What's new

Gift Orban

Stamford

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2015
4,209
20,144
Bullshit. Our ambition remains the same. We have spent big in the past and it often hasn't worked out- we cannot afford too many "misses" when it comes to big transfers. I would rather buy three 30M players hoping one becomes a 100M than one 90M player
Our rivals are spending that though and just because something hasn't worked out in the past it doesn't mean it won't in the future. It's a loser mentality to keep punting 30m on players and expecting one to do something. It's what we have done in the past and we haven't won a thing. Let's actually change how we operate because the current way doesn't work
 

barry

Bring me Messi
May 22, 2005
6,505
15,345
Our rivals are spending that though and just because something hasn't worked out in the past it doesn't mean it won't in the future. It's a loser mentality to keep punting 30m on players and expecting one to do something. It's what we have done in the past and we haven't won a thing. Let's actually change how we operate because the current way doesn't work
Have you seen the list of most expensive transfers? Most haven't lived up to their expectations.
 

Real_madyidd

The best username, unless you are a fucking idiot.
Oct 25, 2004
18,801
12,479
Our rivals are spending that though and just because something hasn't worked out in the past it doesn't mean it won't in the future. It's a loser mentality to keep punting 30m on players and expecting one to do something. It's what we have done in the past and we haven't won a thing. Let's actually change how we operate because the current way doesn't work

Our rivals?
Apart from Arsenal - who have only just done that and previously purchased Pepe I would say they are all in a different place to us. Chelsea and City are both being investigated (one is a money laundering front and the other is a sportswashing enterprise) and the only two giant clubs in the country (Liverpool and United) are way bigger than us.

 

Stamford

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2015
4,209
20,144
Our rivals?
Apart from Arsenal - who have only just done that and previously purchased Pepe I would say they are all in a different place to us. Chelsea and City are both being investigated (one is a money laundering front and the other is a sportswashing enterprise) and the only two giant clubs in the country (Liverpool and United) are way bigger than us.


Regardless of what place theyre in and where the money comes from thats who we are attempting to compete with. I dont even mind if we dont compete with them but the club should be honest about it, price the tickets accordingly and accept mid table.
 

funkycoldmedina

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
1,942
6,390
The really really big signings don't want us, if we get a free run at them it's because bigger clubs aren't interested which means they're not as good as they think. Much better to buy the hungry, young potential and develop them
 

Scot-Spur

Well-Known Member
May 20, 2012
2,401
6,972
Bullshit. Our ambition remains the same. We have spent big in the past and it often hasn't worked out- we cannot afford too many "misses" when it comes to big transfers. I would rather buy three 30M players hoping one becomes a 100M than one 90M player
That’s right! Let’s never pay big money again because we fucked it up in the past.

Plenty other clubs have big misses when spending money but they do it repeatedly. We are apparently a big club yet we are scared to buy an expensive player because we screwed it up previously.
 

HildoSpur

Likes Erik Lamela, deal with it.
Oct 1, 2005
9,171
28,684
That’s right! Let’s never pay big money again because we fucked it up in the past.

Plenty other clubs have big misses when spending money but they do it repeatedly. We are apparently a big club yet we are scared to buy an expensive player because we screwed it up previously.
I honestly don't know why you think like this.
 

Lappi

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2006
211
442
We should start this season with Richarlison + Son + a talented young striker like Orban.

Richarlison is a good forward who suits the system and hasn't had a fair crack yet

If he first choice for 6 months and isn't good enough then sell him and replace him with Toney in Jan

Buying a big name striker to turn stick Richarlison on the bench again is stupid, the money is better spent on a top CB and a winger
 

Scot-Spur

Well-Known Member
May 20, 2012
2,401
6,972
I honestly don't know why you think like this.
I’m not sure what you mean? People complain that our big signings have been flops? Is that unlucky? Is it because we have flip flopped between styles of play? Is it because we haven’t done proper background checks on things like attitude.

Unfortunately not everything works out so I don’t get why we should settle for 2/3 potentials. How come Man City seem to have so many hits when paying large sums?

I’m not saying every player has to be 100 million. However if the opportunity to buy someone for that arises and would fit our team, we can’t be scared to pull the trigger because we might get burned.
 

The Scarecrow

Well-Known Member
Jan 17, 2013
5,603
12,224
Our rivals are spending that though and just because something hasn't worked out in the past it doesn't mean it won't in the future. It's a loser mentality to keep punting 30m on players and expecting one to do something. It's what we have done in the past and we haven't won a thing. Let's actually change how we operate because the current way doesn't work
And just because something hasn't worked out in the past it doesn't mean that it will work out in the future. Moving away from the strategy of signing up and coming players is a large reason for our recent downfall. If we hadn't seen ourselves as too big for the likes of Maddison and Eze when we were first linked to them, there's every chance we would've been in a better state now. A player's transfer fee means fuck all, as proven time and time and time and again by us and by the bigger clubs.
 

Scot-Spur

Well-Known Member
May 20, 2012
2,401
6,972
And just because something hasn't worked out in the past it doesn't mean that it will work out in the future. Moving away from the strategy of signing up and coming players is a large reason for our recent downfall. If we hadn't seen ourselves as too big for the likes of Maddison and Eze when we were first linked to them, there's every chance we would've been in a better state now. A player's transfer fee means fuck all, as proven time and time and time and again by us and by the bigger clubs.
I don’t think anyone is saying we should take punts however there has to be a balance. We have to pay money for established players also and the going rate for this is high.

Otherwise we will be stuck with a promising, young squad that will probably come up short. Then our best players will leave, rinse and repeat.

It’s a balancing act.
 

funkycoldmedina

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2004
1,942
6,390
I don’t think anyone is saying we should take punts however there has to be a balance. We have to pay money for established players also and the going rate for this is high.

Otherwise we will be stuck with a promising, young squad that will probably come up short. Then our best players will leave, rinse and repeat.

It’s a balancing act.
I think when we have a well balanced squad that isneeding fine tuning then that's the time to lump on the expensive signings who can slot straight in and improve us but right now we need strength in depth
 

The Scarecrow

Well-Known Member
Jan 17, 2013
5,603
12,224
I don’t think anyone is saying we should take punts however there has to be a balance. We have to pay money for established players also and the going rate for this is high.

Otherwise we will be stuck with a promising, young squad that will probably come up short. Then our best players will leave, rinse and repeat.

It’s a balancing act.
And we've done that with Maddison this year. We did it with Bissouma and Richarlison last year.
 

Scot-Spur

Well-Known Member
May 20, 2012
2,401
6,972
I think when we have a well balanced squad that isneeding fine tuning then that's the time to lump on the expensive signings who can slot straight in and improve us but right now we need strength in depth
How much depth do we need we have 35 players? We also have no Europe.

I do understand where you are coming from but we should always be looking for first team players if available.
 

Scot-Spur

Well-Known Member
May 20, 2012
2,401
6,972
And we've done that with Maddison this year. We did it with Bissouma and Richarlison last year.
Very true, Maddison and Biss are terrific signings.

I just think we should be pushing for some real quality players as we have the financial power after Kane goes.
 

absolute bobbins

Am Yisrael Chai
Feb 12, 2013
11,658
25,976
I think when we have a well balanced squad that isneeding fine tuning then that's the time to lump on the expensive signings who can slot straight in and improve us but right now we need strength in depth
We have deep and bloated squad. Admittedly I wouldn't have confidence that a lot of them could find their arse with two hands and a map but that is besides the point.

We need a massive clear out of the shit, players should be priced so low that a mark will take a punt on them and get them out the door
 

KirstyG

Well-Known Member
Jul 16, 2015
1,060
4,394
We needs some positive ITK and quick. I think we’ll be panicking as usual and will prob miss out on this type of player because a Lukaku or someone will be offered cheap.
 

The Scarecrow

Well-Known Member
Jan 17, 2013
5,603
12,224
Very true, Maddison and Biss are terrific signings.

I just think we should be pushing for some real quality players as we have the financial power after Kane goes.
That's fair enough, and I also fear we'll spunk the money away. But there are two ways to approach the rebuild after a big sale. We can spend big, trying to replace Kane as like for like as possible, or we can try to spread the money into two or three players who in sum will have a bigger impact. And because Kane only had one year left on his deal and is 30, we got much less for him than he's actually worth. So if we spend all the money on a replacement striker, we'll be worse off.

Had we finished in the top 4 last season, I think a replacement like that would make more sense, but last season we ended up behind teams with no Kane. In general, the success of Newcastle, Brighton and Villa have shown that coaching and a strong squad will take you a long way.

There's a lot of talk about investment on this board, and that's exactly what I think we should do with the Kane money. You don't invest in something that's peaking. You invest in things that are on their way up. We have to rebuild and accept that it's going to take a bit of time. And to not derail too much from topic, I think Orban is a perfect signing in that regard.
 
Top