of why despite all the noises about "modernising" the department I still believe our scouting system completely lacks any sense of cohesion, feels as if the modus operandi is too stat-focused if anything, eg Solanke gets 17 PL goals in a season and we rush out and splash £60m on him despite not really doing a lot to warrant that kind of money in any other season, Richy puts up consistent numbers in a couple of PL seasons at Everton and represents cover for multiple positions as well as a potential answer to the Kane issue so we line up in our queue of 1 to mug ourselves off to the tune of £60m. BJ puts in decent numbers at Forest and we throw nearly £50m their way, without considering how vastly different the two systems are?

Who else seriously looked at GLC? N'dombele? Part of me wonders if we fear having to compete for signings because of the obvious implication that has on wages paid to said player in question, but targeting players who no one else is really seriously interested in because they're easier to sign is surely an arse-backwards way of approaching the market?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I suspect this is very close to the truth.
 
Mostly wrong said:
If we had bought Isak instead of Richy and Palmer instead of Johnson we would be so much better off than we are now, really good examples of why despite all the noises about "modernising" the department I still believe our scouting system completely lacks any sense of cohesion, feels as if the modus operandi is too stat-focused if anything, eg Solanke gets 17 PL goals in a season and we rush out and splash £60m on him despite not really doing a lot to warrant that kind of money in any other season, Richy puts up consistent numbers in a couple of PL seasons at Everton and represents cover for multiple positions as well as a potential answer to the Kane issue so we line up in our queue of 1 to mug ourselves off to the tune of £60m. BJ puts in decent numbers at Forest and we throw nearly £50m their way, without considering how vastly different the two systems are?

Who else seriously looked at GLC? N'dombele? Part of me wonders if we fear having to compete for signings because of the obvious implication that has on wages paid to said player in question, but targeting players who no one else is really seriously interested in because they're easier to sign is surely an arse-backwards way of approaching the market?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Signing Rich was less of a risk than signing Isak. Very similar 1 goal every 3 games record, but knew the league. Slightly less expensive too.

And what was it about Palmer that made you think he’d have been a good signing at the time? Presume there’s posts of yours on here laying bare your admiration for him when he was at City?

Our transfer business should be questioned, but this hindsight bullshit doesn’t wash I’m afraid. Both Isak and Palmer could’ve flopped here.
 
AberdeenYid said:
Signing Rich was less of a risk than signing Isak. Very similar 1 goal every 3 games record, but knew the league. Slightly less expensive too.

And what was it about Palmer that made you think he’d have been a good signing at the time? Presume there’s posts of yours on here laying bare your admiration for him when he was at City?

Our transfer business should be questioned, but this hindsight bullshit doesn’t wash I’m afraid. Both Isak and Palmer could’ve flopped here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Do you know how ironic it is that that is exactly what I'm fucking saying lmao? Maybe our scouting of players should go beyond their transfermarkt page and whether they "have PL experience" which is absolutely not as important as it's made out to be.

As for Palmer, he was not an unknown entity at the time, Pep knew how good he would eventually be because he was really trying to give him rotational minutes the season before he left and wanted to loan him out rather than sell him, and it's not like he went to Crystal Palace and started lighting the world on fire, Chelsea are a big club irrespective of their finish the season prior and clearly saw enough in him to shell out over £30m for him. And besides, it's not my job to do scouting write-ups for Tottenham Hotspur Football Club, sure we have an entire department all earning probably a shite sight more than me to do that.

"hindsight bullshit"? Surely the only way to look at how to change scouting structure for the better at the club is to look at signings we have made and signings our rivals have made and how those player attributes differed, how we could have better identified targets that would fit into an overall system we're looking to play? Especially given how easily verifiable it is to say we could have definitely afforded said targets, considering the outlay we've spent on players in the very same position?
 
Real backs to the wall stuff this one eh.
Show em what where made of and all that.

They are running hot, we are off the boil.
They're fit and firing. We are busted and broken.

Odds stacked against us.
What a season changing win this will be.
3 - 2 win
COYS
 
Mostly wrong said:
Do you know how ironic it is that that is exactly what I'm fucking saying lmao? Maybe our scouting of players should go beyond their transfermarkt page and whether they "have PL experience" which is absolutely not as important as it's made out to be.

As for Palmer, he was not an unknown entity at the time, Pep knew how good he would eventually be because he was really trying to give him rotational minutes the season before he left and wanted to loan him out rather than sell him, and it's not like he went to Crystal Palace and started lighting the world on fire, Chelsea are a big club irrespective of their finish the season prior and clearly saw enough in him to shell out over £30m for him. And besides, it's not my job to do scouting write-ups for Tottenham Hotspur Football Club, sure we have an entire department all earning probably a shite sight more than me to do that.

"hindsight bullshit"? Surely the only way to look at how to change scouting structure for the better at the club is to look at signings we have made and signings our rivals have made and how those player attributes differed, how we could have better identified targets that would fit into an overall system we're looking to play? Especially given how easily verifiable it is to say we could have definitely afforded said targets, considering the outlay we've spent on players in the very same position?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You, I and everyone else on here would have been on our highest of horses had we signed a Man City reserve for £30m. It does you no credit to not admit this.

And no, I don’t think we improve our scouting by looking at signings our rivals have made. They play different systems, with different players, coaches and manager. Palmer and Isak may have set the world alight here, but no guarantees. So we are trying to improve scouting by considering what might have happened? Ndombele could have signed for City and won the Balon d’Or. We’ll never know.

To be honest, I’ve no idea what our scouting structure or strategy is and even if I did, I’d probably have no clue how to improve it. But I know that using hindsight in this manner wouldn’t.
 
Mostly wrong said:
If we had bought Isak instead of Richy and Palmer instead of Johnson we would be so much better off than we are now, really good examples of why despite all the noises about "modernising" the department I still believe our scouting system completely lacks any sense of cohesion, feels as if the modus operandi is too stat-focused if anything, eg Solanke gets 17 PL goals in a season and we rush out and splash £60m on him despite not really doing a lot to warrant that kind of money in any other season, Richy puts up consistent numbers in a couple of PL seasons at Everton and represents cover for multiple positions as well as a potential answer to the Kane issue so we line up in our queue of 1 to mug ourselves off to the tune of £60m. BJ puts in decent numbers at Forest and we throw nearly £50m their way, without considering how vastly different the two systems are?

Who else seriously looked at GLC? N'dombele? Part of me wonders if we fear having to compete for signings because of the obvious implication that has on wages paid to said player in question, but targeting players who no one else is really seriously interested in because they're easier to sign is surely an arse-backwards way of approaching the market?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
feels like footy manger for me the game made me pay like 80 mil for Gianluca Scamacca but then atletico gives a offer of 20 mill for kane and he off
long story short
the stuff how we sale players been even more embarrassing
without looking i think our best sales in the last 10 years ( apart from kane) is emerson 12 mil n winks 12mil and lo celso for spending more time on loan then on a football pitch with a spurs shirt
Ich-Habe-Fertig-GIF-e-MEME-di-Trapattoni-al-Bayern-Monaco-Incazzato-con-i-Giocatori-dice-le-Frasi-Ho-Finito-o-Sono-Terminato-Scarica-la-Reazione-e-Postala-sui-Gruppi-Facebook.gif
 
I
Mostly wrong said:
If we had bought Isak instead of Richy and Palmer instead of Johnson we would be so much better off than we are now, really good examples of why despite all the noises about "modernising" the department I still believe our scouting system completely lacks any sense of cohesion, feels as if the modus operandi is too stat-focused if anything, eg Solanke gets 17 PL goals in a season and we rush out and splash £60m on him despite not really doing a lot to warrant that kind of money in any other season, Richy puts up consistent numbers in a couple of PL seasons at Everton and represents cover for multiple positions as well as a potential answer to the Kane issue so we line up in our queue of 1 to mug ourselves off to the tune of £60m. BJ puts in decent numbers at Forest and we throw nearly £50m their way, without considering how vastly different the two systems are?

Who else seriously looked at GLC? N'dombele? Part of me wonders if we fear having to compete for signings because of the obvious implication that has on wages paid to said player in question, but targeting players who no one else is really seriously interested in because they're easier to sign is surely an arse-backwards way of approaching the market?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Isak and Palmer would be Richarlison and Johnson if we had bought them. We do that to players
 
Just about to set off lads. Looks chilly out there.

If we can beat these with a back line partnership of Doris the tea lady and Paul Coyte today I'll stop complaining and campaign for a statue of Ange on the High Road.

Come on you fucking Spurs
 
Shotgunofmichalebrow said:
The goalkeeper situation should see every last one of the management side fired. If you can muster the stomach to defend going into a season with Forster as your number two whilst extending two untested goalkeepers at first team level you've lost the plot completely.How about you plan for the bloody obvious not the exceptional for a start, that's basic competence. We did not. It didn't need hindsight I said it before a ball was kicked.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think it's really on hindsight pal, IMHO. Beginning of the season we all knew GK is a position we should have good cover, but it's really not the priority we all see it now. Because come on, how will anyone expect Vicario to be sidelined for sooo long with a fracture out of nowhere when he even completed the game before the sudden need for surgery the next day. Many think Forster can come in for a good few games, ample cover definitely for Vicario to be rested in certain games if his injury didn't happen.

If Forster is available today, I'm sure GK is also a position the club is looking at with priority in this window. And now Forster down with illness, like who will know, seriously, and people start blaming the whole club again.

There literally isn't any club stocked with 1 great GK who always start WITH 2 backup GKs who are anywhere as good and 1 willing to sit on the bench, and 1 not even named in match day squad.

If people couldn't accept that luck plays apart in sports, which bad luck has always played a HUGE part in this club, then honestly sports is not something people should invest so much time and emotion in.
 
Well, it'll be worth me dragging myself to the couch at 0630 to see what's going to play out. More entertaining than anything that's likely to happen in the master suite at that hour
:ange-lol:
 
Time for Ange to implement plan B.

Players to each rotate and lie down with cramp every few minutes. Fake some head injuries and play the ball backwards at every opportunity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top