Transfer Rumours transfer thread fact and fiction

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Not sure about that. Past form in football is generally the best measure/ indicator for future performance, especially if that past form is spread over years and not just a recent period which would indicate a rare purple patch.

Would you rather have Haaland or Richarlison up front for your team? What would then be the reason for your pick if not based on their past?
It's the second half of your first sentence that describes what most fans get wrong. They confuse form with class based on too little data. But when the gulf is as big as that between Haaland and Richarlison almost any indicator will agree on who is the better player.
 
Therefore we need to invest in one of the best DOFs football has to offer or we will never win the league because clearly a lack of money isn't the issue.

If we sign Summerville then nothing is changing behind the scenes it seems.

ENIC are the problem.
How do you tell who the best DoF is though?
And if it's easy to tell it will be the same issue as players...a bigger club will hire him (or her). It always comes down to money in the end. ENIC's main failing is not growing the income fast enough!
 
I think we’re massively attractive, we’ve managed to hire two of the biggest managers in history in the last 5 years. Swiping through of a lot **** we’ve also signed players with good pedigree, the problem is we’ve not targeted enough of them. If we built a team of Romero’s, Bentancur’s, Maddison’s and Kulusevski’s we’d coast into top 6/ top 4 each season as a minimum. We just need to stop going for the Richarlison’s, Solanke’s and Gallagher’s, who cost us just as much yet deliver very little.
The four you mentioned have each missed about half the matches over the last two seasons though. I still think that's the main reason we've underperformed.
 
How do you tell who the best DoF is though?
And if it's easy to tell it will be the same issue as players...a bigger club will hire him (or her). It always comes down to money in the end. ENIC's main failing is not growing the income fast enough!
I think their main failing is not matching the footballing ambition with the infrastructure ambition. I think Vinai even hinted as such in his statement.

You cannot knock what they’ve done off the pitch for the most part, the training ground is probably the best in the world and the stadium is a place I hate but obviously generates a lot of money.

But when it comes to football, they've shown a real lack of ambition. Still predominantly targeting players we could’ve signed 15 years ago or who the likes of West Ham/ Everton/ Brentford etc could sign. They need to understand that whilst the Mbappe’s and Haaland’s are out of reach, there’s a bracket below that we can certainly compete in, and whilst at times we may lose out to a rival, I’d rather we compete for 10 brilliant players and sign 1 or 2 than settle on signing 5-6 mediocre players just because they were easier to sign and/ or desperate to join.
 
The four you mentioned have each missed about half the matches over the last two seasons though. I still think that's the main reason we've underperformed.
Their injuries certainly hurt, we still shouldn’t have been anywhere near where we were though. And had we had more of their calibres, we definitely wouldn’t have finished where we did.
It exposed who isn’t good enough though, so with a positive cap on, hopefully the club realise that too and execute a considerable exodus this summer. It should be the most ruthless summer window we’ll have.
 
How do you tell who the best DoF is though?
And if it's easy to tell it will be the same issue as players...a bigger club will hire him (or her). It always comes down to money in the end. ENIC's main failing is not growing the income fast enough!

For me you should look at the clubs who traditionally know how to invest their money wisely on talent and then hijack the staff.

We've got money, we should throw it in the right direction. When Pep came to City they took the whole transfer structure and personnel from Barca to help Pep find his tiki taka stars.

I don't think ENICs downfall is not growing the income fast enough I think it's about not having a clue as to how to build a squad good enough to challenge. That's a knowledge thing imo.
 
For me you should look at the clubs who traditionally know how to invest their money wisely on talent and then hijack the staff.
But there are no clubs who are the sixth wealthiest in their League who have done as well as we have over the whole period so whose staff should we hijack?
 
But there are no clubs who are the sixth wealthiest in their League who have done as well as we have over the whole period so whose staff should we hijack?

We can't sit and do nothing.

We have ironically pursued a pretty consistent strategy since moving to the new stadium which is buying a spread of mid-level established players in the hope that most will be able to raise their game after joining. We've combined this with an even wider spread of promising youngsters. Almost all of our signings fall under those two categories. Perhaps more damaging have been the panic signings which whether expensive (Simons) or on loan (Muani) have been largely ineffective.

This strategy is very different from the one that defined the early era of ENIC.

There is surely sufficient data by now to say that this strategy isn't working and needs to be rethought?
 
We can't sit and do nothing.

We have ironically pursued a pretty consistent strategy since moving to the new stadium which is buying a spread of mid-level established players in the hope that most will be able to raise their game after joining. We've combined this with an even wider spread of promising youngsters. Almost all of our signings fall under those two categories. Perhaps more damaging have been the panic signings which whether expensive (Simons) or on loan (Muani) have been largely ineffective.

This strategy is very different from the one that defined the early era of ENIC.

There is surely sufficient data by now to say that this strategy isn't working and needs to be rethought?
It might just reflect the difference in difficulty between regaining our rightful position as the fourth to sixth best team and actually making it into the top three which we have never achieved historically.
 
It's bonkers to argue that the manager should also be in charge of player recruitment. Sure they should have a voice in the conversation, but the whole point of a DoF is to have someone who doesn't have to coach and improve 25+ players over a season of 50+ games, as well as dealing with injuries, tours, and endless media duties.

Bottom line is a good manager should hardly have any time to get involved with player recruitment. He should brief the DoF on the profile he'd like to coach, and then let the latter get on with his job.

But every top manager has a big say who is recruited.
 
You keep saying the loss is down to signing players and the amount etc

You forget about prize money and European participation etc which is very damaging.
The prize money is an outcome as is European qualification. Both happen after we have spent the maximum we can without breaching the stadium covenants.
 
It might just reflect the difference in difficulty between regaining our rightful position as the fourth to sixth best team and actually making it into the top three which we have never achieved historically.

Of course it's difficult, bloody difficult especially when two of the five teams we're trying to overtake openly cheat.

But I do think a change in strategy is needed. We pursued a buy low, sell high and quick strategy from circa 2003-2013. This worked to propel us from mid table irrelevance to the top 6. The sale of Kyle Walker was the dying ember of this strategy.

This began to wind down after we sold Bale and from circa 2013 - 2019 we pursued a buy medium, sell very slow and very reluctantly strategy which worked because lighting struck twice with the combination of Poch and Mitchell building a superb team very quickly and cost effectively, which temporarily raised us into the top 4 if not higher.

Then came the new stadium. Our newfound financial power meant that our existing strategy had to morph into buy high, be unable to sell, because everyone we approached fleeced us for tens of millions more than the player was worth and meanwhile the player themselves joined on mega wages. None of these players improved us one iota. Some helped us tread water, nothing more. We also handicapped ourselves by adding to this strategy a demand that the player in question should be starry eyed about playing for Spurs. A naive and arrogant approach that completely forgot or ignored how we became a top 6 side in the first place.

This has been the case for every single big money signing we've made since 2019, with perhaps cases to be made in support of Romero, VDV, and Kulusevski.

The rest, which includes Richarlison, Simons, Solanke, Gil, Gray, Kudus, Porro, Johnson, Ndombele and Lo Celso, have had negligible impact relative to their cost to the club.
 
The prize money is an outcome as is European qualification. Both happen after we have spent the maximum we can without breaching the stadium covenants.

Well Spurs sure spent the maximum according to your figures. Yet got 17th place prize money and no European football next season.

Something dramatic has to change. Hence why I think new owners are the only answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spurlock