BromleySpur
Well-Known Member
- Aug 29, 2006
- 146
- 534
So, the money we're getting for proven talent isn't enough to buy proven talent?
Harry Kane
- Thread starter RichSpur58
- Start date
Trix
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2004
- 19,511
- 330,451
1 or 2 at most. With every additional name that comes in for that amount you have to spend you water down the quality.
Last edited:
Henderson Yid
Active Member
- Jun 29, 2012
- 217
- 245
Kaizer Fraubell
The chickens of the last 4 years have come home to roost. looking forward to watching Ange build a new coop and hope the brain trust that is Ange, SM and FP are the ones who select the eggs, not farmer Daniel. the links to Fati are troubling as it looks more of the same.
Trix
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2004
- 19,511
- 330,451
Depends on how many players that money is spent on doesn't it.
Chris Flynn
Well-Known Member
- Aug 3, 2012
- 1,459
- 3,988
He's still on his mums passport
0-Tibsy-0
Well-Known Member
- Aug 13, 2012
- 11,347
- 44,154
I'm sure they'll soon find another Club that the'll campaign for an asset strip.
Despite the vocal opposition to the Super League, those working within football really seem to want to create it but without the name.
They are so excited by big money transfers and the whole process that it has become the football narrative and thus the meaning of football, from a 'legacy' (
) fans point of view, diminishes.And then Kane, or the next player encouraged to move, wins a trophy and will perhaps be lauded. But they have won a trophy at a Club that always wins a trophy regardless of their involvement. Thus all we have is a monopoly and football becomes nothing, apparently, unless you play for one of the view Clubs spunking all the money to remove competition.
And journalists and social media lap it up. The romance dies. The emotion dies. The local tribalism dies. The history of Clubs will one day cease to matter to the masses unless they won a trophy the season before.
Can't be too mad at 120 mil pounds for a guy that didn't want to sign a new contract with the potential of moving to a rival for free.
It's a shame we put ourselves in this position but the only thing we can do is reinvest in all areas of the squad and build again.
Whilst i expect a rocky start, we seem to come back stronger(Even if it takes a year or 2) after selling our best players (Berbatov, Bale etc)
I couldn't bare to watch Harry play for another prem club, that would be horrible. It's now up to you Levy
It's a shame we put ourselves in this position but the only thing we can do is reinvest in all areas of the squad and build again.
Whilst i expect a rocky start, we seem to come back stronger(Even if it takes a year or 2) after selling our best players (Berbatov, Bale etc)
I couldn't bare to watch Harry play for another prem club, that would be horrible. It's now up to you Levy
dontcallme
SC Supporter
- Mar 18, 2005
- 34,320
- 83,586
Nope. Kane has a year left on his contract, making the fee lower.
Unless players have short contracts or release clauses, £100m just doesn’t go that far nowadays.
Last edited:
barry
Bring me Messi
- May 22, 2005
- 6,505
- 15,345
I live in hope buddy. I think we'll do well with the players we have now. I think with Ange at least having input in who we buy, we'll create a team that'll do amazing things. Love the dude. Love his talent ID
wrd
Well-Known Member
- Aug 22, 2014
- 13,603
- 58,005
Sky running with the story that "Tottenham insist Kane has permission to fly to Munich for Medical"
Now tell me in what other deal, what other situation does a club need to insist they're not making thing's difficult and that they're allowing thing's to happen. If our fanbase is ever going to wake up and see how the narratives are spun, see the way thing's are being twisted, it is now or never.
the club wants the story to be that they did everything they could to keep Kane but he turned his back on us, they had no other choice. It is an absolute fact, non disputable that they did have another choice.
Having made the decision that they simply have to cash in rather than let him go for free, the club now wants you to believe that Kane's behaviour has been disruptive. Yes, Ange's start to managing at Spurs has been disrupted by this story but the club wants you to believe that it is Kane that is making thing's difficult but this is demonstrably false. The fact of the matter is, the club could have chosen to communicate early with Kane, communicate early with Bayern and had this sorted and agreed in June. Before Kane even got a whiff of the new direction, met the new manager, the club could have sold him early to avoid disruption, the club wanted the best deal and chose the value of the deal over the value of thing's being sorted early. None of that was within Kane's control, what was in Kane's control was turning up to training and pre-season, he absolutely smashed pre-season, he did everything within his control.
Kane set a deadline to stay, Kane got his head turned by Ange and the likes of Maddison and was ready to stay. In doing this he revealed that the club want to cash in rather than risk losing an asset for free. Some of you have been convinced that he simply must sign a new deal in order to not have this hanging over the club. This is nothing more than shallow logic from a narrative spun that doesn't hold any water. Fact of the matter is, Kane says if not sold by this point, he'd rather stay for the season. There are transfer windows meaning your team is locked for the two halves of the season and Kane gave his word that he will stay. Therefore it only hangs over the club in your minds, not in reality. Ange can handle a few media questions and if people stopped paying attention, it would go away. We've spent 8 years hearing every season how Kane might leave, the idea that whether he stays or goes will disrupt us is pure fiction. Kane if he didn't sign a deal would have to play out of his skin to either prove his loyalty to us OR impress whichever team he hopes to join. Signing a new contract would leave him comfortable and not needing to.
The club then wants you to believe that Kane doesn't care about the club, only himself. He's given us everything, the worlds best striker suffered through Nuno, Jose, Conte. He told us the truth, if the club is heading in the right direction he would stay. His actions are consistent with his words, can you say the same of those running the club? No you cannot, they've demonstrably gone back on their word and have been inconsistent as evidenced by the going back to attacking football manifesto and hiring Paratici and Nuno, it is clear evidence that one has been consistent and one hasn't.
Be very clear of which contingent have been using the club and have been taking advantage of your loyalty for their own gain. Even if they've convinced themselves they're doing it for the club and yes I'm sure people will point to times where their actions have benefitted us but sometimes actions are mutually beneficial.
If you think the actions and the way they have been transpired have all been for the good of the club then simply put, the onus is on me to accept that people will never see it the way I do because if we can't see now that we're being taken for fools, I don't think we ever will but I simply cannot stand that our loyalty, our love for the club is going to used and narratives twisted so people are convinced that losing the player that sacrificed his short career for us is what's best in this moment.
Personally if Kane was smart, he'd leave because it's clear the club under it's current structure will not change but selfishly every fibre in my body hopes he calls the bluff and endures the misguided barbs of our fanbase, in doing so he might make the powers that be let the veil slip. As I've said it's not nefarious or evil, it's simply that their interests are not aligned with the fans but they want us to believe it.
Now tell me in what other deal, what other situation does a club need to insist they're not making thing's difficult and that they're allowing thing's to happen. If our fanbase is ever going to wake up and see how the narratives are spun, see the way thing's are being twisted, it is now or never.
the club wants the story to be that they did everything they could to keep Kane but he turned his back on us, they had no other choice. It is an absolute fact, non disputable that they did have another choice.
Having made the decision that they simply have to cash in rather than let him go for free, the club now wants you to believe that Kane's behaviour has been disruptive. Yes, Ange's start to managing at Spurs has been disrupted by this story but the club wants you to believe that it is Kane that is making thing's difficult but this is demonstrably false. The fact of the matter is, the club could have chosen to communicate early with Kane, communicate early with Bayern and had this sorted and agreed in June. Before Kane even got a whiff of the new direction, met the new manager, the club could have sold him early to avoid disruption, the club wanted the best deal and chose the value of the deal over the value of thing's being sorted early. None of that was within Kane's control, what was in Kane's control was turning up to training and pre-season, he absolutely smashed pre-season, he did everything within his control.
Kane set a deadline to stay, Kane got his head turned by Ange and the likes of Maddison and was ready to stay. In doing this he revealed that the club want to cash in rather than risk losing an asset for free. Some of you have been convinced that he simply must sign a new deal in order to not have this hanging over the club. This is nothing more than shallow logic from a narrative spun that doesn't hold any water. Fact of the matter is, Kane says if not sold by this point, he'd rather stay for the season. There are transfer windows meaning your team is locked for the two halves of the season and Kane gave his word that he will stay. Therefore it only hangs over the club in your minds, not in reality. Ange can handle a few media questions and if people stopped paying attention, it would go away. We've spent 8 years hearing every season how Kane might leave, the idea that whether he stays or goes will disrupt us is pure fiction. Kane if he didn't sign a deal would have to play out of his skin to either prove his loyalty to us OR impress whichever team he hopes to join. Signing a new contract would leave him comfortable and not needing to.
The club then wants you to believe that Kane doesn't care about the club, only himself. He's given us everything, the worlds best striker suffered through Nuno, Jose, Conte. He told us the truth, if the club is heading in the right direction he would stay. His actions are consistent with his words, can you say the same of those running the club? No you cannot, they've demonstrably gone back on their word and have been inconsistent as evidenced by the going back to attacking football manifesto and hiring Paratici and Nuno, it is clear evidence that one has been consistent and one hasn't.
Be very clear of which contingent have been using the club and have been taking advantage of your loyalty for their own gain. Even if they've convinced themselves they're doing it for the club and yes I'm sure people will point to times where their actions have benefitted us but sometimes actions are mutually beneficial.
If you think the actions and the way they have been transpired have all been for the good of the club then simply put, the onus is on me to accept that people will never see it the way I do because if we can't see now that we're being taken for fools, I don't think we ever will but I simply cannot stand that our loyalty, our love for the club is going to used and narratives twisted so people are convinced that losing the player that sacrificed his short career for us is what's best in this moment.
Personally if Kane was smart, he'd leave because it's clear the club under it's current structure will not change but selfishly every fibre in my body hopes he calls the bluff and endures the misguided barbs of our fanbase, in doing so he might make the powers that be let the veil slip. As I've said it's not nefarious or evil, it's simply that their interests are not aligned with the fans but they want us to believe it.
Last edited:
inclineyid
Well-Known Member
- Dec 5, 2006
- 618
- 1,396
Sad sad day, my Dad was Spurs and so I am. Took me to my first game in
1987 defeat to Watford at Vicarage Road. He suddenly passed away in late 2013 and I’ve slowly counted down the number of players still in the team that he watched/knew. It was lovely when Bale returned as one actually came back and the last real superstar we watched in the flesh together.
This summer, with Hugo and Harry leaving, means the side no longer has any players left in it that my Dad saw himself. Sorry to add further blues to a sad day but Levy really has let all the supporters down so badly on the football side it’s disgusting. Levy Out, Enic Out.
1987 defeat to Watford at Vicarage Road. He suddenly passed away in late 2013 and I’ve slowly counted down the number of players still in the team that he watched/knew. It was lovely when Bale returned as one actually came back and the last real superstar we watched in the flesh together.
This summer, with Hugo and Harry leaving, means the side no longer has any players left in it that my Dad saw himself. Sorry to add further blues to a sad day but Levy really has let all the supporters down so badly on the football side it’s disgusting. Levy Out, Enic Out.
Trix
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2004
- 19,511
- 330,451
Well how much would you be mad about cos it's nowhere near that.
SpartanSpur
Well-Known Member
- Jan 27, 2011
- 12,552
- 43,063
2 £50m+ and then Orban (£25m), I'd say. For me Eze and Tapsoba/Silva.
That's how an ambitious club would deal with this loss. The fact we are one of the only clubs with 100s of £m of FFP headroom is a sad indictment of the lack of ambition in our ownership.
No £80m+ players out there likely to join us.
felmani26
SC Supporter
- Jan 1, 2008
- 24,552
- 43,454
Orban and Tapsoba/Silva makes this alot more palatable.
I fear we'll be going opportunistic which flies in the face of the data driven approach we were lead to believe.
JacoZA
Well-Known Member
- Aug 2, 2013
- 889
- 4,801
Like we did when we bought Soldado with the Bale money?
fishhhandaricecake
Well-Known Member
- Nov 15, 2018
- 19,269
- 48,165
Not as simple as that.
Ndomble cost the earth so did Sanchez at the time both flops to an extent.
Toby/Jan and Eriksen and Son for example were all a half or a 1/4 of the price of those players and did incredibly for us.
£100mil doesn’t go that far these days , if we spend it all on say Vhalovic and he doesn’t adapt to the league we have wasted it all whereas if we use it on say Schurrs, Eze & Orban that would nicely improve a number of areas with good potential as part of this new exciting 4 year project.
muppetman
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2011
- 9,030
- 25,219
I've heard it all before. SCBC were a fabulously run football club, as were Swansea before them and no doubt loads of others as well.
Brighton have had a good couple of seasons, but let's see how they do over the next couple of seasons first. They have gambled well with signings over the last few years and made obscene amounts of money, it'll be interesting to see if they can use that to genuinely elevate themselves.
