i'm starting to sound like my dad "i'll tell you now when i was a lad i could get a Dalglish for £440k yet these days they want £100m for Lukaku. A hundred bloody million and as for the wages . I'll tell you now the worlds gone mad and it will all end in tears"
Looks like Man Utd are playing the Mino Raiola card again. Do they actually have any other cards in their hand?
More worryingly when I look in the mirror he stares back. He's twenty one years older than me but we look like twins. I'm sure someone turned my ageing setting up to 11. Bastards!
look at it this way every time he looks at you he thinks "i look 20 years younger than my birth cert says" so its like your own little gift to him
At these prices it must be tempting for some owners to sell the whole squad and put their feet up..... Spurs squad has to be worth close to £1,000m if Lukaku is worth that. Transfermarkt claims £419m but this includes inanities like £51m for Kane and £38m for Dele which are less than half what they should be and most of the rest look very undervalued.
I don't think that there'd be much change out of £419m if someone tried to buy our defence. Probable values in millions: Hugo £50 Vorm £5 Walker £50 Trippier £40 Dier £70 Alderweireld £80 Vertonghen £30 Wimmer £15 Rose £70 Davies £40 These are complete guesses but probably quite close to what we'd want in this mental market and it's well over £419m. Insanity.
Transfermarkt has always confused me. Their statistical analysis and number crunching is generally superbly reliable and informative, but when it comes to player values they seem to be stuck in the pre-Abramovich and Mansour era. Take Adrien Silva for example: it's pretty much public knowledge that Lisbon won't answer the phone to anyone with less than £26m, yet tmarkt cites his value as £17m.
How's about this to save money.......stop all transfer fees and let the FA man pick players and their new clubs out of a hat! The mind boggles......
Leicester agree a fee of £25m with City for Itchy Nachos. Talented player who I would've like as part of a deal to take Walker there, but this piece of news highlights 2 things: 1) If City think a player who has around a dozen PL starts under his belt is worth £25m, they must be made to realise that Levy will be opening negotiations at £60m for Walker. 2) City have no intention of selling even a peripheral player to a direct rival, so why should we?
There is a Transfermarkt value. Then there is a PL "silly money" value. And on the latter, if the player is at Spurs, add some Levy tax.
What a silly thing to say. If Citeh want to buy a Spurs "peripheral" player like Sissoko, be my guest.
I think we should be prepared to sell almost any player to a direct rival at a lot more than their true value as that harms the rival and benefits us.
It doesn't if said rival is funded by leprechaun gold, as is the case with United, Chelsea and City. £20m here or there is pocket money to these people.
I agree. But that doesn't change the fact that £20m to them is a margin of error. I'd say it's a sum we can afford to absorb and cope without (as demonstrated by Sissoko costing at least £20m more than he's worth). But from Everton downwards, blowing that sum of money is crippling and represents major failings in the market.
I seriously doubt that we'll take a major loss on Sissoko. The whole transfer thing is a flawed concept though. I can see how the top 10 players in the world in each position can be very valuable, but like all other things, once you get below that it is incredibly hard to tell the difference.
I tend to agree with this. There is a caliber of player so talented that they'll improve more or less any team they're plonked into. We've rarely seen this at Spurs due to our relatively small financial clout, but occasionally we stumble across a gem in the shape of VDV, Berbatov, Klinsmann, Ginola etc. Once you get below that bracket, it becomes much more about team chemistry and specific skill sets, and hence transfer success rates become much harder to predict.
