Or United are about the spend the same as Spurs spent on Soldado, Lamela, Paulinho & Son.
The Spurs thread | 2016-2017 season | Serious thread - wummers/derailers will be threadbanned
- Thread starter baanke laal
- Start date
- Status
Or United are about the spend the same as Spurs spent on Soldado, Lamela, Paulinho & Son.
Hopefully United won't be jealous, because then they'll continue along the same disastrous path you've followed since Fergie stepped down.
True ... if you translate "about the same" into "ignore the odd £20m or so." And even then, Lamela is in our first XI and deservedly so, whilst the others are not.
I genuinely don't understand Spurs transfer policy at the moment. You've bought 1 player that will genuinely improve your squad - Wanyama. Janssen, I personally like, but not sure he will do anything as I think he'll need more regular games and you just swapped N'koudou for N'jie. I know you don't want to rock the boat too much, as you had a good spell in the league that got you in with a chance of winning it, but surely with a higher quality competition in the schedule, you'd expect more.
Are there any real concrete links to players for Spurs at the moment?
Are there any real concrete links to players for Spurs at the moment?
The aggregate value of those 4 was c. £96m (£30m Lamela, £27m Soldado, £22m Son, £17m Paulinho). The Pogba transfer certainly won't be £20m more than this.
If I were asked whether I'd prefer Lamela/Son along with two useless donkeys or Pogba, I know which I'd choose.
No, I work for a spell-checker company. Given Pogba's price tag, however, in this case I would advise the following: "ob$$e$$ion".
They'll have to scout cheap players better than the ones they have now apparently, since their money's going into the new stadium.
Fine, except that's not the real question. Would you prefer Pogba, or the entire Spurs first XI?
Or follow a path that leads to trophies if we're going to aspire to another club.
Now tell us about the astounding success of the 19 players Spurs have signed in the last three years.
We still have had more success than Spurs since then.
1 FA and once qualified for the CL.
Spurs have won nothing and made the CL once.
It's a stupid question because firstly: If Pogba wins a few Ballon d'Or titles in the next decade whilst being central to a team winning half a dozen PL titles as well as other trophies then of course I'd prefer him to an entire Spurs XI that won't win anything (whilst consuming 15x the wages Pogba will be on during that period). Secondly it's completely selective because as I pointed out previously: he's costing the same as Spurs paid for 4 player's that wouldn't get in the United team.
Likewise a United fan could say he's costing the same as Andy Carroll & David Luiz, but that would also be a stupid comparison.
Nothing that strong to any specific player. But Pochettino did say today that "I expect some signings in the next few weeks." So who knows, maybe he's got a surprise or two up his sleeve.
I would explain our current transfer policy as follows:
1) We have a good, settled first XI, containing a fair degree of talent. It would be very difficult (tho' not impossible) to sign a proven, definite upgrade in any position for this XI without spending a lot of money. We don't have a lot of spare money because of the need to continue funding the new stadium complex under construction. Therefore, with what spare money we do have it's been decided to focus on ...
2) Upgrading 2 or 3 (or maybe 4 or 5, who yet knows) squad cover/competition positions. Janssen was an obvious one, since we have no out-and-out striker to cover for Kane, and similarly with Wanyama for Dier. N'Koudou I don't really know about, but he seems (?) to be a good prospect and will provide cover/competition for either of the two wide attacking positions ... and hopefully prove to be an upgrade on Chadli's squad cover-role.
3) For the rest we'll continue to rely on bringing another 3 or 4 academy/youth players further in the senior squad (e.g. Marcus Edwards, Carter-Vickers, Onomah, Winks) - selling some squad players (e.g. maybe Carroll, Chaldli and Bentaleb) to make room for them - and hope that 1 or 2 of these make a breakthrough.
Will it be enough to compete again for top 4 and do well enough in the CL? Only time will tell, but personally I'm content with the way things are panning out this summer at Spurs.
.
OK. They've been part of a process that led to Spurs ending up with a better first XI and squad than United's ... although that's not so astounding these days.
Yep, one 's' too many in a word for someone for whom English is only their second language, is a complete travesty. I think I should be banned from this forum as I clearly cannot spell.
How many languages do you speak fluently, out of curiosity? I assume you never make any spelling errors in any language, though.
It's only a stupid question - Pogba or the entire Spurs first XI? - because the answer is blindingly obvious ... despite your huge IF concerning Pogba and your "WON'T" concerning Spurs.
I'm pretty confident that Pogba will rapidly become seen as hugely underwhelming. He's not, for example, even half the player that Modric is, and he never will be.
You could try lightening up every now and then ... I didn't think that "ob$$e$$ion" was all that bad a joke in the circumstances.
Your English is excellent.
Out of entire Spurs XI I would maybe take Alli and Kane but they'd not come here for £110m combined.
And the last paragraph is just such typical nonsense. Who knows? He's 23.
Why can't you just talk about Spurs? This is the Spurs thread after all. Given how shite Utd have been why do you take such pride in being better than them twice in three awful years? Why can't you just answer a simple question, if Spurs recruitment has been so good why have 15 of the 19 players you signed in the last three years been incapable of breaking into your first team? Why has £140m of the £200m spent been on players not good enough?
And Spurs have had better managers than Utd for the most part. That's been the big difference rather than the players. Which is why when we had a better manager Spurs finished below us continually.
After that pogba vs Spurs 11 cost post, I'm amazed some of you still have the patience to engage Glaston. I learnt my lesson the day he said we've sold more players to Real than Spurs because we're their feeder club and not because Spurs have simply not had enough players to interest Real.
We'll see, probably a bit early for making such definitive conclusions though.
Modric and Pogba are completely different players so it's a shite comparison anyway. Not that you'd expect Glaston to grasp the nuances of football. Midfield after all isn't a net spend calculation.
Both players have skill-sets which the other lacks. Expecting Pogba to come and do what Modric does, or buying Modric and expecting him to do what Pogba does would be braindead.
I'd wager Glaston's seen Pogba play less than half a dozen times. And probably never watched him for Juventus.
Both players have skill-sets which the other lacks. Expecting Pogba to come and do what Modric does, or buying Modric and expecting him to do what Pogba does would be braindead.
I'd wager Glaston's seen Pogba play less than half a dozen times. And probably never watched him for Juventus.
Last edited:
I just wanted to be pedantic and address one thing: Nacer Chadli is definitely not a flop. He's now been demoted to being more of a bench/backup player, but he has shown that when given the playing time he will score. He scored double digit goals in 2014-2015 (more goals than anyone on Liverpool's entire team for example) and his goals per minute actually improved this year.
He's not the best tactical fit for Pochettino as he's not the best presser of the ball in the world, but the fact is he can score and assist at a fantastic rate for a non-striker/number 10 and for that I just can't fathom how he could be considered a flop.
To be fair it's based on the last season and first season - he was a bit poor fit whenever I saw him and would either be sold or benched this year. Granted the fee that Spurs paid was not that high so he's in the middle - rotational player.
Spurs are bottlers
They are the type of team to be 2-0 up against Barca in the CL final with 3 mins left to play and concede 3 goals and lose.
Finishing below Arsenal last year proves that:
They are the type of team to be 2-0 up against Barca in the CL final with 3 mins left to play and concede 3 goals and lose.
Finishing below Arsenal last year proves that:
First season yes. Last season I'd disagree, like I said he's clearly not a great tactical fit, but despite that his per minute scoring is still very excellent.
We may indeed sell him for that exact reason; Poor tactical fit, but his scoring could mean we get a high fee which is something important to us as our club revolves a lot around player trading. So while we aren't selling our top players (thank god) we still need to bring in some revenue through sales and Chadli would likely be a good way to do so.
That said I don't think that makes him a flop at all. At worst he's kept as strong rotational scoring depth, which in my mind doesn't come close to a flop label, at best we turn around and sell him for a very healthy profit to a team looking for a player who scores as much as he does from wide positions, which again doesn't deserve a flop label to me.
Of course the answer isn't blindingly obvious. The current Spurs squad have a talent cap that is somewhere around their achievements last season, usually a bit worse if other teams perform adequately, so anyone who wants to do better than Spurs did last season (which was just decent) wouldn't want to be lumbered with such a squad and would far prefer one potentially great player. Plus as I said before, it isn't an apt comparison because your entire team earns 15x what Pogba will.
Likewise it depends who you are. Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Real Madrid would choose Pogba over the entire Spurs squad... Because the entire Spurs squad have a salary bill of over £100m and would be of little benefit to any of those teams (Kane and Lloris might make their benches).
The truth is the transfer fee for Pogba is roughly 50% of United's gross profit in 2016, so Pogba at £90m for United is comparatively cheaper than Soldado at £27m for Spurs.
I was chatting with some Spurs fans at work last night and I thought, basically, 1). I did a bit of searching and saw Yunus Malli may be a bargain signing (release clause). Maybe it will be enough, i'd be comfortable with my first 11 as a Spurs fan, knowing on their day they could beat the best in the league. I'd just be apprehensive that the consistency would flow as freely as last season with the extra tournament, which you may pick up a couple of confidence denting losses. As you say though, it wouldn't really be easy to get anyone to fix that problem, so a bit of faith in Edwards and co may be the way to get round that.
Going back a couple of days here, but...
To be fair, you originally stated that "we've consistently brought in players like Alli" and when pressed for examples for named Eriksen and Lamela. Neither were anything like him. Lamela had just come off his second season as a starter for Roma, a season in which he scored 15 goals playing primarily as a right winger (and cost you £30m). Eriksen was just about to embark on his fourth season as a starter for Ajax, but only had a year left on his contract, and was keen on moving on, so you got him fairly cheaply (£11m for him was an amazing bargain, truth be told).
Point is, both were known quantities, as both were highly rated young players that most people who followed football with any kind of regularity knew of. They were already starters for fairly good teams, and I'm going to be so bold as to say that both were probably expected to be able to contribute pretty much right away (hence Lamela being labeled a flop after failing completely to do anything of note in his first season). Alli was the basically the complete opposite of that. He was a virtual unknown (though he had started to attract a little attention on account of the great season he was having), playing in League One for MK Dons, and cost you just £5m. Luckily, he adapted to the league pretty quickly. Had he not, though, it wouldn't have been that big of a deal. He was a 19 year making a big step up.
You finished a massive four points ahead of us. We still won a major trophy mind; which Spurs haven't done in nearly thirty years.
Not much of a ringing endorsement for Spurs that. Especially considering the fact that we were so unhappy with our season that we sacked our manager and all.
Has the best team in England even won a pre-season game yet?
Just imagine the arrogance if they somehow managed to win a milk cup or two.
It's true that MK Dons isn't like Roma or Ajax, but to act like he was a complete unknown after bossing Man Utd in the cup and having a fantastic scoring record at 18, even if it's in League 1, doesn't make him an unknown quantity.
Also this whole "known quantity" definition is one that people keep stamping onto what I said, even though I never said it. "Players like Alli" is what I said and by that I mean young exciting talents. Which is what Dier, Eriksen, Lamela, etc. are/were when we brought them in. I've said nothing more, just some posters want to argue semantics.
It's hilarious observing your debating strategy: you make claims that are unable to be proved currently (and as such unable to be disproved, like Pogba will flop, Pogba will never be the player Modric is etc etc) without actually having the benefit of being able to observe future performance, then you act as though your claims are, without question, correct. How can you be so sure you're correct? Do you remember Modric at 23? Pogba is better at 23 than Modric was; how on earth can you come to the conclusion that Pogba will never reach Modric's level?
You also cherry pick examples to suit your vitriolic agenda. Let's exclude all of Spurs' horrid transfer decisions, let's exclude all United's very good transfer decisions (which I believe Pogba will be), and let's create some alternate narrative where you can bash United (on a United forum... Obsessed?)
Essentially, you are accusing United of being bigger, better and richer than Spurs. Spurs will never splash 100 million quid on a footballer... Because they couldn't. Take note: most United fans on here acknowledge our current level in the footballing world: below that of the elite three of Bayern, Barca and Madrid. There are a few others ahead of us too, but it's clear we are on an upward trajectory. Why can you not show the same levelheadedness and accept that there are better clubs than Tottenham? Why is it that you can never accept that United have done something good, or Spurs have done something bad? When did humility and modesty entirely evade you?
I initially thought you were open to thoughtful debate, but the more I read your dross, the more I realise that you have some vitriolic hatred of United bordering on hilarity.
I understand your sentiment here and don't disagree, but I do slightly question the bolded bit. How can it be clear that you are on an upward trajectory when it's July 29th and exactly zero
league matches have been played?
I'm including the appointment of Mourinho, then the subsequent signings we have made (and are expected to make), while also noting the financial side of the club, which is only improving. I do agree, actual football played has to be the biggest criteria, and we got mauled by Dortmund last time out (though many factors must be considered when looking at that result), but unlike Glaston, I am making an assumption based on educated observation, rather than an emotional, hate-driven sentiment.
When you factor in how Spurs allegedly have such a better team and squad and their manager is apparently the best thing since sliced bread it's weird how there was so little difference in their points totals. It's almost as if somebody is overrating Spurs.
I get it, but to be fair even some of the things that you mention aren't givens. Mourinho is a top manager. Odds are he will be successful at United, I tend to believe that. But the most recent on-field results we've seen from a Mourinho managed side in the PL were quite poor and ended in his mid-season sacking. I'm not saying that's what will happen at United, but surely it's fair to say that him being a team's manager is not nearly as much of a guaranteed indicator of success in the Premier League as it was before last season's fiasco at Chelsea. He could get off to a great start and be a huge success in his first season. Or something similar to last season might happen again. Both are possible because both have happened in the not so distant past. Which is why I'm not sure you can say United are "clearly on an upward trajectory" and list Mourinho's appointment as one of the main factors why...at least not without seeing competitive matches from his new team, which it sounds like we both agree is the primary criteria in this debate.
I agree that in some of his posts Glaston is overrating Spurs, particularly in discussions around transfer strategy and success.
Do you think it's also the case that some are under rating Spurs just a bit? Between the predictions in the top 6 thread and the poll here (though granted it is top 4 not top 6) I've seen plenty of dismissing of a side that played some great stuff last season and, despite running out steam at the end of the season, performed well in many of the most important statistical categories. I'm not saying there isn't a chance Spurs regress this season, but some seem to dismiss altogether the idea that Spurs could actually improve. Neither scenarios are out of the question, though I'd argue improvement (in terms of performance) is maybe even likelier than the alternative, given the increased experience of the youngest side in the league and another year to learn and develop under a top manager. That isn't to say other teams won't also improve, but why is it so offensive of a claim to say Spurs might actually be better next season than they were last? Because from some of the posts I've read, many seem to find it an offensive sentiment. I just don't get that. Or is it all just down to a hatred of Glaston?
Nothing is a given. There'd be no point discussing anything if we could only speak about "givens". Mourinho may fail, but I don't believe that for a moment. Can you objectively look at our current team, and our general state as a club, and say that there aren't obvious signs that we are moving forward? You cannot also disregard Mourinho's brilliance. I'm not saying we exclude his Chelsea debacle, it's obviously relevant and worth consideration, but it's outside his norm.
We've signed* three world class players (arguably), and in Bailly, a hugely promising youngster to go with our existing youth talents. Clearly the club still has massive pull. So yes, anything is "possible", but we obviously have to weigh up the likelihood of our predictions. I'm rambling on now but essentially my point is that United are showing clear signs of improvement.
*Pogba obviously hasn't signed but it looks a certainty now.
I think a lot of people rally against the nonsense that he spouts. I actually like Spurs and have done for a long time. I just don't think the team are as good as some suggest. It's certainly a good team but I don't see it as one that's going to be challenging for the title. They'll certainly be in and around the top 6 places but I would hope in Utd's case that we'll be a lot better than last just by virtue of the fact Van Gaal is no longer there. Some areas of the team still need addressed, not least our midfield, but that seems to be happening. I'd also expect Chelsea and City to improve too. All that added with Liverpool means it's going to be tougher for Spurs next year in my opinion. I don't dismiss the idea that Spurs will be better than they were last year but it's certainly not a given. I'd be surprised if players like Walker and Rose who weren't good enough before were to improve much as there's as much chance of them reverting to prior form in my opinion. A player like Alli may find it more difficult in his second season as many do also. Him coupled with Eriksen and Kane definitely give Spurs reason to be hopeful and I'd be amazed if they didn't finish top 6 but I don't think they'll finish top 4 this year.
Glaston would get more even handed debate on here if he were to not constantly refer any discussion on Spurs to Manchester United. He was doing it when we were good too.
- Status