Realistically nothing should be holding us up with the money we’ve got sitting in the bank from Kane and I think that’s what’s pissing most off, especially as we don’t seem intent on actually trying to replace him too. It’s even worse when we know we’ve already rejected one bid for Sanchez and reports now claim a mix of we’ve rejected a second bid from Rennes or that they can’t afford our asking price - our asking price should be anything above £500k. Lilywhite Rose said we’re also pricing White out of a move too. Club needs to clear decks but keeps rejecting offers/ pricing players too high…
Yeah I just don’t get it. Why are we holding Rennes and Sanchez to ransom over 5m when we have the Kane money in the bank? Surely getting a big fee can be seen not just as an opportunity to buy but also to sell in such a way as to prioritise the future of the squad without worrying so much about finances. I’m not saying to give players away but at the end of the day the rebuild is more important than 5m when we have so much in the bank.
Atletico currently deciding on loan move with obligation to buy for Hojbjerg, according to Paul O’Keefe. We’re waiting to hear back.
Personally I’d even consider giving players away, in terms of waiving fees or accepting measly offers, as it’s better than cancelling contracts which I see us doing after today to those not shifted. A number of those we want out are genuinely horrific footballers, with Sanchez epitomising it. I thought Rennes’ first offer was more than generous at €8m, rejecting that is mental in my opinion. Any of him, Sessegnon, Dier, Lo Celso and Ndombele should be sold at the first offer, where as out of respect I think we should pay up Lloris’ final year and let him find a move that suits him but allow him to stay and train to maintain fitness. Hojbjerg is the only player on our sale list that I think we should be expecting a considerable fee for. I’d obviously sell Richarlison in a heartbeat too but I’m aware that’s not happening.
Loan with obligation is absolutely fine, loan with option and they can do one. He’s too good of a player to send out on loan with no guarantee of receiving a proper future fee, I think he’d only have a year left on his deal by then too.
1. Kane wanted to go. 2. Our season would have been dominated by Kane stories had he stayed. 3. Kane really wanted to go. 4. Ange would have had to continue to make kane the focal point of the team and then completely change things next season possibly taking us backwards whereas doing this way gives him a season to set us up like pochettino had in 14/15. 5. Kane really really wanted to go 6. I'm trying g to look on the bright side. 7. He definitely wanted to go. 8. ....
Couldn’t care less about stories in the press tbh mate. A Kane eager to leave is better than anything we can still get up top too. It was reported he would’ve been happy to stay after the first game of the season as well, one more year of Kane was better than getting £100m.
60% of transfers don't deliver good value or success. That's football. Nobody is to blame for that. Having £60m extra every year from the stadium doesn't guarantee success either but it certainly ought to make a big difference in the long run. The default option in transfers ought to be that the recruitment team might have an edge in selecting players if we are lucky but the coach almost certainly won't. Therefore paying more than our honest valuation for anyone is not a good strategy. Our most expensive signings have generally not turned out well but we are not alone in that. We shouldn't over react.
For Spurs transfers, of course? Reading about Kane wanting to leave and the press banging on about it wouldn’t have bothered me one bit if we kept him.
On a slightly different note, is anyone else already sick of hearing about is how this is a “project”. Ange is the main culprit for this wording, and I don’t blame him as he’s clearly had a brief and he’s new. But it’s a bit of a kick in the nuts to be hearing this terminology, which basically translates to “things will take time”, especially as we went through this with Poch years ago, and as fans we’re seeing the start of something new simply due to poor decision making previously. With our revenues and financial stability, we shouldn’t have to settle for something which feels like it’s going to take years to get back to where we were.
Projects can be quite short....but we will need a lot of luck to get back to the top 4 quickly given that our revenues are still only joint 4th best and Chelsea, Arsenal and Newcastle have more flexibility in their expenditure.
It was always going to take time though. Surely everyone knew that. I do think some of the quibbling over fees for outgoings has been ridiculous but the amount of turnover needed in the squad was enormous, too much for one window, and that’s before you factor in the Kane sale. It’s exactly the same as when Poch came in. Year 1 is about establishing a core and a style of play and then you move from there.
Media trained nonsense I’d imagine, mate. Same with footballers that always have the same generic answers to questions. It’s why it’s always nice - even if sometimes you don’t like what you hear - the rare times some players just openly speaking their mind. Rose got a lot of **** back in the day for some of his interviews but some of them struck some home truths, likewise with Ekotto when he said he didn’t actually like football but it was a good job, there was a bit of a media frenzy over that but a lot of fans actually respected it. Pretty sure another footballer recently said similar, just can’t remember who. I’d imagine managers are told to use specific words that the audience and fanbase can hopefully engage with on a positive note. It’s just as you’ve pointed out, we’ve heard the project stuff time and time again so it’s not really anything new. I do like Ange’s interviews and chats though, proper Aussie. I think with Spurs fans in particular, we keep being told things will take time. But when will that thing actually arrive? Case in point with this window, the narrative is we’ll need a while to sort the squad and whilst that’s true, why do we often leave transfer windows feeling we could’ve at least done a bit more? As will be the case with regarding not replacing Kane.
Hopefully we have a list of things which tend to work when we sign them Welsh wingers Croatian creative midfielders Argentine attacking midfielders Scandinavians in general Not a big enough sample size for Belgian defenders to compare, though
I think a lot of managers use it all the time to be fair. Certainly I believe Ange has a lot over the years IIRC from when I watched a lot of interviews of him when he was appointed. Poch, others use it a lot too. I think it’s one of those industry words that can be a bit meaningless when repeated so often.
