-
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...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
The problem is the present hierarchy are constantly dictated by sell on prospects. I feel it's far more complicated than just scouting as revenue return is a main priority
I would be happy for the present owners if they were willing to change but many of us can't see that happening.
Spending is not the same as net spend though Steve, the tables speak volumes, especially the teams that have had more success than us and what they have invested into their playing staff.
Yup.
I've always said that it is a matter of the right people in the right positions. Overall I feel like we have had that even under ENIC for most of their reign. We've had sporting directors to handle scouting and our scouting department was well built up, as was our academy setup.
Sadly over the last couple of years a lot of that was dismantled as more power was consolidated under Pochettino, which at the time was justified as we were making strides on the field. In hindsight he probably should not have had as much say over transfers and scouting as he did but hindsight is always 20/20. That this coincided wit ha time period where Levy had to put 100% focus on the delayed stadium build did of course not help matters.
Get a sporting director/director of football in. Let them build a scouting department that can find us diamonds to polish combined with appointing a new academy head that can get the production line working again and we will be back on track before long.
Not necessarily, we got rid of Mitchell and bought Hitchin in. It depends on how they go about doing this.
But buying sell on prospects isn’t our strategy though. We have been buying younger players because yes they are often cheaper, but also our tactics under Poch dictated we needed fitness over anything else.
I’d be keen to see a list of players we bought, developed and then sold up the food chain. I can’t think of any tall that would suggest a strategy of this. Trippier and Walker improved and went higher, Walker maybe being an example of a punt that would suggest a sell on was in mind.
But Loris, Toby, Jan, Davies, Eriksen, Sissoko, Dele, Moura, Son, Dier, Dembele, amongst others would suggest we don’t strategize in this way. Do you honestly think the likes of GLC and Tanguy have been bought as punts that we can sell on? Clarke maybe, but one out of a dozen does not mean it’s a strategy.
I haven't seen the tables on net spend but I'll take your word on it that we are poor on that, due to stadium land build etc. I've always said I'd judge Enic from last summer on.
However net spend is nt the be all and end all. I'm sure there are clubs whose net spend is way more than ours, but have not overtaken us in the league. (Everton springs to mind)
Good scouting is the key.
I linked them above, transfermarkt shows last 5 and 10 year spend and breaks down each season.
Red is overall spend, green is profit.
But Hitchin was not brought in to be a director tho. Only our lead scout.
There have been far too many rumblings about us going for a proper DOF/sporting director model for there not to be any fire to go with the figurative smoke.
Just had a look and it kind of proves my point.
The vast majority of them have spent more (net) than us but only 3 or 4 over the last few years are out performing us in the league
Those 3 or 4 have been regularly lifting trophies historically.
Chelsea had a transfer ban, some already had significant investment into their squad and didn't need to spend as much.
Not disputing that.
Only saying that being top or bottom of the net spend table doesn't mean anything.
Again see Everton.
The ones who have regularly won trophies have significantly higher revenues/resources than us. Two of them are dopped to the hilt.
City have broken FFP and Chelsea, were it in place at the time, would also have broken it.
Other clubs are spending to try and take away the Top 4 place we currently haven't spent enough to potentially retain IMO.
It's not all about who are above us, teams around us are investing more as there is a lot more money in the game.
No one is expecting us to break FFP, but City's and Chelsea's trophies don't have any asterisks beside their accomplishments despite buying titles.
Liverpool are a perfect recent example of spending to back the manager.
It's not all about who are above us, teams around us are investing more as there is a lot more money in the game.
No one is expecting us to break FFP, but City's and Chelsea's trophies don't have any asterisks beside their accomplishments despite buying titles.
Liverpool are a perfect recent example of spending to back the manager.
Could we spend more? Sure there's a debate to be had there, but your kick off point about constant excuses, pretending to buy Dybala, Ndombele is fat and crap like that only serves to betray any genuine intent you may have had.
(Thanks for the kiss..... pfffff.)
Last edited:
Personally I think they are expensive hopefully quality but punts . If they develop to a full potential and become world beaters or just very good players they will have to leave if they consider silverware a priority for their career. Sanchez , Dier , Dele , Eriksson , Lamela ,are in that bracket.
So I think the pressure is for a high return constantly as our present model cannot sustain success so this is a major consideration by the hierarchy.
We never or rarely sign ready TOP ready to go players as they may be around 26 but casts off like Moura, Aurier or a Sissoko level player which don't improve the first 11 but can become a cult hero.
So players tend to stay if they're good but if they are better than that they tend to leave and naturally the club wants as much as it can get for them .The last game changer was VDV .
Player recruitment strategy is a complete mess. We rarely target positions that need improving. Full back positions are incompetent, aging central defenders , no quality defensive central midfielder,
no second striker.
Surprisingly we did spend generously this summer but unbelievable they have had no impact. The money should have been spent on Champ league seasoned players that had the maturity to enhance the team.
I see you may be right with say Son , but overall it's a fuckwit mess of a player strategy.
If you don't expect us to break FFP why even mention the Chavs & City?
.....Not trolling; I genuinely don't understand your point.
As for Liverpool they've generated a lot of their dosh by selling Suarez, Coutinho & Sterling..... Something that wouldn't sit well with the many who complain about us selling our best players (despite not pro-actively doing so) and not reinvesting the cash (which is also untrue).
Sold for Profit
Trippier £18.2m (Signed cheap for buyout clause from Burnley)
Walker £46m (Double punt on youth with Naughton from Sheffield United)
Eriksen £5.9m (Contract running out at Ajax)
Signed through Clause or contract running out/bargain/other.
Dembele - £15m (£4m loss of sale far offset by reputation at the time comparitive to clause)
Lloris - £10m (Lyon had to sell and we still tried to strong arm the deal and almost fucked it)
Toby - £11.5m (Atletico-Saints Loan-Levy...we would have got more even if he left before the Summer for whatever that clause fee was before he re-signed)
Jan - £9m (Running out of contract, Ajax wanted £12m)
Sissoko - £30m (Overpaid, still unsure about why so big a fee at the time, not worth a club record then tbh, also Newcastle relegated was a factor)
Dele - £5m (Punt on youth, GUARANTEED PROFIT)
Moura - £25m (Surplus at PSG who had to sell for FFP...could've probably sold for a profit pre-COVID)
Aurier - £23m (See Moura...does not look a bargain now)
Dier - £4m (Youth punt, definite potential profit)
Practically every single player is brought in with the idea of accruing value for potential sale IMO, often to the detriment of the squad.
Honestly feel value in any deal is a larger factor in signing players at Tottenham than it should be comparitive to their suitability etc. and especially with regards to what the managers wanted at the time.
Even GLC's loan fee arrangement was a bit of a punt with the purse-strings PSG-clause loan workaround exercise, ditto Gedson with his clause at Sporting etc.
Last edited:
Could we spend more? Yes.
Don't cry about disagrees when you gave one out first here tbh.
Aye, mentioned Walker myself. Don’t agree on Eriksen. Convinced we’d have kept him if we could. Also don’t think Trippier was sold just to make a profit.
As for the rest, we still have those players. Not sure they add weight to the argument that we are buying to improve and move on if they are all still here and actually growing old in the squad. I’d suggest you are adding weight to my argument instead.
If you want CL seasoned versions of Sanchez (40m), NDombele (60m) & GLC (50m) then you probably need to double our trf budget by the time you deal with the fees and wage hikes.... Probably contending with the likes of RM, City (i.e. the glamour of serial winners) for their signature too.
Take CB for example: VVD & McGuire both cost circa double Sanchez and had naff all CL experience.
....If it's a straight forward as you make it sound shouldn't Everton my flying now?