Or alternatively we suddenly had some spare budget and Sherwood/AVB found someone who could strengthen the squad at short notice (who was after all on the way to one our our rivals with a higher budget - so he must be a reasonable signing). He's done all right hasn't he - scored some crucial goals and assists or do you think Harry Kane would have done better
Dempsey may score goals, but is completely anonymous aside from that, pretty much making him the new Jermaine Jenas or Jason Dozzell from that standpoint.
Well if that is true and we've really got a good enough squad to be about level with Arsenal and Chelsea under an inept manager then someone (Levy - who apparently signs all our players?) has worked miracles over the last few years. The truth is that our squad is clearly worse than Chelsea's and about the same as Arsenal's. Levy and his previous appointees deserve credit for making that happen on a limited budget. AVB must therefore be about as good a manager as Wenger and better than Benitez. Hardly means he is clueless.
where would the sudden budget which we "just happened to notice on deadline day" have come from though, PS? The reality is the club waited and waited not showing their hand... before finally having to do something, when all else hadn't worked. I do think Levy had a right to be cautious in signings last summer, especially after AVB's Chelsea saga. - it could have been a risk. So instead, we got players in who he (and the other staff) wanted, whether AVB proved his worth or not. This is why the signings are sherwood/pleat etc, and it makes sense when you think about it. - However, not getting a striker which we'd been crying out for since berbatov, and leaving it all so late again was not acceptable. - Especially for a new coach coming in who's expected to meet the previous season's expectations. For me Dempsey represents the Tottenham of the 2006 era, or there abouts. He's a Malbranque or a Tainio. - someone who'll do a job, but won't set the world alight. The problem is that since that era, we've tasted much more with the likes of Modric, VDV and now the magnificent Gareth Bale. I knew when we signed him that he wouldn't fit. - That's the issue for me. yes, he's scored some important goals, but so much more needs to be considered in a 90 min game of football. It's all the little things that add up which can really make the difference to the team and the game overall. Dempsey doesn't do enough and often it feels like we've got 10 men. - Or perhaps he could be compared to the school playground where there was that one kid you didn't want to pass to, because you know he'll lose it. it might sound harsh, but that's how I feel when he gets the ball. We've not seen enough of Kane either, but at least he's able to play as a striker. Kane wasn't quite ready either IMO, but I wouldn't have been against him being part of the squad. Maybe we shouldn't have let him go. Dempsey was this odd signing that couldn't play in the position where we really needed him (and we knew that from Fulham), but also suffocated our width, which is where we'd been most dangerous over the years. It shouldn't have to come down to a choice between a young Harry Kane, or a "safe" and "cheap" signing like Dempsey, when the reality was that we needed (and still need) a 20 goal a season striker.
Thats not what you said in post31...I'll move on only after I've pointed out for the second time your claim in post31 is wrong, Sig did not sign 'before' AVB, you actually admit that in post33 with their joining dates. AVB persuaded Sig to sign for us over Pool which in essence makes him one of 'his' signings, that is a fact. Now we can both move on!
I agree with your overall point here, but the only thing i'll pick out is the comparison to Chels and Arsenal. - Yes, Chelsea are better. They have money galore and pump it into the team. End of. However, evidence suggests that Arsenal are better as well, I'm afraid. It's incredible how similar the two north London clubs are these days, but ultimately, Arsenal qualify for the CL every season and finish above us. As painful as it is, they've got the edge on us. - This is what frustrates me the most. We've not needed much over the last 2 or 3 years to overtake them, yet we've failed to address those weaknesses properly.
Me too Power, but I think the 'Levy panic buy' tag is just that, not the actual course of events. Demps I feel is a bit of an odd exception, his hot season with Fulham went to his head a bit imo, i read that he wanted a last chance in his career to pit himself against CL opposition (why he even entertained Pool to try and achieve that, god knows!), but having failed to rip teams in the EL, I think he's answered his own question with his performances.
Asking PNP is your best bet, there are sites that give different values, some include wages, some don't, so some can be misleading. I've seen PNP talk about this somewhere in the last few days, but not sure where now.
I mostly agree. I think what probably happened was that Moutinho was supposed to come in and used up the entire budget and we were happy with Ade/Defoe and Kane as strikers. With no Moutinho we decided to splash out a bit on Dempsey who I think is reasonable value but only a squad player. I wish we could afford players of the calibre of Van Persie and Aguero too but unfortunately we can't and that doesn't change whenever Levy shows his hand. I just don't get having a downer on Levy for signing Dempsey - either way it wasn't a big deal.
"Panic buy" says Spurs' management are incompetent, and that's just not true. All the buys are done on spreadsheets with returns on investment columns, risk matrices, depreciation sums and day-glow highlighting. The manager has his wishes, the directors and fitness coaches too. But unless you're Sheik Abramovic, you have to run a multi-million pound business the right way. Spurs have to operate this way. Dempsey would have been a cell in a spreadsheet. There would be scouting reports going back years. Sure, he wouldn't have been top on the shopping list, but I'd wager there would be a lot of ticks in the right boxes. There's no romance. It's cold and calculated.
That maybe very true inda, so in that case why did we waste £6m of our "tight" funds on Clint Dempsey? We needed a top striker and have done for some time. If ROI's and the other factors come into this, why was that money not put towards a top striker? We didn't need to buy Dempsey at all. We could have just kept Kane and saved the £6m till we had, then saved the rest up and it was all tickety-boo on the spreadsheet so we could get NEW STRIKER.
Panic buy doesn't imply incompetence, although it does imply a lack of a backup plan so the club has to rush and snap up the next best thing with less room to negotiate due to there being hours, or even minutes, to wrap up the deal. Incompetence would selling two strikers who amassed over forty goals between them by signing one and taking on a loanee to help out the club who successfully tapped up your top striker. Dempsey was snapped up because after the Moutinho deal fell through, we were unable to find a creative midfielder in time so instead went for a player who was available and at the very least bang a few goals in from midfield to make up for the lack of a creative midfielder in the short-term. Given his goal return, he comes across as a moneyball-style signing, based on statistics rather than what he adds to the team (which, other than his goals, is next to nothing) So who was the manager when Sigurdsson was in discussions several days prior? There wasn't one, yet he was negotiating with the club - who, unlike Liverpool, weren't offering him less wages than he was on at Hoffenheim. Your argument hinges on the idea that Spurs enter negotiations with a club and sign a player from them within 24 hours, which isn't the Levy way of doing things. Not when your genius youth team coach decides a better use of his time is to drop down a division to coach at Forest...
http://transferleague.co.uk/ Not entirely accurate, by any means, but it's the best there is, unfortunately. Doesn't include wages though, which is the bulk of each club's expenditure on players. This is a decent snapshot of each club as things stand: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/apr/18/premier-league-finances-club-by-club The wage bills there tell a story of what we're up against: Man City: £202, Chelsea: £173m, Man Utd: £162m, Arsenal: £143m, Liverpool: £119m, Spurs: £90m. Also gives some insight into why Moyes and Martinez are so highly rated: Everton: £63m (10th highest), Wigan: £38m (17th). All figures are for the previous 12 months, which is why the likes of Wolves appear, even though they're on the way to League 1. Arsenal are paying a million pounds a week more for an extra point, as things stand.
I don't care who the manager was, thats not what you said is it, I'm only interested in the sentence where you said Sig signed before AVB arrived...which is wrong...why would AVB persuade a player to sign who's already signed? Stop warbling hbic, move on!
Ok semantically he was wrong - the paperwork was signed after AVB arrived (apparently) but the fact that we were in advanced negotiations with him by the time ABV arrived tells you something. And he's not the only signing that's been lined up/completed whilst we were between managers. Basically a few years ago the manager was the guy who identified targets and even negotiated deals. Nowadays at Spurs it seems to be very different. Wasn't Sandro lined up before Harry joined and then signed after he had? Or was that the Kyles? Or both? Point is that Spurs managers definitely seems to have less impact/input on signings than they used to and less than their colleagues at other clubs still do.
There's been confusion in the past as to who was an X-signing and who was a Y-signing. It used to be settled thus: * If you didn't rate the player he was "a Comolli signing" * If you did rate the player he was "a Jol signing"
****ing commoli.... if ever you wanted a guy to spend millions on square pegs for round holes.... I read somewhere that we have adopted the Lyon strategy, as in not buying expensive players, strikers, world cup/Euros darlings etc. Each player is now reviewed by a few people and then it is agreed, not just by the gaffer. It is much cheaper and more effective in essence, to buy clint dempseys and gylfi sigurdsens than Hazrds, torres' and Oscars. In fact, if you compare the cost of Torres, Oscar and Hazrd vs Bale, Defoe and Dempsey against points won in the prem this season it just doesn't add up. (i'm conveniently ignoring the Europa league here)
How to spot a Comolli signing: * Massively inflated transfer fee * High wages * Only way they fit into the team is by wearing the same shirt as everyone else (barring goalkeepers) Meanwhile, the way to spot an Arnesen signing was: * They never played as Santini had the hump about other people signing players * They suddenly started games when Jol took over
