Scott Parker once won player of the year. I wouldn't place too much stock in the result of a popularity contest.
The Spurs thread | 2016-2017 season | Serious thread - wummers/derailers will be threadbanned
- Thread starter baanke laal
- Start date
- Status
It's a popularity contest that heavily favours English players as well, which further highlights why it means little when comparing Martial and Alli.
It's pretty amazing how Pochettino has bought every player in his Spurs squad and hasn't had to rely on any players from the reigns of the previous 3 managers.
Barkley and Butland nominated ahead of Martial should show that but clearly not for some.
Janssen plays so much like Kane. I am suprised they did not sign a player who offered something different. Perhaps his evaluation and potential was too tempting to ignore. Nevertheless, on a different subject, Edwards looks like another player that Pochettino might develop into a proper footballer.
You miss the point. There is more of a committee structure for transfers at Spurs than exists at United, which makes more likely a greater continuity of transfer and youth development strategy across managers. Hence Lloris, Walker, Rose, Vertonghen, Eriksen, Lamela, Dembele and Kane (eight players), who all pre-date Pochettino, will be part of our first XI going into this season.
Pochettino arrived at Spurs at the same time as LvG, yet how many of United's pre-LVG first XI players will still be in your first XI when the current window has closed? Two or three?
At United more power has been concentrated in the hands of individual managers, which, combined with a cheque-book approach to transfers, has resulted in much less continuity and more chopping and changing.
Moreover, and outside the first XI, by the end of this window a large proportion of the Spurs squad will have been shaped during Pochettino's reign - certainly a bigger proportion than United's non-first XI squad was shaped by either Moyes or LvG or will have been shaped by Mourinho come the end of this window.
All in all it's fair comment to say that United's squad is much more of a mish-mash compared to the situation at Spurs.
They're a good side who play attractive football, as seen last year, but the fact is they finished on 70 points, which was their average points finish in the past 5 years.
They'll finish on similar points, and where they finish depends if the teams around them have below par seasons like last year.
They'll finish on similar points, and where they finish depends if the teams around them have below par seasons like last year.
As you stated talk is cheap. Why not wait for season to restart and leave the talk on the pitch instead? Nothing both of us talk now would make any different. Thing can go both ways: newly assembled team slow start like you said, and settled team lost their previous momentum and underperform.
Because this is a forum for talk. Do you want to it shut down in between seasons?
So you want to talk but everyone else's talk is cheap, but not yours?
Tell you what big managers can quickly boost a newly assembled team, especially one who has more control in transfer.
There were bunch of settle teams who were not able to put on any improvement at all. Don't need to look far, look at Arsenal.
That's not even remotely what I said and you know it.
Yes, a manager can try do what you've said, but that doesn't mean they'll necessarily succeed. They might, they might not.
As for the Arsenal comment, if they didn't improve then at least they didn't slide like some other teams. Moreover, Spurs having a settled first XI is not the sole reason I've given for expecting them to do well this season - it's also that it the first XI contains several players who, due to their young age, are likely to improve further, whilst also containing no players who are past their best.
You could have said the same about Arsenal for the last decade. What good has it done them?
As already stated, age is not a certain way to guarantee further growth.
Difference between young good stable Wenger's Arsenal back then and SAF's young United: Wenger lacks winner to guide the team. SAF always have former winners (not necessarily young) to to blend with even younger one. Similar with Bayern, Barcelona.
It can go both way so I don't cheaply talk up or down any team here.
Pre-LVG, we'll have De Gea, Valencia, Smalling, Jones, Carrick, Mata, Lingard and Rooney in or around the first team (5-6 starters as things stand). Fellaini and Young likely to be squad features. Then if you include youth players who were somewhere in the system prior to LVG it's many more - Rashford, CBJ, Pereira, TFM etc. So at least an entire team's worth of players who pre-date LVG at the club. Your argument falls down at the first hurdle.
You make it sound like this structure at Spurs has been a success. It's fair to say Spurs transfer activity over the last 7-8 years has been average at best, and downright shoddy most of the time. Hence why you've spent a fortune (gross before you get out your net spend table) and only have a handful of decent players from it.
For all the structure, the shaping, the supposed continuity and youth development strategy, there's a fairly mediocre 70 points and zero trophies to show for it. Forgive us for being unimpressed.
Well, there are no guarantees in football, but then I've not said that there are.
Thought you were arguing with yourself for a minute there Glaston only to realise it was someone on ignore. Thought you'd finally snapped in here. 
FYI Edwards looks like a player!
FYI Edwards looks like a player!
Or suffer fluctations in form, which are also quite common for young players. Talent development is not a gradual line, there are often bumps and setbacks involved.
Even the settled team argument is a double edged sword. It surely helps with mechanisms, cohesion and tactics inside the team, but without enough new impulses a team can also become too settled, which negatively effects the team´s overall performance.
IMO, the thing that can make or break Tottenham´s season will be the CL. Unless the qualification phase goes really favourable for the Spurs, they will find themselves in pot 3, which will very likely mean two strong opponents in the group stages already. Here lies the main difference to the last season where they could get away with resting key players in the group stage vs. less stellar competition. In the CL they basically have to field the best team they can muster which will put the depth of the squad to a hard test in the other matches. Even then the lack of experience due to the overall young age can easily break their necks as on that International stage composure and cleverness play as much of a big role as the quality of play.
Success in the CL can be a great confidence booster, but failure there can also affect the domestical performances. Here Chelsea and Liverpool, two of the clubs, which will probably be in direct competition with the Spurs have also the advantage of being able to fully concentrate on the league and national cups.
Tottenham is in for a pretty tricky season, especially if they stay that quiet in the transfer window and don´t bring in additional players, who can put pressure on the starters and replace them with a smaller difference in quality.
"In or around" is not the same as actually being in the first XI. Jones won't be, nor will Lingard. And nor will both Mata and Rooney (one of them might be, but probably not) - not when you're apparently about to sign Pogba and have already signed Mkhitaryan. Carrick might be, but then it's more likely that Schneiderlinn will finally supercede him. So your "5 - 6" first XI players in truth becomes probably just 3 - De Gea, Valencia and Smalling - or 4 at a stretch.
That's 3 (or maybe 4) compared to eight players at Spurs who pre-date Pochettino and are now in the first XI. Moreover, Valencia (one of the 3) is something of a makeshift RB that many United fans want to see replaced. So, far from falling down, my "settled continuity" argument clearly stands.
I don't have to "make it sound like" the transfer structure at Spurs has been mostly a success - it obviously has been. Or would you like to compare the total cost in transfer fees and annual wages of Spurs' first XI with that of United's this coming season? At a very rough guess I'd say a 1 to 5 ratio might not be too wildly wrong.
The comment that Spurs "have spent a fortune" is laughable. Only net spend counts - otherwise you are only looking at half of the financial equation. Otherwise you might as well try and say that 10 = 1, when actually it's 10 minus 9 that equals 1.
Last edited:
Thought you were arguing with yourself for a minute there Glaston only to realise it was someone on ignore. Thought you'd finally snapped in here.
FYI Edwards looks like a player!
Ahh, the perils of ignore. Luckily so far I've only felt moved to do that once on here - with some Putin-worshipping guy in the violence-at-the-Euros thread.
Yes, he did look pretty good in his 2nd half appearance today, especially given that he's only 17. He's been promised some first team football this season apparently, so we'll have to see how he gets on.
Yes, I agree with all this. But if we are in Pot 3, then I imagine that many of the Pot 2 clubs will be very much hoping that their group does not end up including Spurs.
Of course no one wants tough fixtures, however, when they're forced to do business then Tottenham would be less favorite than the like of Dortmund, Atletico (only 2 I can recall) in Pot 2.
Your argument can be used for Pot 4 AS Roma (if they get qualified for group stage). Not many/ if any at all Pot 1 & Pot 2 teams would fancy having Roma to toughen the group games, yet the Pot 1 & Pot 2 are still likely more of favorite to go to knock out stage than Pot 4 Roma.
Last edited:
Football is a squad game, especially at the top level. As things stand, most of those I mentioned are likely to play 30+ times. A number of the players you mentioned will also (and have also) spent time outside the first 11 for Spurs. If almost an entire team's worth of players pre-dating LvG are likely to play 30+ games, it's fair to say there's a high degree of continuity there.
I'm still not buying it on your transfer structure. Don't think it's done you any favours over the last 4 managers.
Look for yourself - http://www.transferleague.co.uk/tottenham-hotspur/english-football-teams/tottenham-hotspur-transfers
More failures than successes every year including quite a number of disastrous windows.
And of course gross spend matters. It's what you're actually bringing into the team i.e. how smart have you been with the cash coming in. Just because you sold Bale for £90m and bought a load of shit for £60m, doesn't make the load of shit any less shit. If you'd spent that money smartly, you'd maybe have more than a 70 point season and zero trophies to cling to.
I think some are a little confused with the signings Spurs have made and our "intent".
What I think the real debate is stemming from is the difference in philosophies between the two clubs.
Man United are in a position where they have to re-solidify their status as a top club at almost all costs after 3 poor years. Spurs are in a position where they're looking to build the infrastructure (training ground, stadium, style of play, scouting, etc.) and grow steadily and organically. United fans are therefore looking at signings who will go into the first 11 as a measuring stick. Spurs fans have to wait until the season progresses to see how the young players develop and how the "depth" signings contribute as the measuring stick.
For example United are signing Ibrahimovic in an attempt to improve the starting 11, but it will push young players like Rashford to the bench. Spurs on the other hand are looking to continue playing and developing their young under 25 players like Kane, Dier, Alli, Eriksen, Lamela, etc. and therefore don't want to make signings that push them to the bench so they can rot, and will therefore take the lumps of having a less experienced side. They simply want to bring in some further young players to push them and hopefully uncover another gem. The Spur's veterans are hard to improve upon, they had the tied best defense with Lloris, Rose, Vertonghen, Alderweireld, and Walker contributing extremely well and Dembele had one of the best seasons for a midfielder in the entire league.
The fact is Spurs starting 11 had a fantastic season. Best GD in the league, tied best goals against, second best goals for, most shots on target, least shots conceded, etc. improving upon that with an obvious "world class" signing would require money that we simply do not have to spend. That said we've consistently brought in players like Alli or players up through the academy to contribute in ways no one expected.
What I think the real debate is stemming from is the difference in philosophies between the two clubs.
Man United are in a position where they have to re-solidify their status as a top club at almost all costs after 3 poor years. Spurs are in a position where they're looking to build the infrastructure (training ground, stadium, style of play, scouting, etc.) and grow steadily and organically. United fans are therefore looking at signings who will go into the first 11 as a measuring stick. Spurs fans have to wait until the season progresses to see how the young players develop and how the "depth" signings contribute as the measuring stick.
For example United are signing Ibrahimovic in an attempt to improve the starting 11, but it will push young players like Rashford to the bench. Spurs on the other hand are looking to continue playing and developing their young under 25 players like Kane, Dier, Alli, Eriksen, Lamela, etc. and therefore don't want to make signings that push them to the bench so they can rot, and will therefore take the lumps of having a less experienced side. They simply want to bring in some further young players to push them and hopefully uncover another gem. The Spur's veterans are hard to improve upon, they had the tied best defense with Lloris, Rose, Vertonghen, Alderweireld, and Walker contributing extremely well and Dembele had one of the best seasons for a midfielder in the entire league.
The fact is Spurs starting 11 had a fantastic season. Best GD in the league, tied best goals against, second best goals for, most shots on target, least shots conceded, etc. improving upon that with an obvious "world class" signing would require money that we simply do not have to spend. That said we've consistently brought in players like Alli or players up through the academy to contribute in ways no one expected.
80% for no? Wow
Meh Ibra wont be playing 50 games a year and even though Jose (for me anyway) still needs to prove he can rely on youth I still think Rashford is talented enough to take playing time.
Still waiting for a Spurs fan to post their '2nd Team'. Spurs got away with it on the injury front last season, this season they may not and a strong squad will be key. @GlastonSpur ?
Walker won it in 2011-12 when Aguero won the league for City. That's how important the award is.
His point doesnt even make sense. He is just setting arbitrary number to prove something. If he wants Pre LVG number then how many of the spurs players were from Pre AVB? Just like ManUtd team, Spurs team was signed by 2-3 managers.
Also Post Moyes ManUtd tried to changed whole squad and that's the reason for huge number of signings and releases. It's not surprising there aren't many players in the 11 from Pre LVG days.
Most of the Spurs players are not a properly planned signings, just a scatter gun approach and thankfully for them their manager made them to tick.
Not saying you did, just that having a young squad doesn't mean much unless it has a Messi or a Ronaldo in it in their prime.
Didn't Giggs win it once when everyone, even on the caf, agreed that he didn't really deserve it that season.
No you haven't.
Alli is the only player 'like Alli' who you've signed. No one else comes close to fitting that mould.
Kane and Dier are about the only academy players you've brought through who are worthy of mention in the last number of years.
Hell knows you try to milk those 3 for all they're worth though.
Dier grew up in Portugal. They signed him when he was 20 and was already a starter for Sporting.
They signed Dier from Sporting Lisbon a couple of years ago I think, so he's not an academy player.
The only real academy player in their first XI at the moment is Kane. There are probably a couple more knocking around in the squad, like Mason.
I suppose you could look at Bale as an 'Alli like' player/signing. Their success rate is still fairly low though. Remember people like Dawson, Reid, Gunter? They used to hoover up players and hope a few would prove themselves useful.
For every Ronaldo there's a Nick Powell or 3. It's the same at every club.
Dier, they signed from sporting. Apart from Kane none of their academy players played any significant mins in the league. One more myth that spurs promote their academy players. They just take punt on many younger players, one or two will stand out.
He did. It was more of a lifetime achievement award.
All spending is net spend. It's you not looking at the whole financial equation.
Christ, don't be so precious.
So, your reasoning for not signing higher level players is that your younger players will suffer under lack of game time? You do know for how many games you will be in this season, right? There will be plenty of opportunites to play and develop even with a broader squad. Furthermore, in general we don´t talk about teenagers here, who might be needed to be included mainly for the sake of development. Most of your young players are in their early twenties, so at a point in their careers when they should start to be able to put their foot down and play because of form and performances and not because the lack of serious alternatives.
If you follow this strategy you will run into two problems. The first is a high vulnerability to injuries. The weaker your options of cover, the higher the impact of injuries of key players. A longterm injury of Kane or Eriksen for example could ruin your whole season.
The second problem is the need to prioritise certain competitions. This could already been seen last season. In the EL the moment you ran into the first real CL calibre team, you threw in the towel, fielded a team with basically no chance of victory to concentrate on the league. Now, this might work for the EL as the competition is not regarded that highly in GB, but this won´t fly in the CL. The Champions League is in the eyes of most players the most prestigous and hardest competition, the biggest stage in Club Football.
If Tottenham does not sign at least two or even three potential first team players, I can see Pochettino running into quite the dilemma this season. Concentrating on the CL could lead to problems in the league which the Spurs can´t really afford given the competition for the Top 4, putting a higher focus on the EPL could lead to an early end in the CL, which could also discourage key players in staying longterm.
Absolutely this.
Spurs have several young players that had seasons beyond anyone's expectations. The likes of Alli, Dier and Kane particularly, the latter not necessarily over-performing compared to the previous season, but certainly hitting a consistency for a long and arduous run of games that was unexpected and understandably collapsed towards the end of the season.
You then have a group of player's that regardless of age seemed to have a surprisingly good season: the likes of Dembele, Lamela, Rose and Walker. These were players that before last season had proven themselves beyond doubt to be decent squad options at best but randomly upped their performances to that of good first team players.
Then you finally have the fact that their first choice team didn't have difficult CL fixtures mid-week to deal with (their best player's often being rested in the EL) and only a handful of games in the domestic cup competitions (Kane starting only 6 none PL games for instance).
Next season will be a completely different proposition. Spurs are banking on all of their young players not only doing what young players don't tend to do: keeping consistency, but also improving on consistently good performances. They're also banking on injuries being very kind as they were last season and the addition of 3-4 squad player's being able to fill the shoes of their top performers last season when they are rested.
It's a hell of a lot of "ifs" and a hell of a risky gamble in my view. Although it's a gamble they have no choice but to make given their stadium finance commitments. The only other option would be selling Kane for c. £100m and bringing in four £30m players to build a better squad (although judging how they used the Bale money this would be a catastrophe).
I was really hoping this was being sarcastic but having read other posts I've come to the conclusion that you were being serious.
This thread has many terrible posts by United fans but congratulations on being the top worst post.
See above.
I was being sarcastic.
- Status