Building the best squad - and we need what?

  • 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!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
stevee said:
By

It wasn't counted FIRST TIME around, as my link clearly shows.

It's pretty ingenious to claim it's counted twice when you have no source to that claim and there is a link saying that it WASN'T counted twice.
Click to expand...

The article I shared claims that Conte was backed by the signings Deki, Bentancur and Porro. Even if the full spend wasn't included in the sum.

It's the same question.

If we'd won a trophy whilst Conte was here would Deki and Porro not get medals because they weren't contractually permanent Spurs players until this summer?

If you want accuracy then you go down the rabbit hole of yearly installments and the boredom of accounting and value on the books etc.

If you want an editorially honest way of simplifying the debate, you count the spend from the time the player started playing for the club. That is also when the value of the transfer is agreed as well.
 
Richard Arlison said:
The article I shared claims that Conte was backed by the signings Deki, Bentancur and Porro. Even if the full spend wasn't included in the sum.
Click to expand...
So you agree with me that nowhere, despite your claims to the contrary, does it include the transfer fee when they were only here on loan.

Cool

Richard Arlison said:
It's the same question.

If we'd won a trophy whilst Conte was here would Deki and Porro not get medals because they weren't contractually permanent Spurs players until this summer?

If you want accuracy then you go down the rabbit hole of yearly installments and the boredom of accounting and value on the books etc.

If you want an editorially honest way of simplifying the debate, you count the spend from the time the player started playing for the club. That is also when the value of the transfer is agreed as well.
Click to expand...
Nope.

Honesty is counting the loan fee from when they came on loan and then the transfer fee from when they signed permanently.
That is from when Tottenham Hotspur Football Club owns the player.

This is what everybody does.
Well, I say everybody, but that obviously excludes those who make stuff up as a way of getting a stick to beat Levy with.

Surely you're not suggesting that this website is being dishonest ?

www.transfermarkt.co.uk

Tottenham Hotspur - Transfers 23/24

Transfers: Overview of all signed and sold players of club Tottenham for the current season.
www.transfermarkt.co.uk www.transfermarkt.co.uk
 
stevee said:
So you agree with me that nowhere, despite your claims to the contrary, does it include the transfer fee when they were only here on loan.

Cool


Nope.

Honesty is counting the loan fee from when they came on loan and then the transfer fee from when they signed permanently.
That is from when Tottenham Hotspur Football Club owns the player.

This is what everybody does.
Well, I say everybody, but that obviously excludes those who make stuff up as a way of getting a stick to beat Levy with.

Surely you're not suggesting that this website is being dishonest ?

www.transfermarkt.co.uk

Tottenham Hotspur - Transfers 23/24

Transfers: Overview of all signed and sold players of club Tottenham for the current season.
www.transfermarkt.co.uk www.transfermarkt.co.uk
Click to expand...


Nope, I’ve seen those transfers included in TV and social GFX to say Conte was backed.

The price of transfer was agreed before the player joined. The player joined and played. That’s when the transfer happened. The rest is an accounting detail.
 
Richard Arlison said:
Nope, I’ve seen those transfers included in TV and social GFX to say Conte was backed.

The price of transfer was agreed before the player joined. The player joined and played. That’s when the transfer happened. The rest is an accounting detail.
Click to expand...
I've asked you to provide a link proving that the fees were counted twice, you are unable to do so because it never happened.

The rest is just bluster.
 
stevee said:
I've asked you to provide a link proving that the fees were counted twice, you are unable to do so because it never happened.

The rest is just bluster.
Click to expand...

I saw it. I don't need to provide you shit. This is a chat forum not a courtroom you prick.

You don't believe me that's your choice. There will be several other people in here that saw them counted twice.

The point stands, you either count transfers in an editorially honest way that makes sense for fans to debate or you pick the peanuts out of the poo and dig into the yearly installments.

It's not honest to count Deki, Bentancur, or Porro as Postecoglou spends. They were all targeted whilst Conte was here and the price we committed to paying was when Conte was here. they had nothing to do with Postecoglou. Even if from an accounting perspective the transfer only started getting paid off this summer.

The only one with any grey area in that is Deki.
 
Richard Arlison said:
Thing that this injury crisis shows me is that the approach to squad building and team building shouldn't include recruiting any guys that we see as squad players.

If we keep a Ben Davies or an Emerson Royal as versatile pros that can step in and do a job then great but NEVER recruit them to be that. Recruit every player to have the mindset of starting, even if they end up doing a different job.

When you go after talents like VDV and Udogie, you know fully that you might have them for a good time but not a long time. Whatever happens this season, those 2 are probably only sticking around one more year unless we are winning the prem or challenging for the prem the year after. If not their agents will be pushing them on to bigger things. For Romero and maybe even Bissouma given his age, if we don't get top4 their agents might be pushing them on even next summer...That's fine and just the way shit works. You'd always rather have players good enough to attract bigger clubs.

You don't want to be restarting the project again every time you sell a key player. That doesn't mean you always need to spend 45m on a VDv for your 3rd CB but it means you need to be smart and maybe sign a guy that's 1 or 2 years off being fully ready to be an elite-level CB to be your 3rd and 4th CB...
Click to expand...
Completely agree, but the bit about 'big clubs' makes me wonder what we need to do to be a big club. i.e. what's the 'big club' shopping list for us?

Thoughts:

1. Win a big cup. A nice, shiny one, beating 'big clubs' in at least 2 or 3 of the final rounds.
2. Repeat 1 several times.
3. Get endorsed by internationally-famous people as being a big club.
4. Beat big clubs to big players. (this isn't necessary for success, it's just a nice 'fuck you').

I can see us doing 1 in the next year or two, and 2-4 eventually, but fuck knows when.
 
Richard Arlison said:
I saw it. I don't need to provide you shit. This is a chat forum not a courtroom you prick.

You don't believe me that's your choice. There will be several other people in here that saw them counted twice.

The point stands, you either count transfers in an editorially honest way that makes sense for fans to debate or you pick the peanuts out of the poo and dig into the yearly installments.

It's not honest to count Deki, Bentancur, or Porro as Postecoglou spends. They were all targeted whilst Conte was here and the price we committed to paying was when Conte was here. they had nothing to do with Postecoglou. Even if from an accounting perspective the transfer only started getting paid off this summer.

The only one with any grey area in that is Deki.
Click to expand...
Bit rude.

Nowhere as it ever been counted twice.

You've obviously been going nuts doing a Danny to try and find it, and have failed miserably.

The rest is just bluster.
 
stevee said:
Some say "it was counted twice" , but nobody can provide any link that proves it.

Funny that.
Click to expand...


You don’t want to discuss the link I did share?

Loan with obligation or conditional obligations are accounting details that delay the date of transfer.

The actual transfer of the player happens when the player joins.

As fans looking for a simple discussion, the best time to count the transfer is when it actually happens, not the arbitrary date on the balance book.

Agree?
 
Richard Arlison said:
You don’t want to discuss the link I did share?
Click to expand...
Nope.

You stated that the transfer was counted twice, that's what the discussion is about.

Nowhere in the link you shared does it state that it was counted twice.

In fact it states the exact opposite;

"he's spent £190m worth of signings in two windows and that doesn't include Kulusevski who's still on loan technically."

Everything else is irrelevant.
 
stevee said:
Nope.

You stated that the transfer was counted twice, that's what the discussion is about.

Nowhere in the link you shared does it state that it was counted twice

Everything else is irrelevant to the discussion.
Click to expand...

Edited my post.

Read it again and let’s get back to what the debate is really about.

Richard Arlison said:
You don’t want to discuss the link I did share?

Loan with obligation or conditional obligations are accounting details that delay the date of transfer.

The actual transfer of the player happens when the player joins.

As fans looking for a simple discussion, the best time to count the transfer is when it actually happens, not the arbitrary date on the balance book.

Agree?
Click to expand...
 
Richard Arlison said:
Edited my post.

Read it again and let’s get back to what the debate is really about.
Click to expand...
Nope.

Now you're trying to move the goalposts to when the transfer fee should be counted.

The original discussion was "the transfer fee was counted twice".
They clearly were not.

Even the link you provided states that very clearly ;

"he's spent £190m worth of signings in two windows and that doesn't include Kulusevski who's still on loan technically."

We can change the conversation to"when should the transfer fee be counted", if you like, but at least recognise first that nowhere is the transfer fee counted twice.
 
stevee said:
Nope.

Now you're trying to move the goalposts to when the transfer fee should be counted.

The original discussion was "the transfer fee was counted twice".
They clearly were not.

Even the link you provided states that very clearly ;

"he's spent £190m worth of signings in two windows and that doesn't include Kulusevski who's still on loan technically."

We can change the conversation to"when should the transfer fee be counted", if you like, but at least recognise first that nowhere is the transfer fee counted twice.
Click to expand...

Yes, let’s change the conversation to that.
 
stevee said:
Nope.

Now you're trying to move the goalposts to when the transfer fee should be counted.

The original discussion was "the transfer fee was counted twice".
They clearly were not.

Even the link you provided states that very clearly ;

"he's spent £190m worth of signings in two windows and that doesn't include Kulusevski who's still on loan technically."

We can change the conversation to"when should the transfer fee be counted", if you like, but at least recognise first that nowhere is the transfer fee counted twice.
Click to expand...

😄 Unbelievable the amount of crap this guy chats just to prove a point, I think he honestly has problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom