The obvious point with waiting to pull the trigger on Mr Winning Mentality Who Wins Trophies is that Levy would have had at the back of his mind Nagelsmann telling him he didn't want to switch clubs mid-season back in 2019, so if Nagelsmann was top of the list in February (which would fit, as we had a run of losses in the league as well as limping out of the Europa League and FA Cup at the time) we would have had to have a caretaker in place for a dozen games However, why we weren't already in contact with Nagelsmann about the possibility of taking over at the end of the season to see if there was interest and, if there wasn't, get somebody else sounded out - which is exactly what I suggested at the time rather than fire with no plan in place, but that got shouted down (and I do hope the person shouting that down now isn't harrumphing multiple times a day about how stupid we were to sack a manager without a firm plan in place or anything...) when if we are looking to have a long-term strategy in place the important thing is to have the framework in place for that strategy That's why the season where Pleat was our manager for longer than Hoddle was a mess, because we had the longterm strategy in place to bring in Arnesen as DoF - but as a result we didn't want to hire a manager in the interim...and then hired Santini instead anyway
agree with above. Both Spurs and Arsenal now have the same CL record as the mighty City - the difference is that neither of us spent billions to fail like City did and we won’t spend another £500m to try again. in some ways I wish City/Chavs/PSG/Juve/RM and Barca/Liverpool/United did **** off and go to the ESL, as their spending is in a different league to the likes of the rest of us. City losing will probably prompt them to pay £150m for Kane and £100m for Grealish on top of any other transfers. Levy will get his money but it’s what you do with it that counts - look at the Bale sale proceeds as it wasn’t great. I can see a whole summer of uncertainty for Spurs whilst you try to chase down targets as the price goes up as sellers know you have the Kane money to spend.
Twenty years ago when the first round of super league threats were being made it says a lot that fans of other clubs weren't "Oh no, please, the Premier League needs Man Utd more than ever" and instead shrugged that the Premier League would be more exciting without them financially strong-arming other teams out of their way whenever they felt threatened And then along comes Uncle Roman to permanently mess up the global transfer market... And this is the issue, there's so many leagues around Europe that are anything but competitive, for example the Bundesliga has no stakes at the top of the table since Bayern are crowned champions as soon as the fixture list is released, all because money pools at a small number of clubs - and while the situation in most leagues isn't as dire as the SPL or Primeira Liga where the majority of the league are interchangeable fodder for the Old Firm or Porto/Benfica/Sporting, there is a sense of malaise that comes with following competitions and seeing the same clubs spend their way to victory every season while no pundit ever seems to suggest this is not a good thing
so a PL without City/United/Pool/Chavs would have the likes of Leicester, Everton, Spurs, us, West Ham and Villa competing on a fairly equal basis for the title - all clubs have similar income infrastructures. It’s a shame the others can’t **** off to the ESL
If anything they’ll probably have to pay more than that for Kane now. Aguero leaving and them managing just one shot on target will make them come across that bit more desperate for a top striker going into this transfer window. For all his faults of late there’s one thing Spurs fans can rest easy on and that’s knowing Levy will make it an utter nightmare for City to get Kane, so it’ll either force them to abandon the move or give in to crazy demands. Wouldn’t be surprised if we’re looking closer to £170m+ now.
Somebody I know who watches football but has no idea about it suggested we demand Foden as part of the deal Considering they wouldn't include Jadon Sancho in the Walker deal, even though he was in their U23 squad and ultimately never played for them, why would they include a player they want to base their future around in any deal? And this is the problem: not only do they want every other club's players, they don't want any club to have any of theirs that they've been stockpiling
With the amount we’d probably want I wouldn’t be surprised if they did try throwing a player into the deal. Jesus could be one, seeing as he’s arguably a third choice striker at a club that only has two of them and that won’t change if City go for Kane/ Haaland to replace Aguero.
The thing is there's a gap between players we need and players they're willing to include in a deal While Gabriel is hardly Fraizer Campbell, the obvious point is he isn't a direct replacement for Kane as he's closer in style to Jermain Defoe so he doesn't hold up the ball of link up play like Kane does, so while I wouldn't say he'd be useless having him would require us to change our entire attacking lineup Now on the one hand that could work, for example if we go 433 that means we'd have funds to revamp our midfield in order to perform in that system, and in turn we would likely bring in extra funds as there's clearly players in our squad who couldn't function in a 433, with Ndombele being the one who immediately springs to mind (what're the odds of Lyon wanting to swap Ndombele for Andersen & Aouar...anyone?), although the rumours of us looking at Watkins & Ings are less confidence-building not because either of them are bad, but that implies a whole chunk of any fee will be headed out the door without fixing other areas of the team
IMO City will pay the £150m thats been quoted, prior to losing they may have bid £100m and tried to get Kane to agitate for a move, now i think they will ask Levy what the price is and then just pay it - i don't think they are paying £170m+ though if they gave you Jesus and £120m would you take it ? who would you want to get in and who will you get in - is keeping Bale an option
Yeah I wouldn't be overly keen on him but I think he's a player City would feel is disposable, especially if it meant potentially getting Kane. My preference for a lone striker is to be in that Kane/ Zlatan/ Benzema/ Lewandowski build, the 6ft+ guys who can do a bit of everything.
No one knows what Levy's valuation actually is though. £150m is just the lazy journo figure, some have actually said not even that would tempt Levy but I think between £150m-£170m would get a deal done. I personally wouldn't take any deal, could offer me £500m and I'd still say no, with the way we've recruited in the last few years we'd sign £500m worth of flops. The club though may feel money and a player would be the best option if they agreed to sell Kane. Hard to say who I'd want to replace him. There isn't one striker that really does what he does who we could get so it'd be a case of signing 2-3 players. He's a 30+ goal a season striker that's also hit double figure assists this season. So realistically we'd probably need a 20 goal a season striker, a playmaker and probably *an other* player to chip in with a few of each to fill his void.
5 seasons at City and 3 at Bayern without CL trophy. perhaps he can only win if his team spends billions on players and is the dominant force in their league...... oh perhaps not.
Everton they are in the financially doped pot with Chavs & City and i'm amazed to find out Arsenal are skint but have outspent us (LFC) in transfers in the last 5 years by a net £150m . Our owners stick nowt in and the club gegerates its own income the reason we have done well recently isn't the amount of money spent but a team outperforming it's parts .
I think I said it before, but when it comes to 433 there seem to be a few ways it could go i.) Have an all-round striker who can score and play in teammates (i.e. Benzema at Los Ladrones) ii.) Have somebody ludicrously prolific in the middle (i.e Lewandowski for Bayern) iii.) Have a Teddy Sheringham type in the middle playing in the wide players (i.e. Firmino at Liverpool) iv.) Have three ridiculously pacy players just annihilate defences (i.e. Dortmund's front three of Haaland, Sancho and Brandt) v.) Have an attacking midfielder who can score and create in the middle (i.e. Dortmund last season when Reus was in the middle of Sancho and Hazard) If we got Gabriel we'd have the fourth version in place with Son, Lucas and Bergwijn (or we take a punt with the fifth by putting Lo Celso up front) - but we absolutely would need to rebuild our midfield as, while Skipp, Hojbjerg and Lo Celso have the combination of graft and skill to make a 433 midfield, those are the only three players who do have that because the rest only have graft (Sissoko, Winks) or skill (Ndombele) and are painfully lacking the other
Re Kane. IF we have decided to sell I think the following has to happen: 1. It is made clear that there is a deadline of a month or three weeks before the season starts for the sale to be done. We can not have this dragging on through the beginning of the season until the transfer window closes. That way lies complete carnage. 2. If we sell to United or City (can not see him going to Chelsea personally) we make it clear that we will either only take a set amount in cash end of story, or name the specific player we want and the amount of cash. For example £160m cash only...or Rashford and £80m cash (if united) or Jesus and £110m cash (if City) or Kante plus £110m cash (if I am wrong about Chelsea). We do not HAVE to sell kane. He has 3 years left on his contract. If they want him deman top money and or a player we want. None of this "United to offer De Gea and Martial plus cash for Kane" or Chelsea to offer Kepa, Alonso and Reece James plus cash" or City "to offer Ake plus cash"...we need to make it clear that their deadwood ain't coming our way. 3. That it is publicly made clear that if Kane is still here on X date then he is here for the season and any approaches will be reported as tapping up a contracted player. If they want him and Kane wants out let them get their arses in gear quickly. Finally, the next time Spurs players do this I hope we tell them to find a club who will buy them at our valuation or they'll be doing a Danny Rose and rotting their career away not being in any first team squad. Eriksen, Rose, Dier, Dele Alderweireld and now Kane have all done this or similar. We got nothing for Rose where we could have got £40m in 2017, we turned down around £50m for Dier who then tarted himself around desperately hoping to go to United...Will be lucky to get £5m for him now tbh, somehow we gave him and Alderweireld a new contracts ffs and we only got £16m for Eriksen. I ain't blaming the club, Levy or managers but with hindsight bending over backwards for them was a big mistake. In future I would prefer to sell them if they don't want to be here.
TV DelloSport claim we're doing a twofer: Antonio Conte as manager, Fabio Paratici as DoF At the very least, Paraciti is available having left Juve last week - and given he was at Juve since 2010, he has previous experience working with Conte So how's this going to work out? And overrated South Korean film as DoF?
I agree with your last point but I don't think they can be compelled to leave. They have a contract after all. In any other walk of life they could negotiate to break the contract and so could we. But the football registration system prevents that and gives rise to transfer fees. However the value of the registration seems absurd to me. We are paying Kane 250k a week? So that's £13m a year. And his contract is three years long. So we seem to value him at about £40m. A purchaser is being asked to pay £130m plus presumably higher wages for longer so they have to think he is worth 4 or 5 times as much as that. How can that possibly be right?
Player plus cash deals almost never happen, in fact I can not recall one ever but may be wrong. In any case, players that our PL rivals are willing to lose should not be considered good enough for Spurs, the goal has to be to have us up there challenging them, not taking their cast offs in part exchange for our Talisman and England captain. If we are serious about building a winning team, then we should not be selling Kane to a PL club at any price, IF it must come to that, then he should not be sold for less than £200m, sell him abroad for less (with a buy back option) if he is hell bent on leaving.
I don’t necessarily think that’s a good model of valuation for a player. It makes sense that it would be, but I don’t think it is. Football isn’t so easily compared to other businesses because the intensity of focus on specifically 11+1 employees at any one time is so key, when it comes to performance.
