I mean you’ve completely misread anything I’ve said because just a few posts above you’ll even see my reply to King and notice I’ve said I’d have zero issues signing players that genuinely elevate us and understandably block the pathway for young a player. Werner isn’t one of those players. Instead he helps blocks the pathway of Moore/ Santiago, picks up £165k a week in the process and by the end of the season we’ll no doubt have another compilation of his laughable misses. But feel free to try putting words into my mouth to score points .
I am ambivalent about signing Werner, I am not a huge fan personally but I do think that he was more effective on the left than some of the people we have played there since he got injured. Hopefully Sonny will be playing predominantly from the left and Werner will be a squad and Europa league player where does bring some good experience.
We have at least 8 Europa League fixtures next year and hopefully some additional knockout matches in all three Cups. We need a full squad of 25 plus at least 5 U21s. With normal amounts of injuries all 30 will get opportunities. We should spend very big on a striker, a defensive midfielder and cover for the full backs. We probably also need another goalkeeper. Getting Werner on loan as a squad player frees up money for all of that.
I didn’t actually believe it myself at first, saw a few comments under posts on Twitter but then one or two aggregator accounts mentioned it as well and then I checked a couple websites. He was on £250k at Chelsea and took a wage cut to join Leipzig! So as of right now, he’d be Spurs’ third highest earner for the new season.
That isn't the correct way to look at it. The wider picture is that lots of other mediocre players will now rightfully ask for parity. It is bad enough that Ndombele is (I think) in our top 5 earners, probably top 3 since Harry and Hugo left. It sends the wrong message out imo. I've got no issue with us signing Werner if it clears Moore's path to develop, but on that money it seems foolish.
Only if they don't understand football finance at all. The only thing to compare is the total cost. We get Werner for a whole season for £8m with no other risk. We also get an option to buy him for £8.5m and all options are valuable so that reduces the cost further.
Don’t particularly agree on the Werner signing but I think Ange liked him so assume he’s given the okay which is good enough for me. Ange strikes me as a guy who knows he’ll live and die by these decisions so he knows the score if it doesn’t work unlike a Jose or conte who will blame everyone but themselves. This is an easy signing to get done early in the window and can’t see it affecting any other plans so is just a bit of a meh signing.
That's how the club looks at it. Players will only compare what their pay cheque says at the end of the month. I'd love us to be in a position where we can afford to pay the subs bench £165k a week. If we could, we'd find ourselves much closer to City in achievements. But as it is currently, we are not there yet as a club and making Werner an exception just seems daft, especially as RB are desperate to get rid and he is desperate to play, did we not have the upper hand in negotiations?
Very happy to pay any player in the squad £165k a week if we have the option to cancel their contract at season end.
So that's Bryan Gil guaranteed to be out the door then Also... please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
Maybe I'm just in happy holiday mode, but I'm happy with that. He played with a good attitude, worked hard and created a fair few assists and other goal opportunities. Yes, ideally he could have increased his goal tally, but as a squad member did pretty well in his first 4 months here. I trust in Ange (assuming it was his decision) but with one proviso. If it turns out to have adversely affected the development of Mikey Moore then it's almost unforgivable.
I'm OK with this, but would add one more proviso...that it means that we spend every penny we can lay our hands on getting some goals in the team and someone to shore up the midfield and to compete with and rotate with our current first choice full backs. If saving the transfer fee on an alternative to Werner, means that we can recruit real quality in other areas, then I understand it. We know that the squad has been extremely poor for some time and that fixing it is not the work of a window or two. If he's a holding option for another season, on loan...then ok. I'm glad that we haven't spaffed a load of money on a transfer fee for him. Not so long ago, Levy would have been unable to resist doing exactly that. He has the look of Lucas Moura about him...cheap for a good reason...and only a bargain if you are blind to his very obvious limitations. Another one season loan is about right.
Not sure I quite trust in Ange tbh says he needs a better squad but seems like a yes man to me…just another in the long line of yes men Levy likes to work with. took him game 36 to tweek a tactic…I think he’s out of his depth with in the long run. Couldn’t handle domestic competition without Europe so I see no reason to think we are in for a memorable season tbh will be another Spurs season, decent start, one major player injured and the loss will derail us forgive me for basing it on the only physical proof I have I.e the past.
Could be the genesis of a new economic model (throw in appearance/results weighting on transfer fee sums and I'm in) .
You are mostly right. Until we have the third most expensive squad we are most likely to win nothing.
It's almost impossible to have it both ways though. We know from experience that signing a player that genuinely elevates us and therefore understandably blocks (or even permanently ends) a prospect as bright as Moore will require either enormous luck or an enormous amount of money...I'd say upwards of £60m to be close to guaranteed an improvement and even that isn't a certainty as Richarlison, Lo Celso and Ndombele demonstrate. We have so many examples of players even in the £30-50m region being very hit and miss, which is an insane amount of money to gamble even if that gamble didn't include potentially ending the development of one of our brightest young talents in years. And with us needing to spend similar money (£60m +) on both ST and CM, it is difficult to make the argument that we should spend it again on a position that we don't really need to. I'm not trying to put words in anyone's mouth, I really don't understand how your take on this isn't self-contradictory. You want us to clear the path for young prospects but you also want us to sign more players for those same positions?
I want us to sign good players for positions, and if we don’t sign good players then I want progression for young players. What part of that is so difficult to understand or self contradictory?
