But we have not spent any cash on a net basis so if all the players are fairly valued our team should be no better. So why is it a disaster if we perform the same as before?
Don't get me wrong, I think Spurs have done well this window to get the players that they have. Soldado and Paulinho are quality additions, the others not so much, but decent squad players. You've done well to get your business done before selling your best player, a tip we could learn from. But overall I think the players you've bought are overpriced and the total spend, regardless of where it came from is an eye watering amount to splash out in one transfer window. But there's no way you can tell me that spending 1OOm and finishing outside the top four is good business.
So I go back to my earlier post - if you lost £100m of players and then replaced them - you would expect to be better afterwards because 'you spent £100m'? All we've done is restructure our squad without any net spend - if we've done that well it should leave us better off, if we've done it neutrally we should be exactly the same standard as before. I happen to think we've done it amazingly well and we should get top 4 but it's not the same as City or Chelsea who have a high net spend so should have got better.
True in principal but when you're getting soooo much money for one player, you'd have thought overall you'd be better off with 3-4 very good additions to balance the team and squad. As it stands, anything but top 4 is a failure for Spurs given Arsenal's lack of signings.
BREAKING NEWS Tottenham continue their spending spree with the signing of Erik Lamela from AS Roma. https://twitter.com/SpursOfficial/status/373444642198405121/photo/1. Super signing and a player of top quality. Only problem is he's gone to our much loved rivals.... On a more serious note, will he feature against us in the NLD?
BREAKING NEWS Gareth Bale agrees personal terms at Real Madrid ahead of his world record move from Tottenham. However, the Spanish giants are still in discussions over the fee with a bid of £86m already submitted to Spurs. "While discussions in Madrid have taken some days, it's important to stress this was always a formality," says BBC chief sports correspondent Dan Roan. Man you have to take your hat off to Levy and admire his business dealings. He has strung one of the biggest and richest football clubs all the way till the end, making sure his team is properly strengthened. With a defender and an attacking player already signed up, they are looking into signing one or two more. Damn.
This is the difference. The spuds told us that they weren't a one man team, so relatively they should in theory have added to the overall quality by adding 5-6 new players ..... or is it that those 5-6 players equate to the contribution of one Bale? It's either or, not both. For the money, I think 100m is a huge amount of outlay, regardless of where the cash came from. I'm frustrated that we've not spent a penny yet, but honestly, if we'd spent 100m on the squad then I would certainly be expecting us to improve on our position from last season.
You will have to wait and see. The pressure is now on AVB to deliver. If he does then he'll be the new Messiah, if he fails then he'll be sacked. No more excuses for Spurs now, they have a fine squad of players and the least they should achieve is Champions League.
But you said we were a one man team - so presumably you think Bale is worth £86m and we have not strengthened at all......
No, I said that spurs fans were saying that you weren't a one man team, so the 5-6 additions should improve your squad and league position.
They always seem to find a way to **** it up in hilarious fashion. We've had Lasagne-gate, Fulop-gate and last season Sugar-gate. Will this season be 100m-gate ?
He's eligible, apparently. Makes you wonder why we're stringing out these transfer announcements really, but I don't really care as long as we get them done. Wouldn't expect him to start, but he might make the bench.
So what do you think? Is Bale worth £86m in which case we've not strengthened or is he worth a lot less, and if so how much? In other threads you've already said that we've overpaid for our signings, and that Bale and Walcott are comparable, and that Bale saved our mediocre team on his own last year so I'm just checking how many more contradictions your logic involves.
I'm sure Baldini is getting the best possible deal done. He'll already had one game this season for Roma in the league, so he is technically fit. So AVB may just stick him on the bench. He is too much quality not to stick on the bench on such a big game.
