What's new

The Mauricio Pochettino thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hans Gruber

Active Member
Aug 10, 2017
183
434
@Hans Gruber is right. The fees paid out on players comes with far less risk based on sell on value. That's why you're getting so many younger players going for high fees now, whereas players like Toby couldn't get the fee that was being demanded. Players are becoming a huge source of income now with the inflation doing what it's doing and with that the risk of signing a flop comes with a higher chance.

I can see a lot of teams targeting players with 2 years or less on their contracts now, knowing that the selling club need to sell to get top whack or risk losing him for a smaller fee or nothing the summers following

The flip side of this is that the demand for these types of players - those with under 2 years left on their contract - is rising across the board, and so subsequently their agents are able to demand increasingly higher salaries in return for their signature. And recently it's gone stratospheric, with even middling or aging players being offered ludicrous sums to move on a Bosman.

We've seen it recently with Alexis Sanchez and Ozil, both being paid probably 3 times what they're worth, and then guys like Max Meyer, Fellaini being able to rinse United, Wilshere on 100k, possibly Ramsey next (150k anyone?) the list goes on.

It looks to me like agents are wising up to this fact and are telling their players to hold out for that Bosman, as it'll be worth it in the long run. And who's to argue? Erisken gives it 2 more years and he could move anywhere to the highest bidder, who by then could be offering easily 300k a week. Absolute no brainer, so long as he doesn't get injured/suffer a complete loss of form. Alderweireld is probably thinking the same, maybe Dele too. I think the game is changing for clubs in this regard and Spurs are gonna have to adjust because this strategy of signing guys on super-long contracts for low-ball deals isn't already looking a bit defunct.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
The flip side of this is that the demand for these types of players - those with under 2 years left on their contract - is rising across the board, and so subsequently their agents are able to demand increasingly higher salaries in return for their signature. And recently it's gone stratospheric, with even middling or aging players being offered ludicrous sums to move on a Bosman.

We've seen it recently with Alexis Sanchez and Ozil, both being paid probably 3 times what they're worth, and then guys like Max Meyer, Fellaini being able to rinse United, Wilshere on 100k, possibly Ramsey next (150k anyone?) the list goes on.

It looks to me like agents are wising up to this fact and are telling their players to hold out for that Bosman, as it'll be worth it in the long run. And who's to argue? Erisken gives it 2 more years and he could move anywhere to the highest bidder, who by then could be offering easily 300k a week. Absolute no brainer, so long as he doesn't get injured/suffer a complete loss of form. Alderweireld is probably thinking the same, maybe Dele too. I think the game is changing for clubs in this regard and Spurs are gonna have to adjust because this strategy of signing guys on super-long contracts for low-ball deals isn't already looking a bit defunct.

People also forget that no other club in the top 6 has generated a profit before gate receipts other than us. Money isn't an endless rainbow attached to a pot, it inevitably runs out. Football went a bit bonkers when all of that television money flooded in but that was a lump sum and won't last forever. The inflation of player costs compared to the inflation of every day money simply isn't sustainable. It looks great for a lot of teams throwing around their money at the moment but inevitably whenever this has happened in the last markets have crashed.

I think the top clubs will continue to spend, making it a bit of an oligopoly but others not finding a way of balancing their books will suffer & there could be a lot of them.

Villa got away with murder this summer with their new owners but there aren't enough willing billionaires out there to bail the others out when some will inevitably fail.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
People also forget that no other club in the top 6 has generated a profit before gate receipts other than us. Money isn't an endless rainbow attached to a pot, it inevitably runs out. Football went a bit bonkers when all of that television money flooded in but that was a lump sum and won't last forever. The inflation of player costs compared to the inflation of every day money simply isn't sustainable. It looks great for a lot of teams throwing around their money at the moment but inevitably whenever this has happened in the last markets have crashed.

I think the top clubs will continue to spend, making it a bit of an oligopoly but others not finding a way of balancing their books will suffer & there could be a lot of them.

Villa got away with murder this summer with their new owners but there aren't enough willing billionaires out there to bail the others out when some will inevitably fail.

We've already seen this summer the money that pl clubs spent on transfers went down. Quite considerably. The domestic tv deal dropped slightly the international deal increased but there is no certainty that it will continue doing so.
Player prices are in a bubble at the moment as clubs bought players thinking their value will keep on increasing. Think we will see a flatline of prices soon.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
We've already seen this summer the money that pl clubs spent on transfers went down. Quite considerably. The domestic tv deal dropped slightly the international deal increased but there is no certainty that it will continue doing so.
Player prices are in a bubble at the moment as clubs bought players thinking their value will keep on increasing. Think we will see a flatline of prices soon.

Agreed &a when we do we should be in a great position as other clubs have bloated out their squads with players on silly money &a long term contracts. Investing in the infrastructure & rewarding current performers with higher salaries & contract extensions was a good call and very wise. If the market drops like I think it will we should be in great shape to get our noses ahead of others that have seemingly outgunned us financially for the last year or two
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Agreed &a when we do we should be in a great position as other clubs have bloated out their squads with players on silly money &a long term contracts. Investing in the infrastructure & rewarding current performers with higher salaries & contract extensions was a good call and very wise. If the market drops like I think it will we should be in great shape to get our noses ahead of others that have seemingly outgunned us financially for the last year or two

It will only be wise if we finish in the top 4 and keep hold of our players and manager.
There is still value to be found in the market and we should have strengthened in the summer to give us the best chance.
 

RichieS

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2004
11,916
16,436
Being willing to back him over the egos in the dressing room, giving him time to get everything how he wants it, getting the players he wants even if they're solid and unspectacular instead of galacticos etc.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
It will only be wise if we finish in the top 4 and keep hold of our players and manager.
There is still value to be found in the market and we should have strengthened in the summer to give us the best chance.

Agree wholeheartedly. The club took a big risk not enhancing the quality of the squad this time around. If they get top 4 it will be a great risk they've took but if it comes at the expense of Champions League football it will cost them more than it makes them. A big season both on the pitch &a economically for our club
 

Spurslove

Well-Known Member
Jul 6, 2012
6,627
9,281
Personally think we could do with Mourinho leaving sooner rather than later. I don't think Poch would push to leave mid-season, and Zidane seems to want the Utd job. I think that would prove too tempting.

Utd would really worry me, that and Madrid seem the big two concerns, but I think the combination of the crazy compensation required and Poch's integrity would mean we would be ok if Mourinho was sacked before Xmas. Now if they got a caretaker in until the summer that could be different, but I don't think they would.

Mate, Poch is NOT going to join United, not next summer or any of the next four summers at least. Trust me. :)

.
 

TottenhamMattSpur

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
10,925
16,007
It will only be wise if we finish in the top 4 and keep hold of our players and manager.
There is still value to be found in the market and we should have strengthened in the summer to give us the best chance.

People assume the only way to strengthen is to buy first 11 players but we all know it's a 17-25 man game. It's not even about buying a quality player and guaranteeing them first team football anymore. Our options off the bench are decent players but I don't always feel we have enough variation at times.
Buying something different to what we have would have been my preference.
 

dudu

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2011
5,314
11,048
People assume the only way to strengthen is to buy first 11 players but we all know it's a 17-25 man game. It's not even about buying a quality player and guaranteeing them first team football anymore. Our options off the bench are decent players but I don't always feel we have enough variation at times.
Buying something different to what we have would have been my preference.

True, but we do have more attacking options available to us than we did at the start of and for the most part of last season so our bench is somewhat stronger and more versatile in that area.
 

LexingtonSpurs

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2013
13,456
39,042
Utd would go for zidane over poch. Zidane would have a better effect on their share price and will calm investors who know little about football.
lol - but no.

Glazers control about 90% of the voting shares - they don't care about share price.*

*but I agree they know little about football.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
lol - but no.

Glazers control about 90% of the voting shares - they don't care about share price.*

*but I agree they know little about football.

They don't care about the value of their asset or how rich they are? The banks and hedge funds that they owe hundreds of millions to don't care? The other businesses they own that owe hundreds of millions that the glazers use utd as collateral don't care?
 

LexingtonSpurs

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2013
13,456
39,042
What dictates the value of the club?
Depends on what you mean?

Traditionally, the value of any business is determined by revenues and expenses (and net cash flow). You project out a limited number of years, and you put a value on it.

A sports franchise is similar, yet different. Buyers frequently look at a sports franchise as a trophy, and not an on-going business concern. So, in that case, the value is whatever the buyer will pay.

And the value of the club only becomes relevant in the course of a sale. Whether United hire Zidane or Poch will not have any impact on a sale of ManUnited.

The right question to ask here - which manager will drive more revenue/positive cash flow to the club. Its a difficult question to answer - Zidane brings more world-wide recognition in the short-term, but I think in a 5+ year horizon, Poch delivers more value to the club, but buying and developing young players. Poch would win titles with United. Not sure ZZ would.
 

LexingtonSpurs

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2013
13,456
39,042
They don't care about the value of their asset or how rich they are? The banks and hedge funds that they owe hundreds of millions to don't care? The other businesses they own that owe hundreds of millions that the glazers use utd as collateral don't care?
They don’t care. The short term valuation difference is negligible
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top