Dejan Kulusevski

  • 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
The Dealer said:
I don't love them and both have given more than Kulu in their positions. We don't have to sign Kulu and on the basis of what he has shown, shouldn't.

All I have done is try to suggest reality ref Dier and Hojbjerg as opposed to perception.
Click to expand...
Let’s not get rid of our 23 yr old creative winger and keep incredibly mediocre 27 and 29 yr olds who will only get worse from here.

Kulusevski is a pretty good presser and passer and he’s been playing with two anti pressing forwards (and manager) and a squad with terrible off ball movement.

No doubt he was poor after the WC but based on our transfer success rate, we aren’t finding a better player for 25m.
 
RealCoolYid said:
I could’ve started that rumour or anyone of us on this board because he’s not worth that money
If we are resigned to buy him we’ve gotta learn from previous debacles. It seems we haven’t learnt to not target average ability but
If we can decouple that from the following compound errors of paying too much to the selling club and awarding far too generous a salary to the player then at least we’ve derisked the consequences of the all too familiar flop

I wouldn’t want to give anything over 20m

Lo Celso is un sellable at 15m

No one else wants him. Juve don’t want him so even 20m might be a bit strong


35m is massive money to clubs in Europe. It’s only in the prem we don’t batter an eyelid
Click to expand...
15m is a fair price. Although if we are absolutely struggling with scouting players ...20 isnt bad. I'd rather have Maddison. He posted higher numbers than Kulusevski while playing for a team that got relegated.
 
jack sparrow said:
it's not fair. if his season had been nice (also with no achievement of the conditions for obligation to buy) they wouldn’t have asked us for a higher price.
Click to expand...

Mate; that's really dumb logic.

The clause set(s) the bar of performance in relation to a value. That's the whole point.
 
Airfixx said:
Mate; that's really dumb logic.

The clause set(s) the bar of performance in relation to a value. That's the whole point.
Click to expand...
True . If there is no obligation for them to sell, they can also not sell. No one is obligated to do anything. Paying 35 for kulusevski would be brainless. Has to be negotiated down.
 
RealCoolYid said:
Is it.? Because it’s less than 35 it’s a steal ?
Click to expand...
yep! for a young player of his quality.


scooby doo eating GIF by Boomerang Official
 
iz futbal said:
15m is a fair price. Although if we are absolutely struggling with scouting players ...20 isnt bad. I'd rather have Maddison. He posted higher numbers than Kulusevski while playing for a team that got relegated.
Click to expand...

You'd rather have a 50m player than one that you only rate to be worth 15m?

No shit! LOL
 
bonaspur23 said:
Let’s not get rid of our 23 yr old creative winger and keep incredibly mediocre 27 and 29 yr olds who will only get worse from here.

Kulusevski is a pretty good presser and passer and he’s been playing with two anti pressing forwards (and manager) and a squad with terrible off ball movement.

No doubt he was poor after the WC but based on our transfer success rate, we aren’t finding a better player for 25m.
Click to expand...
Spend 50 on better then.
 
iz futbal said:
Genius innit.

Maddison is very good and be willing to come, instantly improves our first team. For the quality that kulusevksi brings, we cant be spending much more than 15.
Click to expand...

I love Maddison but I'm sure there will be multiple CL playing clubs in for him too. He will also cost double. They are mutually exclusive signings imo. Kulu is a no-brainer for the price and already adjusted to the squad. So many players take time to settle before they really shine. Of his 18 months here he's been pretty good to excellent for about 12 of them. And pretty meh for 6 when our entire season was falling apart for many reasons. Versatile in multiple systems. Don't have to get in some protracted bidding war, etc. Ultimately I think it should be left up to Ange, if he's the type of player he wants then we should definitely keep.
 
iz futbal said:
Genius innit.

Maddison is very good and be willing to come, instantly improves our first team. For the quality that kulusevksi brings, we cant be spending much more than 15.
Click to expand...

Total bullshit.
The team was disfunctional pile of crap already before the WC. This "elite coach" was engeneering his exit for months, we had no player able to progress the ball.

This is not reasonable situation upon which to assess a player like Kulusevski.

And if it were, there would be just ONE player (Kane) that would be left within the first team. Maybe two, as Bentancur missed long time as a result of injury. But if post-WC form is used, literally no one else should have chance of staying in the squad.

Your call, if that is reasonable and realistic or just waaaaaaaayyyy over the fucking top approach.
 
Airfixx said:
Mate; that's really dumb logic.

The clause set(s) the bar of performance in relation to a value. That's the whole point.
Click to expand...
but imagine we agree to loan X player with option to buy at 20M, and after a season they say to you "I want to buy X, but I'll give you 10M"
how that can be considered "fair"?
maybe I wouldn’t have loaned him to you if I knew you wanted to buy him for 10M
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom