Summer 2015 Transfer Window DISCUSSION Thread

  • 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Kafkaesque said:
I have a sneaking suspecion that if we were finishing in the top 4, you'd still be bitching that we should spend and you'd be proud if we were winning the league. As has been covered by others, our status financially doesn't give us a god given right to be in the top 4.

It's near impossible to actually know for sure how we'd feel as fans if we were in City's place, without being there. I can only say from where we are now, I feel that I'll be a whole lot more proud if we manage to get consistently in the CL (and hopefully build even further from there) with a manager signing young player to create a team ethos and with several academy products (hopefully still) starting (when/if we get there), than I would winning championships the way City have.

With regards to tossing money around, City is the exception that proves the rule. The amount they spent was obscene, no less so because they had to get a lot of signings in before FFP. Although United and Woolwich during their dominent periods spent a pretty penny here and there, it was always centered around a manager with a crystal clear philosophy. Even the chavs, with all the money they threw at it, only really achieved success once they got a manager in, who still spent a lot of money, because he could, but did so with specific types of players in mind to create a collective mentality in and around the team. Swansea and Soton are recent examples outside the top teams. To the contrary, the two teams pissing money - from a big sale each - at the best players available who on paper could help break the barrier to United, City, Woolwich and chavs failed miserably. Having the right people making the decisions as to who to sign is much more important than the amount of money.
Click to expand...
Let me try and clarify my position regarding me bitching about our spending. Firstly, our net spend is lower than every other single PL club bar none. That's been consistent over the last 5 years. Apart from Swansea we are the only club to break even or make a profit. What I'm saying is that this suggests we could have gone the extra yard on numerous occasions to secure our managers number 1 targets instead of settling for 2nd or 3rd choice. It shows we could be a little more ambitious. I think we could have made a more concerted effort to consolidate our top 4 position. I don't see why spending less than palace stoke and burnley should be necessary for the club's survival. As a Spurs fan it hurts to see us constantly looking up to Woolwich and Chelsea. Even more so when we post record PL profits for the same financial period.
 
John Thomas said:
Let me try and clarify my position regarding me bitching about our spending. Firstly, our net spend is lower than every other single PL club bar none. That's been consistent over the last 5 years. Apart from Swansea we are the only club to break even or make a profit. What I'm saying is that this suggests we could have gone the extra yard on numerous occasions to secure our managers number 1 targets instead of settling for 2nd or 3rd choice. It shows we could be a little more ambitious. I think we could have made a more concerted effort to consolidate our top 4 position. I don't see why spending less than palace stoke and burnley should be necessary for the club's survival. As a Spurs fan it hurts to see us constantly looking up to Woolwich and Chelsea. Even more so when we post record PL profits for the same financial period.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but the reality is at the moment the players in question that could improve us will prefer to go to other clubs. We cant offer them CL. Our wage structure doesnt allow 100k a week. Hence we sign players who havent won the world cup etc. I can only think of a couple of times recently where we should have backed the manager (Moutinho / Hulk) and suffered because of it.

I wish we'd gone in for Khedira as he would really have made a difference to us, but wages and CL yet again would have scuppered us if we were actually interested at any point.
 
Bruceben said:
If only we had added Hazard to the contingent. Knew he was good when we missed out on him but had no idea he'd be as good as he is now.
Click to expand...

We were in for him, as were just about every other major club in Europe. And thats the problem, we simply arent attractive enough compared to the really big boys. Willian was an even more farcical example of this trend.
 
John Thomas said:
Let me try and clarify my position regarding me bitching about our spending. Firstly, our net spend is lower than every other single PL club bar none. That's been consistent over the last 5 years. Apart from Swansea we are the only club to break even or make a profit. What I'm saying is that this suggests we could have gone the extra yard on numerous occasions to secure our managers number 1 targets instead of settling for 2nd or 3rd choice. It shows we could be a little more ambitious. I think we could have made a more concerted effort to consolidate our top 4 position. I don't see why spending less than palace stoke and burnley should be necessary for the club's survival. As a Spurs fan it hurts to see us constantly looking up to Woolwich and Chelsea. Even more so when we post record PL profits for the same financial period.
Click to expand...


They have more money than us, They finish above us. It's really that simple.
 
John Thomas said:
Let me try and clarify my position regarding me bitching about our spending. Firstly, our net spend is lower than every other single PL club bar none. That's been consistent over the last 5 years. Apart from Swansea we are the only club to break even or make a profit. What I'm saying is that this suggests we could have gone the extra yard on numerous occasions to secure our managers number 1 targets instead of settling for 2nd or 3rd choice. It shows we could be a little more ambitious. I think we could have made a more concerted effort to consolidate our top 4 position. I don't see why spending less than palace stoke and burnley should be necessary for the club's survival. As a Spurs fan it hurts to see us constantly looking up to Woolwich and Chelsea. Even more so when we post record PL profits for the same financial period.
Click to expand...
Palace, Stoke and Burnley aren't regenerating a borough in the capital and building a £3/4/500m stadium.

What don't you understand about that?

Levy hasn't taken an Amigo Loan to cover the cost mate.
 
John Thomas said:
Let me try and clarify my position regarding me bitching about our spending. Firstly, our net spend is lower than every other single PL club bar none. That's been consistent over the last 5 years. Apart from Swansea we are the only club to break even or make a profit. What I'm saying is that this suggests we could have gone the extra yard on numerous occasions to secure our managers number 1 targets instead of settling for 2nd or 3rd choice. It shows we could be a little more ambitious. I think we could have made a more concerted effort to consolidate our top 4 position. I don't see why spending less than palace stoke and burnley should be necessary for the club's survival. As a Spurs fan it hurts to see us constantly looking up to Woolwich and Chelsea. Even more so when we post record PL profits for the same financial period.
Click to expand...

You're looking at net transfers as an isolated factor, which makes no sense. Wages are such a big factor, that making any sort of argument based, in part, on Burnley spending 1m net, is ludicrois.

We're presenting good financial results in a football context, but it's not like we're stacking up profits in any way, and ENIC's not pulling money out. So where would you find the money? You can't really save on wages along with bringing more expensive players. Our ticket prices are already nearly the most expensive, so that's a no-go. The only way, as far as I can tell, is creating debt. Just because there 15+ other PL teams acting like tossers is no excuse for us to do so.
 
Who: JJetset
When: 12th July
Where: SC

Re: Mirallas and McCarthy- Agents pushing stories
They both could happen and 1 more than the other.Lots of dependencies for Mirallas to happen and McCarthy is more straightforward.

McCarthy was the one i was wrong about by saying we weren't interested.
 
Millbanks said:
Palace, Stoke and Burnley aren't regenerating a borough in the capital and building a £3/4/500m stadium.

What don't you understand about that?

Levy hasn't taken an Amigo Loan to cover the cost mate.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean but levy has made it clear that it will be investors funding the stadium , not THFC. Yup that will take a lot of hard work but financially it will not affect the club . It was a press release years ago. Stage 1 of the built was THFC funded ,about £40m & in that time investors will be found to find the rest of it.
 
Furball man said:
I know what you mean but levy has made it clear that it will be investors funding the stadium , not THFC. Yup that will take a lot of hard work but financially it will not affect the club . It was a press release years ago. Stage 1 of the built was THFC funded ,about £40m & in that time investors will be found to find the rest of it.
Click to expand...

Serious investors would be very cautious about investing in a football club. One with debt, unless it's for sound investments (and a 27-year-old footballer with a mohawk and lots of tatoos apparently worth 45m doesn't count as that in those circles), would be an absolute no-go. So really just underlines the need for sound decisions.
 
Kafkaesque said:
Serious investors would be very cautious about investing in a football club. One with debt, unless it's for sound investments (and a 27-year-old footballer with a mohawk and lots of tatoos apparently worth 45m doesn't count as that in those circles), would be an absolute no-go. So really just underlines the need for sound decisions.
Click to expand...

I think what John Thomas John Thomas is getting at is that we've had a few occasions where taking a slight risk wouldn't have been to detrimental to this & our financial security. , the Saha, Nelsen & the fraiser Campbell ones still annoy me today, huge opportunities overlooked.

I see levy as not trying to persuade companies investing into Spurs itself , more of an investment into the real estate of the stadium & all its possibilities , hence the NFL thing.. He's pointing very much towards an entertainment centre than just a football stadium. Hopefully that'll make it a slightly more attractive proposition .

It would be nice to hear how far we are with securing investors & of course what the NFL deal will bring in
 
Totti said:
How many of the first team haven't returned?
Click to expand...

Judging by pictures from the spurs twitter etc, the players who haven't started training sessions are:

Lloris, Vertonghen, Lamella, Yedlin, Kane, Dembele, Chadli, Eriksen, Carroll, Mason and Alderweireld.

Also players who aren't featured in any pictures and are expected to leave are:

Kaboul, Chiriches, Lennon and Adebayor.
 
Totti said:
"The Express claim Daniel Levy has told Mauricio Pochettino to sell six players before he buys any this summer."
Click to expand...

I'm sure he could sell them but it wether levy will accept the amount offered for them.

Anyways haven't we bought some already this summer... Journo nonsense no doubt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom