comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because as previously mentioned:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
We spend well - me and you have discussed that many a time and I always agree with you.
What you always concede to me on is that both our transfer strategy and overall strategy with how the football club is run is a shambles. We could buy Toney for £40m now and have him ready for the start of the season or we can wait until we’re 3 games in and pay £35m - once again gambling that those 3 games won’t make a difference - yet we’ve missed Europe and CL in the last 2 seasons by wafer thin margins
Have a think on that Levyshire
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually think the signings that year are relevant. Not so much Ndombele as you're right, that was just a scouting disaster, but Dev has conveniently not mentioned that the signing of Lo Celso was precisely because we didn't want to commit and 5-10m on Fernandes, who Poch wanted and the player was also keen. We went for the cheaper option and got massively stung for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is made up. The only thing on record on this was that Spurs bid 45m + 20m add-ons. It was the only serious bid from anyone. They did not accept the add-ons.
Those add-ons included winning the PL and UCL.
As a team that had come 2nd in the PL and just reached the UCL final, that was the Lisbon's presidents call.
There is nothing to substantiate that 5m more would have done the deal.
Indeed United paid 55m + 25m, so thats 10m more up front and 5m more in add ons - 15m more altogether.
(all prices euros)
Did we have that money? after already spending quite heavily that summer?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The ball park is roughly accurate. The point is that based on finances we most definitely had, having qualified for the CL for 5 straight years, we could have got our prime target for a little more money or perhaps altered add-ons. The president's call means nothing because he eventually sold him later in the same window to United. If it was a "he's not for sale at any price" thing, I'd take your point, there'd be nothing Levy could have done but he was for sale for a little more than we offered.
We walked away, bought Lo Celso at a cheaper rate and the rest is history. That entire deal I think sums up where Levy's focus is. Obviously no signing is a guarantee and it's easier in hindsight but if you have someone lined up as your number one target but don't pull the trigger, I'm sorry but that really does lack ambition. The winners in this league aren't focused on turning a profit. They're focus is on success and if they get it, the money rolls in. It's the gamblers that breed success. Not those that consolidate.
The very fact we've won 2 trophies in 34 years, 25 of them under Levy, is scandalous when you consider we pay the highest ticket prices in the league. Levy is a profit man. Pure and simple.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn’t even argue it Fridge - it’s beyond any doubt that the money was there and always has been.
That’s why he responded with the expenditure stuff - Levyshire does it every time, he won’t let you say a bad thing about his Daniel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Beyond any doubt the money was there"
Well how can I argue against that gold plated knowledge
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s beyond doubt as we had not spent the summer before - first ever club to do so. Then 18 months later we had £400m FFP headroom - as proven in a post by me earlier. Add in our owner at the time had net worth of $6.4 BN - and well you would have to be massively in love with Levy not to understand the money was definitely there at the time………………………. Oh hang on that explains it
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the numbers for players sales and/or wage expenditure? All of that comes in to play. Then you have the flip-flopping between managers since that period. We had to spend bigger in order to back each individual manager. Some of those other clubs had a settled coach but still spent more, which is what Levy doesn't like doing. Once he hits on a formula with a good coach like Pochettino and has a decent squad, he's yet to show the financial ambition to 'go again' to get us over the line. I think there's a reason you only showed 5 years expenditure and not 10 years because you know how thrifty he was in the previous 5. Now I know the stadium plays some part in that but lets be real. CL revenue from that period meant we had the kind of muscle necessary to keep spending but we didn't. The cost of the stadium was funded by completely different means, which is a long term payment plan, so even that isn't an excuse.
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because as previously mentioned:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
We spend well - me and you have discussed that many a time and I always agree with you.
What you always concede to me on is that both our transfer strategy and overall strategy with how the football club is run is a shambles. We could buy Toney for £40m now and have him ready for the start of the season or we can wait until we’re 3 games in and pay £35m - once again gambling that those 3 games won’t make a difference - yet we’ve missed Europe and CL in the last 2 seasons by wafer thin margins
Have a think on that Levyshire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dont think we're shambles. We have been in teh passed but i have said that over the years and especially since Paraticci came in, we have been getting better and better in the market.
Take this example...we have 100m to spend on 2 attackers.
We can afford Eze & David, but not Eze & Solanke
We can afford Chiesa and Solanke bit not Solanke and Eze/Neto
We can afford Tomey & Chiesa but not Toney and Eze/Neto
....unless one or more of them become cheaper.
If Eze is our key target, then that dictates whatelse we can do. If he hasnt said no yet, and he hasnt said yes, then we set a time to walk away and go elsewhere. Reports today say we are agreeing persoinal terms with Neto, so maybe thats being lined up if we move on from prime target Eze.
None of this is necessarily accurate buit shows that its not as easy as buy this player buy that player, often one thing happens and it all suddenly crystallises your next move, and what you can afford to do next.
If Ange wants Eze (not sayign he does) and thats our prime target then we try our best to make that work and then see what else we can get done with the remaining budget. If Eze hasnt decided yet or is waiting for City or whetever, there aint much we can do because while we can offer him a lot, others can offer him more.
Patience ! lets see how things pan out before trotting out the same old tight levy blah blah blah
and what if Eze is the only one Ange wants but we decide it's too steep a price? Part of the problem is that we perpetually seem to go for the 2nd or 3rd option.
Let's wait and see but I think we all know how this likely ends. We've been Spurs fans a long time and generally we're so slow to build a squad that by the time it's close and we still haven't won anything, a star player wants out and the whole process has to start again. Romero will be the next one.
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the numbers for players sales and/or wage expenditure? All of that comes in to play. Then you have the flip-flopping between managers since that period. We had to spend bigger in order to back each individual manager. Some of those other clubs had a settled coach but still spent more, which is what Levy doesn't like doing. Once he hits on a formula with a good coach like Pochettino and has a decent squad, he's yet to show the financial ambition to 'go again' to get us over the line. I think there's a reason you only showed 5 years expenditure and not 10 years because you know how thrifty he was in the previous 5. Now I know the stadium plays some part in that but lets be real. CL revenue from that period meant we had the kind of muscle necessary to keep spending but we didn't. The cost of the stadium was funded by completely different means, which is a long term payment plan, so even that isn't an excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No mate...Spurs dont spend ! Thats the accusation.
And even if you take Net spend, we're actually 4th in that list having spent net 220m more than City (270m vs 490m)...and that's allowing for 100m made from Kane last year.
Whatever way you look at it, we spend, we spend big.
But unlike Utds and Chelsea we aint up against PSR pressures
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted about a minute ago
and what if Eze is the only one Ange wants but we decide it's too steep a price? Part of the problem is that we perpetually seem to go for the 2nd or 3rd option.
Let's wait and see but I think we all know how this likely ends. We've been Spurs fans a long time and generally we're so slow to build a squad that by the time it's close and we still haven't won anything, a star player wants out and the whole process has to start again. Romero will be the next one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see how it ends and rest assured i want a new attacker and a new forward as a minimum.
One from: Toney, Solanke, Giminez (of Feyenoord) David (in that order)
and one from: Eze Neto Chiesa (In that order)
Think we need a DCM too...but may be a clever loan to plug a gap, same at LCB/LB
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SO this window....what represents ambition. Who and how much we spending?
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the numbers for players sales and/or wage expenditure? All of that comes in to play. Then you have the flip-flopping between managers since that period. We had to spend bigger in order to back each individual manager. Some of those other clubs had a settled coach but still spent more, which is what Levy doesn't like doing. Once he hits on a formula with a good coach like Pochettino and has a decent squad, he's yet to show the financial ambition to 'go again' to get us over the line. I think there's a reason you only showed 5 years expenditure and not 10 years because you know how thrifty he was in the previous 5. Now I know the stadium plays some part in that but lets be real. CL revenue from that period meant we had the kind of muscle necessary to keep spending but we didn't. The cost of the stadium was funded by completely different means, which is a long term payment plan, so even that isn't an excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No mate...Spurs dont spend ! Thats the accusation.
And even if you take Net spend, we're actually 4th in that list having spent net 220m more than City (270m vs 490m)...and that's allowing for 100m made from Kane last year.
Whatever way you look at it, we spend, we spend big.
But unlike Utds and Chelsea we aint up against PSR pressures
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The accusation from me anyway is that our strategy is schitt, 2 in particular:
1. We leave signings to the last minute to drive the price down, this can often leave them missing the start of the season and we have in the last 2 seasons missed out on Europe altogether and a CL place respectively by a wafer thin margin. We seem to only go against this when another side agree a deal for one of our prime targets - like Brentford did with Gray
2. And I will argue until I am blue in the face about this one - we quite clearly have our remuneration set up wrong - CL qualification trumps winning a domestic cup at Spurs - it’s wrong on so many levels. Nearly every manager in recent memory has rotated us out of a cup comp to try and get 3 points on the weekend when all were playing for is CL qualification - boils my pizz. Then we sacked Jose 6 days before a cup final so we didn’t have to pay a greater amount of compensation to him in case he accidentally won it.
These are the huge failings of Daniel Levy and the reason we win faaaack all
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SO this window....what represents ambition. Who and how much we spending?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What would represent success - not necessarily ambition, would be Ange to come out a couple of days before the Leicester game and talk about how delighted he is that the club landed all or nearly all of their primary targets before the season kicked off.
Is that really too much to ask for ?
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SO this window....what represents ambition. Who and how much we spending?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What would represent success - not necessarily ambition, would be Ange to come out a couple of days before the Leicester game and talk about how delighted he is that the club landed all or nearly all of their primary targets before the season kicked off.
Is that really too much to ask for ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead he comes out looking a little worse for wear and how we might not get all our targets - and why is that, what’s the stumbling block in your opinion Levyshire?
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 47 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SO this window....what represents ambition. Who and how much we spending?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What would represent success - not necessarily ambition, would be Ange to come out a couple of days before the Leicester game and talk about how delighted he is that the club landed all or nearly all of their primary targets before the season kicked off.
Is that really too much to ask for ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead he comes out looking a little worse for wear and how we might not get all our targets - and why is that, what’s the stumbling block in your opinion Levyshire?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Big plans and a finite amount of money.
Last season we had big deals done early/b4 KO. We didnt miss out on UCL because we got Johnson in last minute.
Conte got UCL and that was a shambles of a season when we had sacked Nuno, brought in Deki & Bents last knockings of the Jan window.
I just see very little correlation between timing of deals and success come May.
Tell me...if we get Eze and Toney in on 30 August 10:59pm, how's that going to affect our chances of winning the Europa or FA Cup or League cup.
What matters is the depth is there, for the season, to fight on several fronts.
If the next step or realistic expectation was a title challenge then i would agree more with you, that players need integrating asap to hit the ground running. But we are not there yet and their aint no point pretending.
Worst case scenario, we play Leicester (a) and Everton (h) with what we have now. No dramas IMO!
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 15 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 6 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 13 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 9 hours, 20 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 14 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 6 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 12 hours, 57 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 4 hours, 14 minutes ago
So you do not consider Porro a CB?
We are very short in the midfield. Madison is past his prime by a long way. Hojbjerg is gone to a better club.
Who are you suggesting play in our midfield?
And yes,...we need a striker.
Looks like Aussieglue is getting hung out to dry!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is a RB Ted
Do you actually watch Spurs, like ever? Cos you seem to know faaaack all - and I don’t mean that in a - I don’t agree with your opinion sort of way, I mean you genuinely seem to know sweet FA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well,if you know the difference between an RCB and an RB in Aussieglue's book you should let us all know.
Please!
Tell us below!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you even trying to claim here Ted - it sounds like you think Porro plays really narrow and I almost like a 3rd CB - which could t be further from the truth. Like Danny says, Porro is more like a RWB, very very attacking.
Do you actually watch Spurs? Genuine question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd actually disagree with you all, both Porro and Udogie play inverted, so they are narrow but only in advanced positions.
When we defend we do defend quite narrow, small gaps between the back 4, not often much wider than the width of the box.
Both full backs rarely overlap, you are more likely to find them in or edge of box than hitting the byeline.
It is not an unusual tactic and played by the likes of City & Arsenal to great effect.
The key difference is that Spurs tend to have both in advanced positions at the same time. Sometimes you will see Porro & Udogie a few yards from each other in the final third. This is, in my opinion the part of our tactics that needs tweaking and it doesnt necessarily mean they stop doing this (may be a reduced amount) but that actually the rest of the team, our shape, needs to adjust in these moments to ensure we are not overly exposed when we lose possession.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
fair enough. This all started with someone asking for a 4th CB. Well it seems like we only have 2 CBs anyway.
Along with 2 wing backs.
I'm happy with that.
what we need as a much stronger midfield and attack.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Romero, VDV, Dragusin - give your head a wobble Ted
Davies is either a LB or a LCB - take your pick but he has had 10 years in the Prem and is unfairly maligned by some, has been a real servant for us.
We have Phillips and Dorrington emerging and in Vuskovic (currently on loan in Belgium) we have a youngster considered more or less the best in the world for his age.
We have Udogie and Porro as starters at full back, wing back. Then we still have Royal, Spence, Reguilon. Now Reggie and Royal will hopefully go but Spence seems to be redeeming himself and could play a back up role.
In addition, Archie Gray will play mins at RB/RWB like he did 30 times for Leeds last season. Finally Skipp can cover as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dragusin also plays at back. Check his resume.
We have 4 good players at the back four, however you want to classify them,since Aussieglue's tactics throw any classification out the window...
Porro, Romero, VDV, Udogie.
Dragusin is backup.
What we need is a stronger midfield, Maddison is over the hill, Hojbjerg has moved on (to a better club) Sarr is good but needs support.
And our attack is aging. Son maybe okay another year (?), Kulushevski is unreliable, Johnson (oh well) and is Solomon still around?
I know nothing about Gray. Is THAT our great white hope?
I am under whelmed to say the least. We should be going out for midfielders of Dani Olmo's calibre.
Best wishes for the coming season,guys!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ted, we have a potentially generational set of talent coming through the club - Vuskovic at CB, Gray at RB/MF, Bergvall at CAM, Moore at LWF/LM - these 4 are some of the top youngsters in all of Europe. On top of that we have Lankshear, Donley and Devine - FW/MF/ MF who have a lot of potential - maybe not as much as the previous.
Signing players in those positions will limit opportunities - it’s a fine line.
As for our forward line ageing - so is everyone’s. Som aside the average age of our attack is 25 - not exactly over the hill and I haven’t even included the youngsters like Veliz and Lankshear to drive that down.
PEH has moved onto a better club - Marseille finished 8th last season in the French league you cretin. They’ve signed a player that couldn’t get a start for us. They aren’t in Europe and you couldn’t name half their players without googling and we all know it.
Please for the love of everything, either start watching Spurs regularly or shut the faaack up, it’s one thing to have an opinion but yours always seems to be 5 months behind current affairs or just plain mental
Best wishes to ya pal, hopefully you actually watch us this season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am underwhelmed by your list of in comings.
When Maddison moved over to us nobody else put in a bid for him....And I wonder why? You are going to find out....the guy is downhill, nowhere near his prime.
We need a top class midfielder, as I said earlier,someone in Dani Olmo's class. I dont see that arriving.
And we need a STRIKER. I mean a real one. Perhaps Toney might do if Aussieglue can make anything out of him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newcastle were all over Maddison at that point Ted, in fact they were supremely confident until Spurs swooped in.
For the love of everything, if you don’t actually watch Spurs or stay up to speed why faaacking comment?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You damned ignoramus, you're worse than Donald Trump....
read this........
https://www.football.london/tottenham-hotspur-fc/transfer-news/newcastle-ended-james-maddison-transfer-27223329
Spurs got him for 40 mill, because Castle quit. And nobody else wanted him. He's on his way down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They pulled out for FFP reasons after tabling a bid of £50m the year before
What didn’t happen was they didn’t wake up a year later and suddenly think “ That 26 year old James Maddison is over the hill”
The only reason you don’t rate James Maddison is because 8th placed Marseille didn’t make a bid for him, amirite Ted?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FFP had nothing to do with it.
As you should have seen last season, Maddison is over the hill. Our midfield is going to suck.
And Marseilles wouldn't be that crazy.
Repeat...... Dani Olmo.......or equivalent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s quite literally in the article you posted that Newcastle pulled out for FFP reasons
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think FFP had anything to do with it, you should go read the FFP rules! Several clubs have sued the FA over this rubbish. FFP was just an excuse.
And no otherclub bothered with Maddison. You'll see soon when this season starts.
Scammers signing a striker, it`s not that difficult is it
Alvarez wants out at city
Two weeks tomorrow
Still no first eleven signings
Like how the narrative changes from no signing to no first eleven singing
Worrying!!
If we don’t bring in another striker, at least… it will completely derail our season…
Naïve & incompetent… if proves to be the case!
comment by Hengy (U9129)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
Like how the narrative changes from no signing to no first eleven singing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
?
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Hengy (U9129)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
Like how the narrative changes from no signing to no first eleven singing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like how the narrative changes from no signing to no first eleven singing
Even the level headed calm Ange must be getting exasperated.
Anyway.. bullet dodged........ Gallagher is seemingly going to Atletico Madrid
Was it always going to be like this with Levy, or is he just a bit reluctant to spend more after last summer's spending and the way last season went with Ange? Either wouldn't be that surprising.
Sign in if you want to comment
Tottenham Transfer News - LIVE
Page 2022 of 2060
2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | 2027
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because as previously mentioned:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
We spend well - me and you have discussed that many a time and I always agree with you.
What you always concede to me on is that both our transfer strategy and overall strategy with how the football club is run is a shambles. We could buy Toney for £40m now and have him ready for the start of the season or we can wait until we’re 3 games in and pay £35m - once again gambling that those 3 games won’t make a difference - yet we’ve missed Europe and CL in the last 2 seasons by wafer thin margins
Have a think on that Levyshire
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 26 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 6 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually think the signings that year are relevant. Not so much Ndombele as you're right, that was just a scouting disaster, but Dev has conveniently not mentioned that the signing of Lo Celso was precisely because we didn't want to commit and 5-10m on Fernandes, who Poch wanted and the player was also keen. We went for the cheaper option and got massively stung for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is made up. The only thing on record on this was that Spurs bid 45m + 20m add-ons. It was the only serious bid from anyone. They did not accept the add-ons.
Those add-ons included winning the PL and UCL.
As a team that had come 2nd in the PL and just reached the UCL final, that was the Lisbon's presidents call.
There is nothing to substantiate that 5m more would have done the deal.
Indeed United paid 55m + 25m, so thats 10m more up front and 5m more in add ons - 15m more altogether.
(all prices euros)
Did we have that money? after already spending quite heavily that summer?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The ball park is roughly accurate. The point is that based on finances we most definitely had, having qualified for the CL for 5 straight years, we could have got our prime target for a little more money or perhaps altered add-ons. The president's call means nothing because he eventually sold him later in the same window to United. If it was a "he's not for sale at any price" thing, I'd take your point, there'd be nothing Levy could have done but he was for sale for a little more than we offered.
We walked away, bought Lo Celso at a cheaper rate and the rest is history. That entire deal I think sums up where Levy's focus is. Obviously no signing is a guarantee and it's easier in hindsight but if you have someone lined up as your number one target but don't pull the trigger, I'm sorry but that really does lack ambition. The winners in this league aren't focused on turning a profit. They're focus is on success and if they get it, the money rolls in. It's the gamblers that breed success. Not those that consolidate.
The very fact we've won 2 trophies in 34 years, 25 of them under Levy, is scandalous when you consider we pay the highest ticket prices in the league. Levy is a profit man. Pure and simple.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn’t even argue it Fridge - it’s beyond any doubt that the money was there and always has been.
That’s why he responded with the expenditure stuff - Levyshire does it every time, he won’t let you say a bad thing about his Daniel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Beyond any doubt the money was there"
Well how can I argue against that gold plated knowledge
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s beyond doubt as we had not spent the summer before - first ever club to do so. Then 18 months later we had £400m FFP headroom - as proven in a post by me earlier. Add in our owner at the time had net worth of $6.4 BN - and well you would have to be massively in love with Levy not to understand the money was definitely there at the time………………………. Oh hang on that explains it
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the numbers for players sales and/or wage expenditure? All of that comes in to play. Then you have the flip-flopping between managers since that period. We had to spend bigger in order to back each individual manager. Some of those other clubs had a settled coach but still spent more, which is what Levy doesn't like doing. Once he hits on a formula with a good coach like Pochettino and has a decent squad, he's yet to show the financial ambition to 'go again' to get us over the line. I think there's a reason you only showed 5 years expenditure and not 10 years because you know how thrifty he was in the previous 5. Now I know the stadium plays some part in that but lets be real. CL revenue from that period meant we had the kind of muscle necessary to keep spending but we didn't. The cost of the stadium was funded by completely different means, which is a long term payment plan, so even that isn't an excuse.
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because as previously mentioned:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
We spend well - me and you have discussed that many a time and I always agree with you.
What you always concede to me on is that both our transfer strategy and overall strategy with how the football club is run is a shambles. We could buy Toney for £40m now and have him ready for the start of the season or we can wait until we’re 3 games in and pay £35m - once again gambling that those 3 games won’t make a difference - yet we’ve missed Europe and CL in the last 2 seasons by wafer thin margins
Have a think on that Levyshire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dont think we're shambles. We have been in teh passed but i have said that over the years and especially since Paraticci came in, we have been getting better and better in the market.
Take this example...we have 100m to spend on 2 attackers.
We can afford Eze & David, but not Eze & Solanke
We can afford Chiesa and Solanke bit not Solanke and Eze/Neto
We can afford Tomey & Chiesa but not Toney and Eze/Neto
....unless one or more of them become cheaper.
If Eze is our key target, then that dictates whatelse we can do. If he hasnt said no yet, and he hasnt said yes, then we set a time to walk away and go elsewhere. Reports today say we are agreeing persoinal terms with Neto, so maybe thats being lined up if we move on from prime target Eze.
None of this is necessarily accurate buit shows that its not as easy as buy this player buy that player, often one thing happens and it all suddenly crystallises your next move, and what you can afford to do next.
If Ange wants Eze (not sayign he does) and thats our prime target then we try our best to make that work and then see what else we can get done with the remaining budget. If Eze hasnt decided yet or is waiting for City or whetever, there aint much we can do because while we can offer him a lot, others can offer him more.
Patience ! lets see how things pan out before trotting out the same old tight levy blah blah blah
posted on 2/8/24
and what if Eze is the only one Ange wants but we decide it's too steep a price? Part of the problem is that we perpetually seem to go for the 2nd or 3rd option.
Let's wait and see but I think we all know how this likely ends. We've been Spurs fans a long time and generally we're so slow to build a squad that by the time it's close and we still haven't won anything, a star player wants out and the whole process has to start again. Romero will be the next one.
posted on 2/8/24
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the numbers for players sales and/or wage expenditure? All of that comes in to play. Then you have the flip-flopping between managers since that period. We had to spend bigger in order to back each individual manager. Some of those other clubs had a settled coach but still spent more, which is what Levy doesn't like doing. Once he hits on a formula with a good coach like Pochettino and has a decent squad, he's yet to show the financial ambition to 'go again' to get us over the line. I think there's a reason you only showed 5 years expenditure and not 10 years because you know how thrifty he was in the previous 5. Now I know the stadium plays some part in that but lets be real. CL revenue from that period meant we had the kind of muscle necessary to keep spending but we didn't. The cost of the stadium was funded by completely different means, which is a long term payment plan, so even that isn't an excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No mate...Spurs dont spend ! Thats the accusation.
And even if you take Net spend, we're actually 4th in that list having spent net 220m more than City (270m vs 490m)...and that's allowing for 100m made from Kane last year.
Whatever way you look at it, we spend, we spend big.
But unlike Utds and Chelsea we aint up against PSR pressures
posted on 2/8/24
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted about a minute ago
and what if Eze is the only one Ange wants but we decide it's too steep a price? Part of the problem is that we perpetually seem to go for the 2nd or 3rd option.
Let's wait and see but I think we all know how this likely ends. We've been Spurs fans a long time and generally we're so slow to build a squad that by the time it's close and we still haven't won anything, a star player wants out and the whole process has to start again. Romero will be the next one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see how it ends and rest assured i want a new attacker and a new forward as a minimum.
One from: Toney, Solanke, Giminez (of Feyenoord) David (in that order)
and one from: Eze Neto Chiesa (In that order)
Think we need a DCM too...but may be a clever loan to plug a gap, same at LCB/LB
posted on 2/8/24
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SO this window....what represents ambition. Who and how much we spending?
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 11 minutes ago
Disappointed no one posted the last 5 years spending. Wonder why
As the fab Fab would say....HERE WE GO:
Source - Transfermkt
Period 20/21 - 24/25. Price in Euros
Chelsea: 1.57bn
Utd: 776m
City: 752m
Arsenal: 752m
Spurs: 710m
others.....
Villa 618m
Liverpool 488m
NUFC 565m
This goes to my points that:
1. We are not pound poor. We have spent near as much as the others, bar silly Chelsea.
2. So why are we not their equals? Because we havent spent it well enough.
Ergo...it's WHO we buy that counts most, not necessarily how much they cost and when we bought them.
There are numerous examples of players we brough in early, not delivering.
Players we've spent a lot of money on, not working out.
Players we brought in late, turning out to be great!
Players we've spent small sums on being fantastic.
I will wait to see where we get to come 1st Sept and judge from there
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are the numbers for players sales and/or wage expenditure? All of that comes in to play. Then you have the flip-flopping between managers since that period. We had to spend bigger in order to back each individual manager. Some of those other clubs had a settled coach but still spent more, which is what Levy doesn't like doing. Once he hits on a formula with a good coach like Pochettino and has a decent squad, he's yet to show the financial ambition to 'go again' to get us over the line. I think there's a reason you only showed 5 years expenditure and not 10 years because you know how thrifty he was in the previous 5. Now I know the stadium plays some part in that but lets be real. CL revenue from that period meant we had the kind of muscle necessary to keep spending but we didn't. The cost of the stadium was funded by completely different means, which is a long term payment plan, so even that isn't an excuse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No mate...Spurs dont spend ! Thats the accusation.
And even if you take Net spend, we're actually 4th in that list having spent net 220m more than City (270m vs 490m)...and that's allowing for 100m made from Kane last year.
Whatever way you look at it, we spend, we spend big.
But unlike Utds and Chelsea we aint up against PSR pressures
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The accusation from me anyway is that our strategy is schitt, 2 in particular:
1. We leave signings to the last minute to drive the price down, this can often leave them missing the start of the season and we have in the last 2 seasons missed out on Europe altogether and a CL place respectively by a wafer thin margin. We seem to only go against this when another side agree a deal for one of our prime targets - like Brentford did with Gray
2. And I will argue until I am blue in the face about this one - we quite clearly have our remuneration set up wrong - CL qualification trumps winning a domestic cup at Spurs - it’s wrong on so many levels. Nearly every manager in recent memory has rotated us out of a cup comp to try and get 3 points on the weekend when all were playing for is CL qualification - boils my pizz. Then we sacked Jose 6 days before a cup final so we didn’t have to pay a greater amount of compensation to him in case he accidentally won it.
These are the huge failings of Daniel Levy and the reason we win faaaack all
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SO this window....what represents ambition. Who and how much we spending?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What would represent success - not necessarily ambition, would be Ange to come out a couple of days before the Leicester game and talk about how delighted he is that the club landed all or nearly all of their primary targets before the season kicked off.
Is that really too much to ask for ?
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SO this window....what represents ambition. Who and how much we spending?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What would represent success - not necessarily ambition, would be Ange to come out a couple of days before the Leicester game and talk about how delighted he is that the club landed all or nearly all of their primary targets before the season kicked off.
Is that really too much to ask for ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead he comes out looking a little worse for wear and how we might not get all our targets - and why is that, what’s the stumbling block in your opinion Levyshire?
posted on 2/8/24
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 47 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 6 minutes ago
Spurs under Enic are a big brand but small football club.
They just don’t have the ambition or skill set to win stuff.
The facts are there, no matter what anyone says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SO this window....what represents ambition. Who and how much we spending?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What would represent success - not necessarily ambition, would be Ange to come out a couple of days before the Leicester game and talk about how delighted he is that the club landed all or nearly all of their primary targets before the season kicked off.
Is that really too much to ask for ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead he comes out looking a little worse for wear and how we might not get all our targets - and why is that, what’s the stumbling block in your opinion Levyshire?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Big plans and a finite amount of money.
Last season we had big deals done early/b4 KO. We didnt miss out on UCL because we got Johnson in last minute.
Conte got UCL and that was a shambles of a season when we had sacked Nuno, brought in Deki & Bents last knockings of the Jan window.
I just see very little correlation between timing of deals and success come May.
Tell me...if we get Eze and Toney in on 30 August 10:59pm, how's that going to affect our chances of winning the Europa or FA Cup or League cup.
What matters is the depth is there, for the season, to fight on several fronts.
If the next step or realistic expectation was a title challenge then i would agree more with you, that players need integrating asap to hit the ground running. But we are not there yet and their aint no point pretending.
Worst case scenario, we play Leicester (a) and Everton (h) with what we have now. No dramas IMO!
posted on 3/8/24
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 15 hours, 9 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 6 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 46 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 13 hours, 12 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 9 hours, 20 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 14 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 6 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Striketeam7 - haters gonna hate (U18109)
posted 12 hours, 57 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 4 hours, 14 minutes ago
So you do not consider Porro a CB?
We are very short in the midfield. Madison is past his prime by a long way. Hojbjerg is gone to a better club.
Who are you suggesting play in our midfield?
And yes,...we need a striker.
Looks like Aussieglue is getting hung out to dry!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He is a RB Ted
Do you actually watch Spurs, like ever? Cos you seem to know faaaack all - and I don’t mean that in a - I don’t agree with your opinion sort of way, I mean you genuinely seem to know sweet FA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well,if you know the difference between an RCB and an RB in Aussieglue's book you should let us all know.
Please!
Tell us below!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What are you even trying to claim here Ted - it sounds like you think Porro plays really narrow and I almost like a 3rd CB - which could t be further from the truth. Like Danny says, Porro is more like a RWB, very very attacking.
Do you actually watch Spurs? Genuine question
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd actually disagree with you all, both Porro and Udogie play inverted, so they are narrow but only in advanced positions.
When we defend we do defend quite narrow, small gaps between the back 4, not often much wider than the width of the box.
Both full backs rarely overlap, you are more likely to find them in or edge of box than hitting the byeline.
It is not an unusual tactic and played by the likes of City & Arsenal to great effect.
The key difference is that Spurs tend to have both in advanced positions at the same time. Sometimes you will see Porro & Udogie a few yards from each other in the final third. This is, in my opinion the part of our tactics that needs tweaking and it doesnt necessarily mean they stop doing this (may be a reduced amount) but that actually the rest of the team, our shape, needs to adjust in these moments to ensure we are not overly exposed when we lose possession.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
fair enough. This all started with someone asking for a 4th CB. Well it seems like we only have 2 CBs anyway.
Along with 2 wing backs.
I'm happy with that.
what we need as a much stronger midfield and attack.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Romero, VDV, Dragusin - give your head a wobble Ted
Davies is either a LB or a LCB - take your pick but he has had 10 years in the Prem and is unfairly maligned by some, has been a real servant for us.
We have Phillips and Dorrington emerging and in Vuskovic (currently on loan in Belgium) we have a youngster considered more or less the best in the world for his age.
We have Udogie and Porro as starters at full back, wing back. Then we still have Royal, Spence, Reguilon. Now Reggie and Royal will hopefully go but Spence seems to be redeeming himself and could play a back up role.
In addition, Archie Gray will play mins at RB/RWB like he did 30 times for Leeds last season. Finally Skipp can cover as well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dragusin also plays at back. Check his resume.
We have 4 good players at the back four, however you want to classify them,since Aussieglue's tactics throw any classification out the window...
Porro, Romero, VDV, Udogie.
Dragusin is backup.
What we need is a stronger midfield, Maddison is over the hill, Hojbjerg has moved on (to a better club) Sarr is good but needs support.
And our attack is aging. Son maybe okay another year (?), Kulushevski is unreliable, Johnson (oh well) and is Solomon still around?
I know nothing about Gray. Is THAT our great white hope?
I am under whelmed to say the least. We should be going out for midfielders of Dani Olmo's calibre.
Best wishes for the coming season,guys!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ted, we have a potentially generational set of talent coming through the club - Vuskovic at CB, Gray at RB/MF, Bergvall at CAM, Moore at LWF/LM - these 4 are some of the top youngsters in all of Europe. On top of that we have Lankshear, Donley and Devine - FW/MF/ MF who have a lot of potential - maybe not as much as the previous.
Signing players in those positions will limit opportunities - it’s a fine line.
As for our forward line ageing - so is everyone’s. Som aside the average age of our attack is 25 - not exactly over the hill and I haven’t even included the youngsters like Veliz and Lankshear to drive that down.
PEH has moved onto a better club - Marseille finished 8th last season in the French league you cretin. They’ve signed a player that couldn’t get a start for us. They aren’t in Europe and you couldn’t name half their players without googling and we all know it.
Please for the love of everything, either start watching Spurs regularly or shut the faaack up, it’s one thing to have an opinion but yours always seems to be 5 months behind current affairs or just plain mental
Best wishes to ya pal, hopefully you actually watch us this season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am underwhelmed by your list of in comings.
When Maddison moved over to us nobody else put in a bid for him....And I wonder why? You are going to find out....the guy is downhill, nowhere near his prime.
We need a top class midfielder, as I said earlier,someone in Dani Olmo's class. I dont see that arriving.
And we need a STRIKER. I mean a real one. Perhaps Toney might do if Aussieglue can make anything out of him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newcastle were all over Maddison at that point Ted, in fact they were supremely confident until Spurs swooped in.
For the love of everything, if you don’t actually watch Spurs or stay up to speed why faaacking comment?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You damned ignoramus, you're worse than Donald Trump....
read this........
https://www.football.london/tottenham-hotspur-fc/transfer-news/newcastle-ended-james-maddison-transfer-27223329
Spurs got him for 40 mill, because Castle quit. And nobody else wanted him. He's on his way down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They pulled out for FFP reasons after tabling a bid of £50m the year before
What didn’t happen was they didn’t wake up a year later and suddenly think “ That 26 year old James Maddison is over the hill”
The only reason you don’t rate James Maddison is because 8th placed Marseille didn’t make a bid for him, amirite Ted?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FFP had nothing to do with it.
As you should have seen last season, Maddison is over the hill. Our midfield is going to suck.
And Marseilles wouldn't be that crazy.
Repeat...... Dani Olmo.......or equivalent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s quite literally in the article you posted that Newcastle pulled out for FFP reasons
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think FFP had anything to do with it, you should go read the FFP rules! Several clubs have sued the FA over this rubbish. FFP was just an excuse.
And no otherclub bothered with Maddison. You'll see soon when this season starts.
posted on 3/8/24
Levy out.
posted on 3/8/24
Scammers signing a striker, it`s not that difficult is it
posted on 4/8/24
Alvarez wants out at city
posted on 4/8/24
Two weeks tomorrow
Still no first eleven signings
posted on 4/8/24
Vintage Levy
posted on 4/8/24
Like how the narrative changes from no signing to no first eleven singing
posted on 4/8/24
Worrying!!
If we don’t bring in another striker, at least… it will completely derail our season…
Naïve & incompetent… if proves to be the case!
posted on 4/8/24
comment by Hengy (U9129)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
Like how the narrative changes from no signing to no first eleven singing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
?
posted on 4/8/24
comment by Mack (U6574)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Hengy (U9129)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
Like how the narrative changes from no signing to no first eleven singing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like how the narrative changes from no signing to no first eleven singing
posted on 5/8/24
Even the level headed calm Ange must be getting exasperated.
Anyway.. bullet dodged........ Gallagher is seemingly going to Atletico Madrid
posted on 5/8/24
Was it always going to be like this with Levy, or is he just a bit reluctant to spend more after last summer's spending and the way last season went with Ange? Either wouldn't be that surprising.
Page 2022 of 2060
2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | 2027