The Tottenham Hotspur "Spiral" Watch

Aurier is a classic Eboue. Quite good but too rash. If he was that good he'd have made it at PSG.

Llorente isn't worth anything to Spurs because you'd be in exactly the same position if you hadn't bought him because he's done nothing for you. Actually that's not true, you wouldn't be in exactly the same position as you are now because you'd have an extra £20m in the bank that you could spend on someone not so pointless. Sissoko is bang average. I'm not forgetting Eriksen. Of course you've made some great buys too like him. But to try and suggest Spurs haven't wasted a ton of money just based on the fact that your net spend is close to zero is ludicrous.

PS. Eriksen worth Bale? Come now. He's an attacker/wing forward who averages 7 goals a season in the premier league. He's an excellent footballer but not in the top echelons of the game and disappears far too often like Ozil.

 

If Eriksen played under a better manager like Conte or Jose he would add to that tally.

 

Eriksen has more goals for Denmark this season that he does for Spurs.

 

You’d know all about a national rim park Skiddy

 

In today’s market, if Eriksen were sold, he would go for not a million miles away from Bale’s price.

Llorente is in no way a waste of money. He’s a hugely experienced player who’s won CL titles. He’s great at holding the ball up and calming things down. Which is what he was bought to do.

Sissoko is greatly improved. No he’s not going win games, but his powerful direct running can be useful in games.

Aurier, yes I’d agree about his sometimes ‘headless chicken’ actions. But he’s clearly talented, has great pace, and if MP can improve his concentration and decision making, he’ll be well worth what we paid. PSG have enough money that they can’t be arsed trying to work and improve a player, they just go out and spend millions more on another one.

 

And if 2013 Bale were sold in today's money he'd go for about £200m.

If you say so. But why does Llorente having won the CL before for a completely different club make him a worthwhile addition to you if he never does anything for you or plays? And jeez, 'calming things down' is England manager talk for bigging up rubbish players who do nothing.

If you say so. Greatly improved from what? Not doing a lot at Newcastle to not doing a lot at Spurs?

Erm..... couldn't Spurs have tried to work on and improve Walkers-Peter rather than just go out and spend millions on Aurier?

 

Going to have to agree with Cini in parts.

1. Eriksen would go for Bale money now but only because of footie inflation, not because Eriksen is regarded as Bale (of back then)

2. Llorente so far has been a waste of money. He's not played badly when he has played but so far his contribution has been to run the clock down at the end of a game and 1 match against real. He might prove his worth if given the opportunity but seeing Poch has kept Kane on even when he's been injured, i see Llorente going down the standard Spurs reserve striker route (njie, jansen etc).

So you bought a striker to be emile heskey rather than a goalscorer? sure.... that makes sense seeing he's backup to your main goalscorer

3. Sissoko isn't even worth 30m in this stupid market. Improving from pile of dog **** to average doesn't mean he's been a good buy.

4. Aurier looks brilliant physically and technically isn't too bad. However from what i have seen he's a massive liability, whether thats diving in all the time, getting unecessarily carded or playing stupid passes (he's basically Moreno in a spurs shirt but a little less stupid). If someone will improve him though, it's poch but so far he's not got the goods.

5. Cini has a point with Walkers Pieters as hes *now been blocked off. He was looking good from the 2 appearances he made.

 

How many goals has he scored for Spuds?

 

Agreed about Bale..

Absolute nonsense about Llorente. His experience is invaluable at times.

Sissoko is greatly improved. His fitness was not up to the required levels when he first came.

Nonsense again. Of course Walker-Peters is being worked on, and I’ve no doubt he’ll progress to the first team squad in time. But he’s very young and needs to be handled slowly. We needed the pace on the right after Walker was sold.

 

If Kane is off the pitch, his main job is to hold the ball up for Alli or Son. If he grabs a goal, great. He’s hardly spent any time on the pitch yet.

 

Agreed... just saying on whats happened so far. He's got the quality to play a big part if he gets the opportunity but we are talking about the here and now about him being a success so far or not. It would be like saying Oxlade Chamberlain has not been a waste of money at liverpool as he's got it all (except a brain) but really no one knows and so far, he's been a big fat waste of 40m

 

In today’s terms. He didn’t cost much. He’s massively experienced at the highest level, and that can be very helpful in a young side like ours.

He’s 32 now, so he’s a short term buy. Yes, I’d like to see him get more game time.

 

Show me where I said Spurs only do good transfers . 331 million on new transfers in the past 5 seasons...full stop.
329 million collected on players sold the past 5 years ..full stop . Hell we grabbed sigurdsson off of Spurs for an academy's player , used Siggy and sold him for 45 million . And of course BIG clubs don't care about lost net spending ... Lots more money where that came from . And through all the ins and outs at Tottenham , they still bring one of the best teams these past5 seasons . super run club

 

Here you go. You suggested that clubs other than spurs are the 'foolish spenders'. Which suggests that you think that spurs aren't foolish spenders. Otherwise it would be the most pointless comment you've made so far.

 

You don't really read comments do you. I said that I didn't care about clubs spending money, not the clubs themselves.

So one of the best teams of the last five years, in your opinion, is the team that have zero trophies out of the 25 available that Premier league clubs could have won in that time???

 

Boom

please log in to view this image

 

The past 5 seasons Man City had a total net transfer of 500,000,000 in the red .Man u had a total net transfer over the past 5 seasons of 437,000,000 in the red .Chelsea 192,000,000 in the red . Arsenal ( who go after the FA Cup all the time cause they know they will never win the title ) 182,000,000. Tottenham 2,000,000. Ain't rocket surgery meathead , like I say , big club spenders don't care about losing billions . There fans walk past the losses like its nothing . Well done Spurs , the big , we'll run club .

 

please log in to view this image

 

You keep repeating this. But your basis for being well run is just bizarre. For a start, why does it matter to you whether a football club who don't make financial contributions to you is financially well run or not? What difference does it make to any fan if their club spends money or saves it in the bank? If they save it, the fan gets nothing. If they spend it, the fan gets nothing.

Chelsea and City are not likely to go under. So in what way are they badly run? They spend money available to them. They play very attractive football. They win trophies. If they DIDN'T spend the money they have available to them I'd consider them a badly run entity. If you have money to spend and choose not to then you're an idiot. Either spend it, invest it or give it to charity. Letting it sit in a bank doing nothing is not being 'well run'.

And you keep ignoring the point that spurs also squander multimillions on players, just because they break even over a five year period. They could have chosen to not buy those duffers and pocket the money instead and leave it sitting in a bank account (which seems to be your one stipulation for being well run even when it's the opposite). Or they could have chosen to spend it on better players.

It just strikes me that you're jealous of teams that spend more than you, and when they spend it you come out with tired rhetoric of them being 'badly run'.