Are Spurs going to get relegated? (1 Viewer)

[Deadmanposting]

Being a constantly greedy cunt seems to have the odd repercussion for his career.

Sorry, cahnt.

 

[washingcattle]

£60 million still wouldn't buy replacements for those players Modric in particular.

 

[Cormcolash]

Fuck off Harry, haha

 

[oh shit]

£60 million still wouldn't buy replacements for those players Modric in particular.

still 60m more than everton will spend, hence the 'clout'
anyway it's looking like AVB so rest easy

 

[washingcattle]

If Baines, Fellani and Jags went we'd have close to £45 mil to spend but again to re-iterate my point that money is not enough to attract the same calibre of players. Especially when your not in the CL. Spurs aren't, so no matter what financial clout they have they won't find a ready made replacement for Modric for example.

 

[billygannon]

Daniel Levy
"I want my club to be like clockwork. I need to put a clock maker in charge. Where did the Sugar Lord leave Christian Gross' number?"

 

[oh shit]

If Baines, Fellani and Jags went we'd have close to £45 mil to spend but again to re-iterate my point that money is not enough to attract the same calibre of players. Especially when your not in the CL. Spurs aren't, so no matter what financial clout they have they won't find a ready made replacement for Modric for example.

no, it's paying higher wages which attracts better talent. everton could have £45m in cash, but that doesn't mean they could buy themselves a £45m transfer player and meet his wage demands.

i think this debate is getting a bit silly anyway, i mean it started because you basically took umbrage at the suggestion that spurs have more clout than everton. but they obviously do. everton is a financial basket-case, not that i take any pleasure from that, whereas spurs is bankrolled by a billionaire and seems set to build a 55,000 seater stadium.

i work right beside white hart lane and I am acutely aware that while it's only about 2 miles from highbury, it is a world apart. in fact my girlfriend's from highbury and she'd never actually been to tottenham until i took her there for a look after the riots. so they wont quite match arsenal even with the new stadium, but if spurs get the northumberland park development built, and there's been clearance and demolition work taking place there for the last 9 months, they will be even further up there in the spending leagues. so i think it's fair enough to say that while moyes has done wonders for everton, it would be interesting to see what he would do with greater resources.

as for modric, well he's just one player, they signed him 4 years ago, he's a rare talent, and they got him young and cheap, so it's completely moot as to whether or not they could sign him as he is today, isn't it?

 

[washingcattle]

no, it's paying higher wages which attracts better talent. everton could have £45m in cash, but that doesn't mean they could buy themselves a £45m transfer player and meet his wage demands.

i think this debate is getting a bit silly anyway, i mean it started because you basically took umbrage at the suggestion that spurs have more clout than everton.

No I didn't, I never mentioned Everton it's obvious they have more clout than Everton Maims Bond said "Some Clout" not more clout than Everton. They don't have as much clout as say City, or Chelsea. or about 20 clubs in Europe. United have way more clout and would love a player like Modric but they can't attract one either and have convinced Paul Scholes to stay on again.

Spurs aren't in the Champions League. Their financial position isn't the be all and end all of what players they can or can't sign. I said they'd be an average side without Modric, Adebeyour, Van De Vaart and Bale, they would. I said they would have a hard time replacing those players, they would. No one has taken any umbrage to anything. If I were Moyes or any other contender I'd be wanting assurances that Spurs best players aren't leaving on account of Chelski winning the CL.

 

[billygannon]

I don't know. I've followed Spurs for over twenty years now. They were really shit for a long, long time. The epitome of mid-table mediocrity. But financially Spurs are on a very sound footing. The club is run in a far more stable way than it was ten years ago. Spurs have been consistently doing well since 2004. Redknapp did exactly what was needed - but the whole England manager thing turned his head. He wasn't interested anymore - and the results showed it. Even after Hodgson was appointed Spurs disappointed. Bale and Modric are dead certs to go - the biggest reason being that Levy and the board reckon they can get about a £60 million profit out of them. They'll buy up two or three players and end up pocketing £20 million.

You can't take Spurs any further without an enormous injection of cash. They're not going to win anything big because Chelsea and Manchester City are cheating. All you can do is run the club well. Managers come and go - Spurs will get a good manager - maybe not the immediate successor but they'll get a safe pair of hands if that fails.

Spurs have huge potential. They have tonnes of fans - especially in England. But yeah... just need to convince an oil baron.

 

[Cormcolash]

This thread makes me want to clout someone

 

[maims bond]

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Hector Grey]

Tiny Tactical Tim has lost his mind. Does he think that telling the players they're playing for their spurs future is a threat? Really?

 

[Cormcolash]

Fuck, I shoulda stuck twenty quid on Benfica, probably would have got decent odds before the game and everything. Spurs are fucking shite.

 

[washingcattle]

Fuck, I shoulda stuck twenty quid on Benfica, probably would have got decent odds before the game and everything. Spurs are fucking shite.

You would in your hole, Benfica are a great side.

 

[Cormcolash]

Yeah, and the bookies probably woulda had stupid odds on Spurs at home

 

[Jim Daniels]

Tottenham's problem is that €100m is not worth this....

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

especially when they squandered it all, and will always have a dire defense

 

[oh shit]

I think I'd disagree. £100m buys you half a team of proven players and given that it's not like contracts mean much in football - Bale was clearly prepared to force his way out - Spurs made sure they received more cash than anyone has ever before received for a player.

I'd also disagree that they necessarily squandered the money, at least in terms of the players they bought. It's just too early to tell which players would come good and which are genuinely incapable - though I wouldn't base that on Tim's recent assessments. People talk about the money Liverpool squandered on Carroll, Adam and Downing. But people don't talk about the money that Liverpool squandered on Carroll, Henderson, Adam, Downing and Suarez.

I think the main mistake was pissing off AVB over some of the transfers, and then in expecting instant results. It was always going to be a 2-3 year building project but that's never been Levy's style and they can probably add another year or two on as a result. Long may it continue!

 

[washingcattle]

It's worth pointing out that £100 million can't buy you a good defence. Not because the players are expensive but because you can't simply buy that ready made.

Unlike buying attacking players who can prove themselves instantly by showing what they can do individually, building a solid defence is a process and Spurs haven't got the balance or the personnel right as yet and won't as long as they keep sacking managers. If you look at the best defensive records Everton, City, Chelski the players have been there a long time and have always defended the same way with the same captain, same goalkeeper same organisation on and off the pitch. Arsenal have just gotten the balance right and they've been working on that for the past 5 years under the same manager. Spurs haven't a hope of defending well unless there's some sort of stability at the top and they need someone at the back to take responsibility, the way Ledley King did, even when he didn't play you could see an influence there.

 

[Hector Grey]

You know who's a decent defender. I mean, he's not Jurgen Kohler or anything, but Stephen Caulker. Oh. Right. Also, you can't play a high line with Les Dawson at the back. I'd argue you can't defend with Les at the back, but some people rate him. Kyle Walker is shite too.