LiamJM10
Active Member
- Aug 24, 2013
- 389
- 612
Ah, touche. Can't believe I missed that. Wanted him last summer before he left Granada. Top fullback.
Ricardo Rodriguez
- Thread starter Barry Mead
- Start date
Ah, touche. Can't believe I missed that. Wanted him last summer before he left Granada. Top fullback.
Barry Mead
Well-Known Member
- Jan 31, 2013
- 3,083
- 4,078
- Thread starter
- #42
I don't understand this idea of Spurs are not in a position to spend £25 or £30 mill on a left back.
If we have that kind of money to spend on one player surely the most important player we need to spend it on is the one in a position we most need
Invariably in transfer windows there are bargains and there are expensive players, you hope to find the bargains where you can but if you can't find one and it is in a key area that is weakening the entire team surely it's better to spend the big money there
Now I'm not saying LB is our biggest need I think we have a few needs but if we find a few players that fit our needs in other areas at reasonable costs and it takes £25 mill or so to fill that need with a top player then we should go for it and given the amount of excess we have to offload I imagine money isn't really an issue and if the quality is there and the player is still at a young enough age I imagine Levy would be onside too. Lets not forget the profit he made on the left back he bought a few years back was a lot more than £25 mill
If we have that kind of money to spend on one player surely the most important player we need to spend it on is the one in a position we most need
Invariably in transfer windows there are bargains and there are expensive players, you hope to find the bargains where you can but if you can't find one and it is in a key area that is weakening the entire team surely it's better to spend the big money there
Now I'm not saying LB is our biggest need I think we have a few needs but if we find a few players that fit our needs in other areas at reasonable costs and it takes £25 mill or so to fill that need with a top player then we should go for it and given the amount of excess we have to offload I imagine money isn't really an issue and if the quality is there and the player is still at a young enough age I imagine Levy would be onside too. Lets not forget the profit he made on the left back he bought a few years back was a lot more than £25 mill
Ossie85
Rio de la Plata
- Aug 2, 2008
- 3,924
- 13,231
Yeah, it's ridiculous. If we have it, we should spend it, regardless of the position.
It doesn't matter for how much. If you have a player that would significantly upgrade your starting 11, you should spend as much as required on it.
A team is as strong as its weakest link.
We can survive with Ade as our striker, or Chadli as our LW, or Dawson as our CB. We CANNOT go another season with Rose as our left back.
LB should be our top priority, and we should aim to get the best player we can get.
Mouse!
Fookin' Legend in Gin Alley
- Aug 29, 2011
- 6,303
- 19,263
Every position on the pitch is of equal importance.
Top quality LB's are also harder to come by than top quality strikers.
Blake Griffin
Well-Known Member
- Oct 3, 2011
- 14,166
- 38,466
that is pure fantasy. top teams can get away with having mediocre full backs but they won't get anywhere with mediocre strikers. why do you think strikers and attacking players go for mega bucks whilst full backs go for a pittance in comparison? every position is important but full back is probably the least important position on the field and one you can get away with. it would be ridiculous to spend big on a full back when it's not going to push us towards the top sides, we need difference makers, not contributors. spurs could sign marcelo, jordi alba or david alaba, it won't make a massive difference in the grand scheme of things.
Barry Mead
Well-Known Member
- Jan 31, 2013
- 3,083
- 4,078
- Thread starter
- #46
Top teams can get away with signing mediocre full backs?
Is that why United just spent £30 mill on Shaw, why Barca spent 32.5 mill euros on Dani Alves and Real paid 30 million euros for Fabio Coentrao?
Blake Griffin
Well-Known Member
- Oct 3, 2011
- 14,166
- 38,466
they can get away with having mediocre full backs, of course they try and sign the best ones. those fees are still only half or 1/3 of what the best attacking players cost, the reason being that they're far more important. only a complete loon would build a team starting with a full back. maybe if we ever become a top team we could afford to drop ridiculous money on a full back but not now, that would be like buying an expensive body kit or sound system for a car that needs an engine rebuild.
Barry Mead
Well-Known Member
- Jan 31, 2013
- 3,083
- 4,078
- Thread starter
- #49
I disagree with most of that, only a complete loon would build a team of 10 decent players instead of 11, no teams now are ever going to totally rebuild a team, they look at their strengths and their weaknesses and keep the strong ones and try and strengthen the weak areas. If they think they can get quality players that fit those roles reasonably they will, if they can't they will pay a premium to get those players.
Your analogy about the car doesn't really work because it's a bit like suggesting you'd pay a fortune for an engine but skimp on the brakes and the steering which means your expensive engine could crash and burn. Football teams are just that a team, each player must play his part, you have a weak area then other teams will exploit it. No point having an expensive striker scoring goals at one end whilst you have a cheap full back failing to stop the opposition and losing goals the other end. There will be times you can find quality cheap in either area, in the last couple of years the likes of Benteke, Michu, Bony and Remy have all managed to put a decent number of goals away and all cost a lot less than say City paid for Kolorov. Sometimes you can pick up a good full back cheap though to be fair the likes of Cole and Clichy were bought comparatively cheap because of contract situations, but lets say Rodriguez the fee to Wolfsburg was around 7 mill euros
If you need a player for a position that is your weakness it doesn't really matter what players in other positions cost you have to try and get the best player you can afford. If you can afford 25 or 30 mill on a striker but don't really need one and you desperately need a full back and that is what it'll cost you where's the sense in not getting the full back?
If we want an analogy it's like having a Ferrari that cost £125 k and refusing to spend another £25k for the key to make it work, so you have a great car but never get anywhere
Mouse!
Fookin' Legend in Gin Alley
- Aug 29, 2011
- 6,303
- 19,263
If there's a player available (which he would be for the right price) who plays in the position we most need to address, who is top class, who we can afford (which we can, despite what you seem to think), then I think we should go for him.
It's now or never with players at his level - he looks likely (if he isn't already) to become one of the the top left-backs in the world. We need to act quickly before a bigger club comes in. We can either sort the position for 10 years, or sell him on for a profit in 5. Well worth the €25m IMO.
crokey
Well-Known Member
- Sep 1, 2012
- 2,433
- 7,467
What position do you think warrants a £20-30m player for Spurs with our current squad?
I can slightly see your point and I would rather spend £30m on a left forward than a left back but I really can see us spending a vast amount on our left hand side
Blake Griffin
Well-Known Member
- Oct 3, 2011
- 14,166
- 38,466
i would buy the striker, he'd make more of a difference. why do full backs cost a lot less than any other outfield position?
Blake Griffin
Well-Known Member
- Oct 3, 2011
- 14,166
- 38,466
with our resources and squad in mind i think any position from midfield onwards would warrant that outlay other than rf/rw.
Dan Yeats
Well-Known Member
- Jul 12, 2011
- 2,796
- 2,911
"Ben Davies"? He's meh.
We should be looking at Benito Daviesola instead - he's amaaazing!
Barry Mead
Well-Known Member
- Jan 31, 2013
- 3,083
- 4,078
- Thread starter
- #55
I think that has been changing in recent years as the full back role has become more key to the tactics employed and also in terms of quality available.
Once upon a time you could find quite a number of decent full backs, even if we seem to have always struggled, nowadays the numbers are thinner so it becomes a matter of supply and demand. Top strikers have always been hard to find so held a premium and will continue to whilst they remain hard to find
As for buying a striker in the situation I really can;t follow that logic, why not have a player that can (injuries permitting) strengthen the team every game than add a third striker that if you already had two quality strikers could maybe strengthen the team say one game in three. Sounds to me in the circumstances a full back would give you three times the vale
fatpiranha
dismember
- Jun 9, 2003
- 8,337
- 21,678
If we signed Rodrigueuz it would be a huge statement of intent by Spurs. Ricardo is simply the best available player in his position in the world. If we are serious about becoming a regular CL team then this is the sort of player we need to bring in. The signing of Davies would simply maintain the status quo, a decent player who may develop but not one a top 4 side would automatically regard as a 1st choice 1st teamer.
We have Lloris, we have Eriksen; Rodriguez would be our 3rd world class player and the repercussions of signing him would go beyond what he does on the field as it would show other possible transfer targets that we are serious about becoming a team that challenges for honours rather than just a stepping stone to a bigger club.
We have Lloris, we have Eriksen; Rodriguez would be our 3rd world class player and the repercussions of signing him would go beyond what he does on the field as it would show other possible transfer targets that we are serious about becoming a team that challenges for honours rather than just a stepping stone to a bigger club.
Ossie85
Rio de la Plata
- Aug 2, 2008
- 3,924
- 13,231
He's good, but right footed. I'd prefer a left footed LB
I think Daviesola has third party ownership.
GeneralBurk
Well-Known Member
- Apr 26, 2005
- 919
- 888
Not having any strikers didn't do France any harm in 1998. Stephane Gui'varch was the French jigsaw.
