Transfers Summer Transfer Thread 2023! - Closed (Maybe)

[Airfixx]

We've not done nearly enough this summer.

Given we've just finished 8th, it's extremely concerning.

Click to shrink...

Again; did I say not to be "concerned"?

FFS

 

[TheGreenLily]

Longer we leave it, the less likely teams are to get a replacement in time and will be less willing to sell players that are important to their team.

The only players that get cheaper as the window goes on, are players that clubs want to sell.

Click to shrink...

Agree with that too.

Other clubs don't want to messed about when a season starts and rightly so. I felt the same Bale went RM it just messes everyone around, unsettles the team and you are playing catch up before you know it and the season has only started.

 

[septicsac]

There is no debate here, Levy is failing Spurs and has been where football is concerned for sometime. We are getting left behind badly, esp with our stuttering search for CH's which in reality is going on three yrs now. If we lose Kane it benifits no one but Levy, the right thing to do would have been to strengthen early, show Kane we have some ambition, a new manager who wants to play attacking, possession based football and convince him to stay, but in reality this would cost more than letting kane go and levy has clearly selected this route, all while increasing ticket prices and taking fans for granted yet again.

 

[Tomo]

I wouldn't complain at all, they are all very good targets.

I don't think we really need "additional" spending. I just think we shouldn't be wasting money in the first place on players we don't need and will never use, which ultimately leaves us with the big holes each season you refer too.

Of course, additional spending is always welcome, but there is so much more we can do to make our lives a lot easier before we need this additional money.

We are one of the richest clubs in the world, of course we can afford to spend to a certain degree, would never argue against that and we most certainly have the capacity to spend a bit more than we do, but it's meaningless if we don't use it wisely enough, is all I am sying.

Click to shrink...

We will never use it properly without asking a simple question. What is Tottenham Hotspur?

We constantly change styles so we buy players who otherwise might be good like Lo Celso and give them to managers who play a style of football that doesn’t fit them. We are a squad of Sqaure pegs round holes.

All very well saying our scouting ain’t great but think of it from the scouts point of view. You scout a player perfect for Pochball then Jose comes in playing a totally different way making that player redundant.

Modern football is all about style and building a team of players that fit a way of playing but we change style all the time. Until that stops we won’t fix Jack shit.

 

[Smogz]

The Athletic wrote an article about Leverkusen's training camp, they have a bit in there about Tapsoba:

Edmond Tapsoba is one of the club’s mightiest prospects.

He is classy and confident in that Saalfelden rain, stepping out of tackles and looking every bit like one of the Bundesliga’s finest ball-carrying defenders.

Off the pitch, he is softly spoken and personable. He is about to enter his fourth season with Leverkusen and that time has not been without its challenges. He enjoyed a sudden rise upon joining the club in 2020, then a dip in the aftermath. Now, though, his stock is higher than ever.


Tapsoba is one of the Bundesliga’s best ball-carrying centre-backs (Photo: Christof Koepsel/Getty Images)
One of the factors behind the team’s improvement under Alonso, certainly after the Bundesliga’s resumption following the World Cup, was a much-improved defence of which he was part. That owed much to Alonso’s work on the unit’s formation, explains Tapsoba, and the number of small-sided games Alonso employs.

“He’s tough on the defence. We work a lot on positioning — that seems a big part of Spanish coaching — and also on not letting the ball get between the lines and being ready for the pressure.”

Tapsoba is one of the most sought-after defenders in Europe. He has a host of admirers and for good reason.

Skilful, tall, and extremely quick — he’s also an unexpectedly good penalty-taker — he has the en vogue attributes that the biggest teams chase. He is also versatile. Leverkusen play with a back three and he has occupied all three centre-back positions at different times. Tapsoba is right-footed, but prefers to play in the centre or from the left. That is an interesting window into his mindset. He wants to defend, yes, but he wants to influence the game with the ball.

“On the right, you only really have two passing options: your wing-back and your centre-back. On the left (or centre), when you control the ball, you can step inside and see the whole field.”

Tapsoba is lithe and classy and really typical of the modern defensive ideal. But, watching him cherish the ball, it is easy to imagine him in a different era, anchoring a midfield or dominating the space between the penalty boxes with his languid skill and long stride.


So by his own admission he prefers playing on the left (or in the centre).

Click to shrink...

So he is used to play in a back 3 and not PL proven...hmm

 

[kingdawson]

Compelling degree of info here.

Click to shrink...

you can be as sarcastic as you want. The fact is, he has spent a lot of money.

 

[Fattynomates]

Chelsea get another CB due to Fofana injury... bear in mind they already have: Silva, Badiashile and Colwill at CB.

Click to shrink...

Why didn’t Poch and ant Sanchez?

 

[To Dare Is To Do.]

Up until this season; we had been.

(Figures also previously yprovided courtesy of TFM)

Wage bill since new stadium opened only 20m pounds higher too.

(On phone now so fk going diggingall over again..... Just highly aggravating seeing people spinning untruths bigging up the scum.,)

Click to shrink...

Firstly, no one is 'bigging up' Woolwich when we complain that their transfer expenditure is more than ours.

Secondly, the way you use statistics is flawed.

I've seen your posts on this- you take a fixed time point (when we moved into new stadium) and then compare net spend since then.
But the fact that our net spend was far lower than theirs before this point distorts the statistic. This is because they can sell the product of their previous high spend to fund players for a lower 'net spend' but same value.

Simplified hypothetical to demonstrate my point:
2020-2023:
Club A spend £100m on strikers, 0 sales,
Club B spend £30m on strikers, 0 sales.

2024-2026:
Club A sell the previously bought strikers for £50m, and spend another £100m on strikers.
Club B sell the previously bought strikers for £15m, and spend another £65m on strikers.

The 2024-2026 net spend on strikers for both clubs are identical. But Club A's strikers between 2024-2026 are of higher value.

Of course the usual caveats apply... monetary value may not = performance etc. But if we are discussing expenditure, this point is very relevant.

 

[Airfixx]

Iirc it may not have been 200m net but it was a considerable sum in each of the 21/22 and 22/23 seasons

They had one of the highest if not the highest net spends over the last two seasons

Click to shrink...

So "the last 2/3 years" only actually means this summer?

Indeed.

So this summer they have already spent 200 mill with a couple of transfers still in the pipeline and no major outgoings. Where is this money coming from, how can they afford to spend over 200 mill this summer?

Click to shrink...

Dunno..... If one to start slinging numbers about then eventually they'll be required to be correct......... I have no idea about the Scuns accounts.

 

[Brian Fantana]

We’d never do this

 

[TheGreenLily]

We will never use it properly without asking a simple question. What is Tottenham Hotspur?

We constantly change styles so we buy players who otherwise might be good like Lo Celso and give them to managers who play a style of football that doesn’t fit them. We are a squad of Sqaure pegs round holes.

All very well saying our scouting ain’t great but think of it from the scouts point of view. You scout a player perfect for Pochball then Jose comes in playing a totally different way making that player redundant.

Modern football is all about style and building a team of players that fit a way of playing but we change style all the time. Until that stops we won’t fix Jack shit.

Click to shrink...

I love Lo Celso, it feels like a new signing so far with him coming back and looking very apt in Ange's style of football.

And I have said exactly the same thing in his thread.

If Levy got those two CB's Tapsoba , VdV and quality replacement PEH (If he goes) and Kane (If he goes), and I think we are going to smashing teams apart next season.

I think we have every chance of a top 4 and I expect some excellent cup runs, with a chance of winning them.

But Levy has to pull the trigger and get who need to sure up our defence.

 

[To Dare Is To Do.]

Firstly, no one is 'bigging up' Woolwich when we complain that their transfer expenditure is more than ours.

Secondly, the way you use statistics is flawed.

I've seen your posts on this- you take a fixed time point (when we moved into new stadium) and then compare net spend since then.
But the fact that our net spend was far lower than theirs before this point distorts the statistic. This is because they can sell the product of their previous high spend to fund players for a lower 'net spend' but same value.

Simplified hypothetical to demonstrate my point:
2020-2023:
Club A spend £100m on strikers, 0 sales,
Club B spend £30m on strikers, 0 sales.

2024-2026:
Club A sell the previously bought strikers for £50m, and spend another £100m on strikers.
Club B sell the previously bought strikers for £15m, and spend another £65m on strikers.

The 2024-2026 net spend on strikers for both clubs are identical. But Club A's strikers between 2024-2026 are of higher value.

Of course the usual caveats apply... monetary value may not = performance etc. But if we are discussing expenditure, this point is very relevant.

Click to shrink...

Deuterz Tottenham Massive

Feel free to note this as rebuttal if it's argued that our net spend since 2019 is high.

An example of this is City actually. They spent so much money between 2010-2020, that they can maintain an extremely high value squad without high net spend in recent years.
They can just sell previously bought players and upgrade with moderate net spend. So if they argue their recent success isn't money related by pointing to 2021-2023 net spend... it's a bullshit argument in the same way our so called net spend compared to rivals since 2019 is.

 

[Airfixx]

you can be as sarcastic as you want. The fact is, he has spent a lot of money.

Click to shrink...

Yes they spent a lot so far this summer..... I've not said otherwise.

Thanks for joining in tho.

 

[Zomb]

Defender gets injured, Chelsea buy another one. That’s how serious club should act.

Click to shrink...

I love Lo Celso, it feels like a new signing so far with him coming back and looking very apt in Ange's style of football.

And I have said exactly the same thing in his thread.

If Levy got those two CB's Tapsoba , VdV and quality replacement PEH (If he goes) and Kane (If he goes), and I think we are going to smashing teams apart next season.

I think we have every chance of a top 4 and I expect some excellent cup runs, with a chance of winning them.

But Levy has to pull the trigger and get who need to sure up our defence.

Click to shrink...

Four new players?! LOL

I would be made up with those two CB’s, the rest can wait

 

[Richard Arlison]

Firstly, no one is 'bigging up' Woolwich when we complain that their transfer expenditure is more than ours.

Secondly, the way you use statistics is flawed.

I've seen your posts on this- you take a fixed time point (when we moved into new stadium) and then compare net spend since then.
But the fact that our net spend was far lower than theirs before this point distorts the statistic. This is because they can sell the product of their previous high spend to fund players for a lower 'net spend' but same value.

Simplified hypothetical to demonstrate my point:
2020-2023:
Club A spend £100m on strikers, 0 sales,
Club B spend £30m on strikers, 0 sales.

2024-2026:
Club A sell the previously bought strikers for £50m, and spend another £100m on strikers.
Club B sell the previously bought strikers for £15m, and spend another £65m on strikers.

The 2024-2026 net spend on strikers for both clubs are identical. But Club A's strikers between 2024-2026 are of higher value.

Of course the usual caveats apply... monetary value may not = performance etc. But if we are discussing expenditure, this point is very relevant.

Click to shrink...

Right.

Put simply, buying more expensive players often leads to buying better players and being able to sell them for more.

whereas

Having a rep for trying to get other club's players for less than they want to sell, often leads to clubs not wanting to pay your prices when you want to sell them. Less money in means you can't spend more on better players.

 

[Zomb]

Go on ….

Click to shrink...

They try and win things

 

[skywalker68]

We’d never do this

Click to shrink...

Levy would ask ledley, if he could play a few games, to cover the injury.

 

[Tomo]

Deuterz Tottenham Massive

Feel free to note this as rebuttal if it's argued that our net spend since 2019 is high.

An example of this is City actually. They spent so much money between 2010-2020, that they can maintain an extremely high value squad without high net spend in recent years.
They can just sell previously bought players and upgrade with moderate net spend. So if they argue their recent success isn't money related by pointing to 2021-2023 net spend... it's a bullshit argument in the same way our so called net spend compared to rivals since 2019 is.

Click to shrink...

Always thought that City spent over £1bn and that was before this level of football inflation so it’s about £1.5/£2bn worth of players in this market to sell around. Long as they know when to sell they can always generate to invest in new.

Also City spend vast on wages like Haaland who gets reportedly £850k per week.

 

[SpaggyBoy]

I love Lo Celso, it feels like a new signing so far with him coming back and looking very apt in Ange's style of football.

And I have said exactly the same thing in his thread.

If Levy got those two CB's Tapsoba , VdV and quality replacement PEH (If he goes) and Kane (If he goes), and I think we are going to smashing teams apart next season.

I think we have every chance of a top 4 and I expect some excellent cup runs, with a chance of winning them.

But Levy has to pull the trigger and get who need to sure up our defence.

Click to shrink...

Sorry but the only thing we'll be smashing next season the record for the most amount of goals conceded ina domestic season.

 

[Airfixx]

Firstly, no one is 'bigging up' Woolwich when we complain that their transfer expenditure is more than ours.

Secondly, the way you use statistics is flawed.

Click to shrink...

Show me a season when Arse have spent 200m pounds net before this one..... Or bore off.

I've seen your posts on this- you take a fixed time point (when we moved into new stadium) and then compare net spend since then.
But the fact that our net spend was far lower than theirs before this point distorts the statistic. This is because they can sell the product of their previous high spend to fund players for a lower 'net spend' but same value.

Simplified hypothetical to demonstrate my point:
2020-2023:
Club A spend £100m on strikers, 0 sales,
Club B spend £30m on strikers, 0 sales.

2024-2026:
Club A sell the previously bought strikers for £50m, and spend another £100m on strikers.
Club B sell the previously bought strikers for £15m, and spend another £65m on strikers.

The 2024-2026 net spend on strikers for both clubs are identical. But Club A's strikers between 2024-2026 are of higher value.

Of course the usual caveats apply... monetary value may not = performance etc. But if we are discussing expenditure, this point is very relevant.

Click to shrink...

Sorry... Not interested in some strawman lecture about finance.