markiespurs
SC Supporter
- Jul 9, 2008
- 11,899
- 15,576
Probably in the minority here, but the more I see of Trippier, the less concerned I am at losing Walker should he go
Sunday Supplement
- Thread starter spurslenny
- Start date
millsey
Official SC Numpty
- Dec 8, 2005
- 8,735
- 11,504
Sounds pretty fair to be honest
theShiznit
Well-Known Member
- Jul 26, 2004
- 17,870
- 23,923
Exactly. How can it go from "oh it's Chelsea's title" 2 months ago and "a fore gone conclusion" to we've bottled it despite never being within 4 points of them with them having all the easy games and us all the hard games...
Just some weak agendas and people trying to make a name for themselves.
Dov67
Well-Known Member
- Jul 1, 2005
- 3,350
- 10,363
agreed - sell him abroad. Unless Man City agree to finance our stadium in full, it does not help us by helping Man City improve their team. We are not here to solve their problems
cliff jones
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 4,081
- 6,600
Walker doubling his wages can only tempt others to think again, he's quite close to Rose for eg, so I'd be worried about the signal it sends and knock on effect. Fook off Citeh.
rossdapep
Well-Known Member
- Aug 25, 2011
- 22,113
- 79,555
Depends. If that money allows us to strengthen ourselves even more so then they are only playing catch up with us. I'm not 100% convinced he'd be a success there, the way that City defence is set up means the opposition will always be presented with opportunities.
worcestersauce
"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
- Jan 23, 2006
- 26,949
- 45,209
Sounds like a discussion on here.
mill
Well-Known Member
- May 21, 2007
- 10,403
- 37,136
FACT
arunspurs
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 8,832
- 35,620
I don't think Walker is going to improve City that much. Yes he would be a improvement on Sagna but not a fit Zabaletta. If you take our strongest XI, the most replacable or upgradable player is Walker at RB. If we get crazy money from City, we should sell him. If we sell him outside PL, the better. But I cant see it.
IMO, Trippier has more upside to his game & could improve really well. KWP as back up to Trippier could be on thoughts of Poch as well, given he signed a new contract.
If we are going to sell Walker for 40m & that is going to give us say Zaha or Barkley, so be it. We will improve the attacking options. I don't think it sends any message. If we sell any of Lloris, Dier, Toby, Kane, Dele, Eriksen, then I would be worried not for selling Walker.
Gb160
Well done boys. Good process
- Jun 20, 2012
- 23,667
- 93,388
Starting to feel a bit like we might've called Walkers bluff, I'd only worry about what signal it sends if it is to a rival.
Jody
SC Supporter
- Sep 11, 2004
- 7,008
- 5,826
Fully agree.
Doctor Dinkey
Legacy Fan
- Jul 6, 2013
- 3,626
- 8,746
I could see Walker bombing badly at Citeh.
Tucker
Shitehawk
- Jul 15, 2013
- 31,323
- 146,785
It portrays us as a selling club. It's suicide.
And no matter what way you spin it, it improves them. He's a top quality player. Anyone who says otherwise is clutching at straws.
eddiev14
SC Supporter
- Jan 18, 2005
- 7,173
- 19,679
Yep. Sadly this is exactly how it will appear to our players, the media and clubs competing with us.
If we sell to a Madrid/Barca/Bayern then ok, we can rationalise that. However, we are talking about a club we're in direct competition with, a club we have finished above for (almost certainly now) 2 seasons in a row, having worked hard to claw ourselves back in front of them.
This would be doing what many on here had said we had categorically stopped doing. A return to those ways could be incredibly destabilising.
dace
Well-Known Member
- Apr 4, 2014
- 339
- 783
IMO selling Walker to say City does not mean we are a selling club.
Perhaps we have called Walkers bluff, he may regret a move away from Spurs on a footballing level.
However, if we sell Walker (he is on a 5 year deal) it will be on our (Poch) terms .
If we let him go and get a Zaha, it will be an improvement, we still have Trippier.
Ferguson at MUtd always seemed to let an important player move and still improve the team.
Perhaps we have called Walkers bluff, he may regret a move away from Spurs on a footballing level.
However, if we sell Walker (he is on a 5 year deal) it will be on our (Poch) terms .
If we let him go and get a Zaha, it will be an improvement, we still have Trippier.
Ferguson at MUtd always seemed to let an important player move and still improve the team.
arunspurs
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 8,832
- 35,620
Am not spinning anything here.
We are as much as selling club as Arsenal were selling club to United (Van Persie) and to City (Sagna, Clichy, Nasri , Adebayor). You may want to hear nice positive things like 'we wont sell to our rivals' etc... I have learned from Bale saga that everyone has a price & if they match the price we will sell the player.
Now IMO Modric & Bale were slightly different to Walker. Walker is not in their bracket. We took less for Modric & gave him to Madrid and Bale also went outside PL. But I dont think its same for Walker. Modric would have definitely improved Chelsea by miles. I cannot say the same for Walker to City. If you are talking about Lloris, Eriksen,Toby,Dele or Kane its different.
Think this way - City anyway are going to spend 40m on a right back from Europe - whether its Walker or Sidibe from Monaco or Auerier from PSG. Regardless they are going to improve on their current RB Sagna, who is a travesty. So, its not like we dont sell Walker, City arent going to improve.
Like it or not, our transfer policy is dependent on selling players & reinvesting. Atleast that is the model for last 5 years. If Walker is sold for 40m, I can see it going straight for Barkley or even Zaha. We promote Trippier to XI & KWP to back up RB.
As long as we dont sell any other player,IMO, this is not a bad thing. We deepen the squad with a attacking player and promote from academy (like we did with Winks when we sold Carroll & Mason) and hope it works out. If we buy Maguire from relegated Hull (likely), then we boost RB & LCB options as well as he can play across the back line.
City may get Walker and Pep may improve him. But its still a tall order for him to improve their XI as City's squad is riddled with aging old men. It is not what we want but I dont think it is going to decrease our chances next season.
sussexyid
Well-Known Member
- Mar 21, 2004
- 1,541
- 945
Mr Henry was saying after the Spam game (and credit to him for this) that we haven't thrown anything away this or last season, we were never top so had nothing to throw away and we should be applauded for making a fight of it when no other club stepped up to challenged.
Tucker
Shitehawk
- Jul 15, 2013
- 31,323
- 146,785
Keep telling yourself that.
If we were to start selling first team players to premier league rivals again, then in my view it's a monumental act of self harm. I'd rather us leave the players to rot on the bench. Or pay them to stay at home.
We should not be in the business of helping our competition improve in any way shape or form. Let them shop elsewhere, let Walker get on with the disappointment like Modric did.
