Spurs 2018/19

[hellohello]

Last season I thought this would be the season when Lamela steps up another level, I personally think he is underappreciated by some despite the fact that he need to add more end product. I personally think he will have a very good season for us. As for the AVB era, I didn't want him sacked mid season although I wanted him gone at the end of the season.

I'm very disappointed about the window because we didn't address some key areas. However, it's not a disaster and I see it more as a missed opportunity, but we still have plenty to be positive about.

We have a world cup winning keeper who despite some mistakes is a fantastic keeper.
You can argue our central defense pairing is best in the league.
Our fullbacks are solid although not exceptional.
We have great quality and depth in our front three, and they are feeding the best pure nr 9 in the world imo.

Only definite concern for me is in centre mid and I felt we desperately needed at least one new player there. But I guess we're gonna have to hope Poch can either change the system and put Alli/Eriksen down or that Dembele can play most games.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Last season I thought this would be the season when Lamela steps up another level, I personally think he is underappreciated by some despite the fact that he need to add more end product. I personally think he will have a very good season for us. As for the AVB era, I didn't want him sacked mid season although I wanted him gone at the end of the season.

I'm very disappointed about the window because we didn't address some key areas. However, it's not a disaster and I see it more as a missed opportunity, but we still have plenty to be positive about.

We have a world cup winning keeper who despite some mistakes is a fantastic keeper.
You can argue our central defense pairing is best in the league.
Our fullbacks are solid although not exceptional.
We have great quality and depth in our front three, and they are feeding the best pure nr 9 in the world imo.

Only definite concern for me is in centre mid and I felt we desperately needed at least one new player there. But I guess we're gonna have to hope Poch can either change the system and put Alli/Eriksen down or that Dembele can play most games.

Lamela is a decent player, a good squad option. He's never been exceptional though, not even close to it. Exceptional is Kane, Eriksen, Vertonghen, etc. You seriously didn't want AVB sacked after the Liverpool debacle? I'm surprised, you're obviously a very patient man. We were an absolute mess that entire season and it was clear he had lost the dressing room (like he did at Chelsea) and that his methods weren't working. He needed to go.

I guess it depends on how you look on it. I think it's a disaster in the sense of showing zero ambition and creating a good atmosphere going in to the next season, which I think was really important. Of course we have some great players, as you mentioned, but so do the rest of the top six and it's going to be tough for us if we get a couple of injuries, due to our very poor squad depth. Agree on the centre mid issue, it's clearly a big problem in the side, and badly needed work going in to the season.

We've got a decent chance at top four going in to the next season, but in terms of winning a trophy, it doesn't look good. We don't really have the depth to compete in all competitions, and I expect once more that relying too heavily on Kane and Dembele will be our downfall. We're also going to have to hope Alli has a great season, which is a bit of a worry since he's coming off the back of a poor year for club and country. We're going to struggle badly when Son is out for the Asian games too, could very feasibly drop quite a few points during that period as we have no wide players who can do what he can.

 

[RedSky]

You are in for some disappointing years unless Levy changes his price range

"What the club is doing is showing it is so brave,"

The perfect troll

To be fair, I dunno what Pochettino is meant to do? Complain like Jose and cause problems a day or two before the start of the season? He's being professional despite probably being annoyed at the lack of signings.

Next Summer is the one which really shows Tottenhams ambitions imo, they'll have had almost a full season in their new Stadium and won't be able to use that as an excuse anymore. Fan expectations will be big as well. I would say this season for them is damage control, finish top 4 and try and win a cup.

 

[B20]

To be fair, I dunno what Pochettino is meant to do? Complain like Jose and cause problems a day or two before the start of the season? He's being professional despite probably being annoyed at the lack of signings

I think it's possible to express honest frustration without being a moaning git.

Something like "It's not what we were hoping for at the start of the window of course, but we've got a very strong squad and I fully believe in my players to get us through till January, where we can hopefully get some fresh legs in and give our players a bit more breathing space from week to week. I am disappointed at what happened, but I am sure Daniel will work twice as hard till January to make up for it."

Put some public pressure where it belongs, rather than make it out to have been the master plan all along, Glaston-style.

 

[finneh]

Lol … not wanting to sell to rivals is supposed to be a criticism? And what does 25% above market value even mean in the context of a market that's gone crazy with upward prices?

As for the Martial deal, there is no solution when one club - United - won't sell to a rival but still expected the other club to sell to them. So the Toby + cash notion is a total non-starter.

Nor, as I've already said, does this window prove anything about alleged "financial struggles". There are several other alternative possibilities, including that Levy - who already said last year that he thinks the current transfer bubble will collapse - simply concluded that only badly-run Premiership clubs, or those funded by sugar-daddies, take part in buying players to any significant degree in current market conditions.

If you think he's wrong to believe in a coming market collapse, then fair enough. But that doesn't mean he will be wrong.

Not selling to your rivals is absolutely fine if you're Manchester United. We can afford to sell our players on the cheap and avoid getting a better price from our rivals as it wouldn't be to the detriment of our squad. We could sell Martial to Dortmund for £35m whilst an offer of £60m from Spurs was on the table, as this £25m is a somewhat minor sum that wouldn't impact our transfer dealings.

Spurs however are in a completely different boat. Due to the simple fact that Spurs have very little money combined with the fact that European teams can't afford to spend £50m+ on a central defender you have two choices: sell to a rival to raise the funds required to replace them or keep and unhappy player to the detriment of their own team/squad. In this instance it's absolutely clear that anyone who has Spurs' own interests at heart would do: sell to the rival and improve their own team.

The Martial situation I think is more nuanced than you suggest, given that Mourinho was clear he has no problem selling want-away players and also no problems selling to rivals. However it would never have occurred because Levy would value Alderweireld at £60m and Martial at max £60m (25% above and 25% below). If Spurs offered Alderweired and £20m there would have been a lot of internal pressure to accept the offer... Levy however would feel that he's not getting the big premium for selling and big discount for purchasing, which is against his ideological beliefs. I've dealt with many people like him on numerous occasions... I can sell them a product at a cheaper rate that they're currently paying but they refuse to make themselves more profitable because we're "competitors", my advice to them is the same as it is to Levy: stop being so stubborn and emotional.

In terms of the market having "gone crazy"... It's increased as it has done repeatedly for the past 50 years. As United fans we've heard it all before when our interest payments were too high to sanction purchasing the likes of Hazard. However we weren't naive enough to believe it was anything other than nonsense trotted out to try and appease annoyed fans.

Answer me this... When in the history of the PL have transfer prices randomly reduced? The answer is never because the only way they can reduce is if the revenue of football clubs randomly reduces by a significant amount and there is absolutely no sign of this occurring. Commercial revenues are still rapidly increasing, as are the overseas rights to show games. Domestic rights will slow after a period of aggressive growth and this may cause a transfer to slow, but a crash is certainly not realistic.

Actually... Levy better pray that this isn't a "transfer bubble" because if it is it also means there's a "turnover bubble" of PL clubs to match. This being the case Tottenham are in one of the most precarious positions in terms of being able to withstand a large drop in TV revenue; since their commercial revenue levels are tragic and they have a huge pile of debt to service.

 

[RedSky]

I think it's possible to express honest frustration without being a moaning git.

Something like "It's not what we were hoping for at the start of the window of course, but we've got a very strong squad and I fully believe in my players to get us through till January, where we can hopefully get some fresh legs in and give our players a bit more breathing space from week to week. I am disappointed at what happened, but I am sure Daniel will work twice as hard till January to make up for it."

Put some public pressure where it belongs, rather than make it out to have been the master plan all along, Glaston-style.

All that does is feed the media to write bullshit articles about the Manager being pissed off though.

 

[B20]

All that does is feed the media to write bullshit articles about the Manager being pissed off though.

And why not. As long as he has the players and fans onside, that should be fine.

 

[RedSky]

And why not. As long as he has the players and fans onside, that should be fine.

It breeds negativity. Having a Manager play mind games with the Owners is just a recipe for disaster. Just keep everything positive and don't let the press have any ammunition, that way the support, players, manager and owners are all on the same page. Just my opinion, but when the press grabs onto something and starts throwing negative articles about it starts the rot in the fans which can be very hard to shake. It's counter productive.

 

[africanspur]

And why not. As long as he has the players and fans onside, that should be fine.

Hmm, no thanks. We've already had experience of the manager working openly on a different plan to the chairman (Redknapp) and it isn't pleasant.

I don't want the club to be in open conflict in the media, with manager and chairman briefing the press against each other.

Besides, Poch is....well he's a bit strange tbh. He believes very strongly in stuff like positive energy, almost..aura like. He isn't going to go into a season slagging off the chairman or the players or the fans. That isn't what he's like and from what I can remember, he's never openly criticised his chairmen, his fans or his players, even ones who openly want away (such as Walker asking to leave just days before a FA cup semi). That isn't his style and I hope that doesn't change and he doesn't become a cynical bastard smashing his chairman or players in the media.

 

[B20]

Hmm, no thanks. We've already had experience of the manager working openly on a different plan to the chairman (Redknapp) and it isn't pleasant.

I don't want the club to be in open conflict in the media, with manager and chairman briefing the press against each other.

Besides, Poch is....well he's a bit strange tbh. He believes very strongly in stuff like positive energy, almost..aura like. He isn't going to go into a season slagging off the chairman or the players or the fans. That isn't what he's like and from what I can remember, he's never openly criticised his chairmen, his fans or his players, even ones who openly want away (such as Walker asking to leave just days before a FA cup semi). That isn't his style and I hope that doesn't change and he doesn't become a cynical bastard smashing his chairman or players in the media.

Fair enough, though I wasn't suggesting cover briefing campaigns or anything of the sort. Still think it's possible to express such things honestly and acknowledge and explain shortcomings that happened and are obvious to everyone, with integrity - without it turning into a cloak and dagger campaign.

 

[hellohello]

Lamela is a decent player, a good squad option. He's never been exceptional though, not even close to it. Exceptional is Kane, Eriksen, Vertonghen, etc. You seriously didn't want AVB sacked after the Liverpool debacle? I'm surprised, you're obviously a very patient man. We were an absolute mess that entire season and it was clear he had lost the dressing room (like he did at Chelsea) and that his methods weren't working. He needed to go.

I guess it depends on how you look on it. I think it's a disaster in the sense of showing zero ambition and creating a good atmosphere going in to the next season, which I think was really important. Of course we have some great players, as you mentioned, but so do the rest of the top six and it's going to be tough for us if we get a couple of injuries, due to our very poor squad depth. Agree on the centre mid issue, it's clearly a big problem in the side, and badly needed work going in to the season.

We've got a decent chance at top four going in to the next season, but in terms of winning a trophy, it doesn't look good. We don't really have the depth to compete in all competitions, and I expect once more that relying too heavily on Kane and Dembele will be our downfall. We're also going to have to hope Alli has a great season, which is a bit of a worry since he's coming off the back of a poor year for club and country. We're going to struggle badly when Son is out for the Asian games too, could very feasibly drop quite a few points during that period as we have no wide players who can do what he can.

I wasn't a fan of sacking a manager when we're just gonna have a short time fix. But there could have been stuff behind the scenes that influenced it, and I wasn't very against it either.

I agree with your points, and for me it's just a matter of balance. I have reasons to be positive and reasons to be negative. Let's hope the season starts well for once, it has been my biggest criticism of us for the last few seasons and I desperately want us to hit the ground running.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

I wasn't a fan of sacking a manager when we're just gonna have a short time fix. But there could have been stuff behind the scenes that influenced it, and I wasn't very against it either.

I agree with your points, and for me it's just a matter of balance. I have reasons to be positive and reasons to be negative. Let's hope the season starts well for once, it has been my biggest criticism of us for the last few seasons and I desperately want us to hit the ground running.

I feel like we just needed to get his toxic presence out of our club as soon as possible. At least Sherwood attempted to play exciting football, and results did get better for the rest of the season, he also gave opportunities to the likes of Mason which was nice, certainly better than watching Paulinho mope about. Honestly I think everybody was just done with AVB, it was embarrassing and painful to be a Spurs fan during that season, can't remember a time when I was less excited for games and I went in to every big match 100% expecting to get smashed to bits.

Yeah, there's definitely reasons to be positive, as I've said despite being very dissapointed by our business we still have fantastic players and a wonderful manager. I doubt it'll be doom and gloom, it's just I think right now nobody wants to really hear the positives because they're angry with the club, understandably. Starting the season fast is going to be very difficult IMO, we lose Son after the first game I believe, have a number of players who had no pre-season, a few injuries and no new signings to freshen things up. It's going to be a tough start, if we really do start quickly I'll be impressed.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Not selling to your rivals is absolutely fine if you're Manchester United. We can afford to sell our players on the cheap and avoid getting a better price from our rivals as it wouldn't be to the detriment of our squad. We could sell Martial to Dortmund for £35m whilst an offer of £60m from Spurs was on the table, as this £25m is a somewhat minor sum that wouldn't impact our transfer dealings.

Spurs however are in a completely different boat. Due to the simple fact that Spurs have very little money combined with the fact that European teams can't afford to spend £50m+ on a central defender you have two choices: sell to a rival to raise the funds required to replace them or keep and unhappy player to the detriment of their own team/squad. In this instance it's absolutely clear that anyone who has Spurs' own interests at heart would do: sell to the rival and improve their own team.

The Martial situation I think is more nuanced than you suggest, given that Mourinho was clear he has no problem selling want-away players and also no problems selling to rivals. However it would never have occurred because Levy would value Alderweireld at £60m and Martial at max £60m (25% above and 25% below). If Spurs offered Alderweired and £20m there would have been a lot of internal pressure to accept the offer... Levy however would feel that he's not getting the big premium for selling and big discount for purchasing, which is against his ideological beliefs. I've dealt with many people like him on numerous occasions... I can sell them a product at a cheaper rate that they're currently paying but they refuse to make themselves more profitable because we're "competitors", my advice to them is the same as it is to Levy: stop being so stubborn and emotional.

In terms of the market having "gone crazy"... It's increased as it has done repeatedly for the past 50 years. As United fans we've heard it all before when our interest payments were too high to sanction purchasing the likes of Hazard. However we weren't naive enough to believe it was anything other than nonsense trotted out to try and appease annoyed fans.

Answer me this... When in the history of the PL have transfer prices randomly reduced? The answer is never because the only way they can reduce is if the revenue of football clubs randomly reduces by a significant amount and there is absolutely no sign of this occurring. Commercial revenues are still rapidly increasing, as are the overseas rights to show games. Domestic rights will slow after a period of aggressive growth and this may cause a transfer to slow, but a crash is certainly not realistic.

Actually... Levy better pray that this isn't a "transfer bubble" because if it is it also means there's a "turnover bubble" of PL clubs to match. This being the case Tottenham are in one of the most precarious positions in terms of being able to withstand a large drop in TV revenue; since their commercial revenue levels are tragic and they have a huge pile of debt to service.

Lol … tbh sounds like you're pissed off that United failed to get Toby, and so now you come up with some convoluted argument as to why Spurs should have let you have him, when you wouldn't sell us Martial in return. And the figures you give for a Toby-Martial deal, as supposedly put forward by Levy, are nothing more than speculation. It's much more likely IMO that Woodward simply refused to let Martial leave.

The result is that we haven't strengthened a rival. And a further result will be, provided that he isn't sold abroad before the European window closes, that we now have Toby for another season and so our squad is not weakened by his departure. Besides, there is no player that we could have signed who would have more than compensated for losing him.

Your suggestion that keeping Toby - one of the best CB in the Prem - is to "the detriment" of the Spurs team/squad is laughable.

You ask: "When in the history of the PL have transfer prices randomly reduced?" A better question would be: when have they ever accelerated at the pace seen in the last 2-3 years? Such acceleration is a classic pattern in the run-up to a bubble-burst.

You say: "Tottenham are in one of the most precarious positions in terms of being able to withstand a large drop in TV revenue". This is obvious nonsense, because not only will our income increase by something approaching £100m per year as a direct result of our new stadium, we also have one of the lowest - if not the lowest - wages-to-turnover ratios in the Prem.

In the face of this, stadium debt repayments are no problem and would remain no problem even if TV money decreases. The real casualties of any collapse in TV money would be some of those clubs who've spent massively on new players and who would then - because of the resultant crash in transfer prices - be unable to sell them except at a huge loss.

 

[Random Task]

Lol … tbh sounds like you're pissed off that United failed to get Toby, and so now you come up with some convoluted argument as to why Spurs should have let you have him, when you wouldn't sell us Martial in return. And the figures you give for a Toby-Martial deal, as supposedly put forward by Levy, are nothing more than speculation. It's much more likely IMO that Woodward simply refused to let Martial leave.

The result is that we haven't strengthened a rival. And a further result will be, provided that he isn't sold abroad before the European window closes, that we now have Toby for another season and so our squad is not weakened by his departure. Besides, there is no player that we could have signed who would have more than compensated for losing him.

Your suggestion that keeping Toby - one of the best CB in the Prem - is to "the detriment" of the Spurs team/squad is laughable.

You ask: "When in the history of the PL have transfer prices randomly reduced?" A better question would be: when have they ever accelerated at the pace seen in the last 2-3 years? Such acceleration is a classic pattern in the run-up to a bubble-burst.

You say: "Tottenham are in one of the most precarious positions in terms of being able to withstand a large drop in TV revenue". This is obvious nonsense, because not only will our income increase by something approaching £100m per year as a direct result of our new stadium, we also have one of the lowest - if not the lowest - wages-to-turnover ratios in the Prem.

In the face of this, stadium debt repayments are no problem and would remain no problem even if TV money decreases. The real casualties of any collapse in TV money would be some of those clubs who've spent massively on new players and who would then - because of the resultant crash in transfer prices - be unable to sell them except at a huge loss.

Did you see Bailly and Lindelof perform tonight? They were excellent. Between them, Smalling, Jones and Rojo we are clearly well stocked in the central defence department. Toby would have been a quality addition no doubt, but United's failure to secure him is not quite as bad as first anticipated.

Due to Levy's greed and/or unwillingness to do business with United, Poch and Spurs have to work with a player who is clearly not happy to be there.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Did you see Bailly and Lindelof perform tonight? They were excellent. Between them, Smalling, Jones and Rojo we are clearly well stocked in the central defence department. Toby would have been a quality addition no doubt, but United's failure to secure him is not quite as bad as first anticipated.

Due to Levy's greed and/or unwillingness to do business with United, Poch and Spurs have to work with a player who is clearly not happy to be there.

The same can be said of Martial and United's unwillingness to do business with Spurs. But Toby is more of a playing asset to Spurs than Martial is to United, so I don't imagine that Levy is too upset.

 

[acnumber9]

The real casualties of any collapse in TV money would be some of those clubs who've spent massively on new players and who would then - because of the resultant crash in transfer prices - be unable to sell them except at a huge loss.

I’m not sure how that’s a huge problem. Any drop in fees means it costs less to replace those players.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

The same can be said of Martial and United's unwillingness to do business with Spurs. But Toby is more of a playing asset to Spurs than Martial is to United, so I don't imagine that Levy is too upset.

Arguable that. Toby wasn't really much of an asset last season, if he's still at odds with the club then Pochettino won't want to be playing him regularly, so Sanchez/Vert will still probably be our first choice partnership. Potentially there's an agreement and Toby will knuckle down for this season, but it's always awkward having a player you know will be leaving soon, hardly going to be a favourite of a manger who demands 100 percent commitment. Martial and Jose don't seem to have a very good relationship and I don't think he really suits their style of play, but he still scored 9 and got 5 assists in the league for them last season, so there's always the chance (however slim) he'll get his arse in to gear for them, he's certainly capable.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

I’m not sure how that’s a huge problem. Any drop in fees means it costs less to replace those players.

Most clubs also aren't actually interested in selling their best assets nowadays either, even mid table teams are able to keep hold of their best players. They aren't purchasing with a view to selling on for a big fee later, they're buying to stay competitive in the league and continue to benefit from TV money etc.

 

[Random Task]

The same can be said of Martial and United's unwillingness to do business with Spurs. But Toby is more of a playing asset to Spurs than Martial is to United, so I don't imagine that Levy is too upset.

Not quite the same thing is it. Martial is highly talented forward whose market value is significantly more than Spurs could afford. Toby, who was to be the paperweight in this deal, is in the twilight of his career, coming off the back of an injury-plagued season with Spurs and a below average world cup campaign. The deal would have been far riskier for United than it would for Spurs, thus not acceptable to Woody.

Spurs couldn't feasibly afford to buy Martial outright, but that should not stop Levy from making a profit on Toby given his clubs current financial situation. His greed will end up costing Spurs a large sum of money and in the process forced his manager to work with an unhappy player. Bad move in my opinion. You could even go as far as calling him both selfish and childish.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Not quite the same thing is it. Martial is highly talented forward whose market value is significantly more than Spurs could afford. Toby, who was to be the paperweight in this deal, is in the twilight of his career, coming off the back of an injury-plagued season with Spurs and a below average world cup campaign. The deal would have been far riskier for United than it would for Spurs, thus not acceptable to Woody.

Spurs couldn't feasibly afford to buy Martial outright, but that should not stop Levy from making a profit on Toby given his clubs current financial situation. His greed will end up costing Spurs a large sum of money and in the process forced his manager to work with an unhappy player. Bad move in my opinion.

What would you say Martial's market value is, out of interest?

 

[GlastonSpur]

I’m not sure how that’s a huge problem. Any drop in fees means it costs less to replace those players.

If your income is reduced from a drop in TV money, and if at the same time you can now only sell for a big loss the players that you bought at bubble-peak prices, that outweighs any benefit from a reduced price for buying new players.

 

[Random Task]

What would you say Martial's market value is, out of interest?

Not much good with numbers mate but I'll give it a go.

*removes rose-tinted specs*

Say £70 million?

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

If your income is reduced from a drop in TV money, and if at the same time you can now only sell for a big loss the players that you bought at bubble-peak prices, that outweighs any benefit from a reduced price for buying new players.

Making a bit less from selling players is not going to have a huge financial impact on the clubs spending that kind of money, though.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Not much good with numbers mate but I'll give it a go.

*removes rose-tinted specs*

Say £70 million?

At first that seems a tad steep, after all he's clearly not in a particularly good place at United at the moment, isn't signing a contract, and still has a lot to prove. Then I think about it and the fact that players like Zaha have pricetags matching or even exceeding that number, and it doesn't seem so bad .. especially in terms of if you were selling to a rival team. He's still very obviously a talented player and only 22, so in the current market it seems about right, I'd maybe drop it by 10 mill or so purely because of his current club situation, but I don't think 70 is outlandish. You're right in that if that is his value, we wouldn't pay that in a million years.

I never bought that him coming to Spurs was remotely realistic, tbh. Forgetting the fee there were concerns about wages, and the simple fact I didn't think United would sell to us.

 

[acnumber9]

If your income is reduced from a drop in TV money, and if at the same time you can now only sell for a big loss the players that you bought at bubble-peak prices, that outweighs any benefit from a reduced price for buying new players.

But that money was spent on money earned from when the TV money was there. If you earn £100m from TV money one year and spend it on one player and then TV money reduces to £50m the following year and that players value drops to £50m then any equivalent replacements’s value drops to that level too. The only disadvantage would be another club squirrelling that money away in case transfer fees drop meaning they have more to spend. That seems a bit silly though. In the case of Spurs, any drop in TV money will mean that money you’ve squirrelled away will be going on your rising expenses.

 

[Random Task]

At first that seems a tad steep, after all he's clearly not in a particularly good place at United at the moment, isn't signing a contract, and still has a lot to prove. Then I think about it and the fact that players like Zaha have pricetags matching or even exceeding that number, and it doesn't seem so bad .. especially in terms of if you were selling to a rival team. He's still very obviously a talented player and only 22, so in the current market it seems about right, I'd maybe drop it by 10 mill or so purely because of his current club situation, but I don't think 70 is outlandish. You're right in that if that is his value, we wouldn't pay that in a million years.

I never bought that him coming to Spurs was remotely realistic, tbh. Forgetting the fee there were concerns about wages, and the simple fact I didn't think United would sell to us.

69 Million?

No, seriously. What bothered me most about the potential transfer of Martial to Spurs was the Poch factor. I'd bet my right arm that Poch would get the best out of Martial and turn him into a superstar. I can't help but wonder if Woody felt the same way. Perhaps I'm thinking too much from a fans perspective, I don't know.

*edit*

Sorry I had a meltdown moment with my laptop. Must stop drinking.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

69?

ayyyyy

 

[GlastonSpur]

Arguable that. Toby wasn't really much of an asset last season, if he's still at odds with the club then Pochettino won't want to be playing him regularly, so Sanchez/Vert will still probably be our first choice partnership. Potentially there's an agreement and Toby will knuckle down for this season, but it's always awkward having a player you know will be leaving soon, hardly going to be a favourite of a manger who demands 100 percent commitment. Martial and Jose don't seem to have a very good relationship and I don't think he really suits their style of play, but he still scored 9 and got 5 assists in the league for them last season, so there's always the chance (however slim) he'll get his arse in to gear for them, he's certainly capable.

Toby gives us the option of playing with a back three: Sanchez - Toby - Verts. This an option we don't really have without him unless we take Dier out of the DM position, and even then it's a worse back 3 than with Toby.

Playing with a back 3 suits us because it enables Trippier and Davies to get forward as wing backs much more than otherwise ... seeing as they don't have a huge amount of pace to get back and cover, their need to do so is much reduced with a back 3 behind them. In addition, they can also they can then also take part in a 'midfield' role much more, giving us more scope to outnumber the oppo midfield.

We played with a back 3 a lot before Toby got injured and then looked likely to leave this summer. So I wouldn't be at all surprised if this season we reverted to that formation now that he looks to be staying.

Martial would have provided competition for Son and some type of cover for any Kane injury. He may even have forced his way into a starting spot - who knows. But I still see having Toby in our starting XI as a more of an asset this season than Martial's arrival would have been.

 

[acnumber9]

Most clubs also aren't actually interested in selling their best assets nowadays either, even mid table teams are able to keep hold of their best players. They arne't purchasing with a view to selling on for a big fee later, they're buying to stay competitive in the league and continue to benefit from TV money etc.

That would be my thoughts on it too. I hate hearing people talk about resale value. It should never be a consideration for a football fan.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

How realistic even is it that the bubble is going to 'burst' ? I know you said you had some articles etc to share Glaston, I'd genuinely be interested to read them. To me it seems like the money in the sport is only going to increase, with new markets still to be explored etc, at least for the forseeable future it looks to me like we're set for transfer fees etc to get progressively more ridiculous.

 

[Cheesy]

At first that seems a tad steep, after all he's clearly not in a particularly good place at United at the moment, isn't signing a contract, and still has a lot to prove. Then I think about it and the fact that players like Zaha have pricetags matching or even exceeding that number, and it doesn't seem so bad .. especially in terms of if you were selling to a rival team. He's still very obviously a talented player and only 22, so in the current market it seems about right, I'd maybe drop it by 10 mill or so purely because of his current club situation, but I don't think 70 is outlandish. You're right in that if that is his value, we wouldn't pay that in a million years.

I never bought that him coming to Spurs was remotely realistic, tbh. Forgetting the fee there were concerns about wages, and the simple fact I didn't think United would sell to us.

I dunno, much as I could see Martial fetching that in normal circumstances, a key part of any player price-tag is ultimately the extent to which the club is willing to sell/needs to sell. While I'd imagine we do value Martial, we've shown we don't necessarily see him as pivotal to our side, which automatically knocks a bit off any realistic asking fee.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

No, seriously. What bothered me most about the potential transfer of Martial to Spurs was the Poch factor. I'd bet my right arm that Poch would get the best out of Martial and turn him into a superstar. I can't help but wonder if Woody felt the same way. Perhaps I'm thinking too much from a fans perspective, I don't know.

I always thought that Martial's somewhat lazy style of play at times, particularly in terms of off the ball movement, would be a worry in a Pochettino team. Son and Lamela are generally our favoured wide players, and they both work like hell and that's very important to Poch. That said, he's the kind of manager who is capable of getting players to give 100%, so it's entirely possible he could have got that from Martial and if so I think he would have turned out brilliantly for us.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Not quite the same thing is it. Martial is highly talented forward whose market value is significantly more than Spurs could afford. Toby, who was to be the paperweight in this deal, is in the twilight of his career, coming off the back of an injury-plagued season with Spurs and a below average world cup campaign. The deal would have been far riskier for United than it would for Spurs, thus not acceptable to Woody.

Spurs couldn't feasibly afford to buy Martial outright, but that should not stop Levy from making a profit on Toby given his clubs current financial situation. His greed will end up costing Spurs a large sum of money and in the process forced his manager to work with an unhappy player. Bad move in my opinion. You could even go as far as calling him both selfish and childish.

All this ignores the fact that (a) we haven't strengthened a rival; (b) we retain one of the best Prem CBs for another season; (c) that United also have to now work with an unhappy player in Martial; and (d) that Martial's sale price now drops for next summer because of his contract running down further.

I don't see how all this equates to a 'bad move' in not selling Toby to United. And besides, we'll still more than double our money if he's sold next summer.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

I dunno, much as I could see Martial fetching that in normal circumstances, a key part of any player price-tag is ultimately the extent to which the club is willing to sell/needs to sell. While I'd imagine we do value Martial, we've shown we don't necessarily see him as pivotal to our side, which automatically knocks a bit off any realistic asking fee.

Yeah, this is very true, the fact it's publically known that Martial isn't 'first choice' and doesn't really seem to want to stay would definitely impact his price. I think if you sold to another Premier League club though you'd still be demanding a fee in that area due to the risk factor of him coming good, if you were selling to a European club I could see him going for somewhere in the 40-50 range.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

That would be my thoughts on it too. I hate hearing people talk about resale value. It should never be a consideration for a football fan.

With the money in football (and especially the Premier League) it's really not usually worth selling your stars. I talked quite a bit about this, but would it really have been worth it for Palace to sell Zaha, even for 60-70m? The likelihood of them being relegated is far higher if they lost him, and then they've lost that money and could realistically face years in the championship. Trying to remain a competitive side is more important to most teams than making a quick buck off player sales.

 

[GlastonSpur]

But that money was spent on money earned from when the TV money was there. If you earn £100m from TV money one year and spend it on one player and then TV money reduces to £50m the following year and that players value drops to £50m then any equivalent replacements’s value drops to that level too. The only disadvantage would be another club squirrelling that money away in case transfer fees drop meaning they have more to spend. That seems a bit silly though. In the case of Spurs, any drop in TV money will mean that money you’ve squirrelled away will be going on your rising expenses.

It's silly to base your argument on a selling price drop for a single player bought at market-bubble peak price. The point is that some clubs will have several such players, so if their sale prices all drop by £50m, you lose £50m from the drop in TV income (in this hypothetical example), plus (for some clubs) multiples of £50m on the sale value of their players.

It's a bit like buying a house: if you buy at the top of a market that then collapses, you've still got to pay back the large debt incurred in buying it, but can't sell except at a huge loss. Of course you can buy a new house at the lower prices, but the much-reduced sale price of the old house might not even cover what you still owe for buying it in the first, never mind allow you to buy a new one.

And if at the same time your salary/wage is cut (the TV money drop equivalent), the picture is not rosy.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Toby gives us the option of playing with a back three: Sanchez - Toby - Verts. This an option we don't really have without him unless we take Dier out of the DM position, and even then it's a worse back 3 than with Toby.

Playing with a back 3 suits us because it enables Trippier and Davies to get forward as wing backs much more than otherwise ... seeing as they don't have a huge amount of pace to get back and cover, their need to do so is much reduced with a back 3 behind them. In addition, they can also they can then also take part in a 'midfield' role much more, giving us more scope to outnumber the oppo midfield.

We played with a back 3 a lot before Toby got injured and then looked likely to leave this summer. So I wouldn't be at all surprised if this season we reverted to that formation now that he looks to be staying.

Martial would have provided competition for Son and some type of cover for any Kane injury. He may even have forced his way into a starting spot - who knows. But I still see having Toby in our starting XI as a more of an asset this season than Martial's arrival would have been.

That's true, will be interesting to see if we continue with the back three. You're right that it definitely suits a number of our players (Trippier especially, who thrived at WB for England but struggles a bit at fullback with the defensive side of the game) and because we have 3 excellent central defenders at the club who compliment each other well, if Toby is motivated. Will be interesting to see if Pochettino goes back to it, honestly thought we had seen the last of the formation but it's true that if Toby genuinely is prepared to knuckle down this season, it may be worth giving it a go again.

I'm not sure I agree that Toby would have been more of an asset than Martial, though. Having another dangerous attacking player in the arsenal could have been crucial for earning another few points in games where we're struggling to break down sides, and also would have been very good cover for when Son's out for the Asian Games. It's perfectly realistic that Martial forces his way in to the starting XI too, and because of his ability to play striker it would have been good cover for both the wide and central attacking roles. Overall, very handy player to have around the club, especially with a manager like Pochettino who gets the best out of his semi-decent attacking players.

 

[GlastonSpur]

How realistic even is it that the bubble is going to 'burst' ? I know you said you had some articles etc to share Glaston, I'd genuinely be interested to read them. To me it seems like the money in the sport is only going to increase, with new markets still to be explored etc, at least for the forseeable future it looks to me like we're set for transfer fees etc to get progressively more ridiculous.

Here's one, for example, dated last summer: https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrew...ionary-bubble-and-it-will-burst/#5f7443a1188b

 

[acnumber9]

It's silly to base your argument on a selling price drop for a single player bought at market-bubble peak price. The point is that some clubs will have several such players, so if their sale prices all drop by £50m, you lose £50m from the drop in TV income (in this hypothetical example), plus (for some clubs) multiples of £50m on the sale value of their players.

And all their replacements will drop in price too. I simplified it to one for illustrative purposes. The principles remains if it’s one player or ten players. Selling prices dropping means buying prices drop.

 

[mikey_d]

I dunno, much as I could see Martial fetching that in normal circumstances, a key part of any player price-tag is ultimately the extent to which the club is willing to sell/needs to sell. While I'd imagine we do value Martial, we've shown we don't necessarily see him as pivotal to our side, which automatically knocks a bit off any realistic asking fee.

For us to replace martial with someone of a similar profile, young and talented who's probably good for about 10 goals a season we would be spending st least 80-100 million in today's market. clubs are quoting us 60-70 million for 28-29 year olds who have a similar output, so i don't think a valuation of 70 million is too high, if martial was playing regularly to the level he was before we signed sanchez(and then lost his position) we would be talking valuations much higher.