). Hard to say definitively. I mean, come on, the kid never played and never did much when he did. returning (plus or minus you decide).), and hardly played even under Redknapp, whereas the incoming players may be fewer in numbers, but the quality, versatility and suitability to AVBs predilictions, make the squad stronger.
Yes, but that's a bit of a facile comparison, TBH.
GOAL-KEEPER:
If Lloris comes even close to his billing then him backed by Brad has to be stronger than Brad supported by Cuducini.
Verdict: Stronger IMHO.
Agreed. Very excited about Lloris and this is one area where we have definitely improved.
CENTRAL DEFENCE:
King - so fecked that, ultimately, he was the shadow of what he was, but preventing us form building any sort of stability at the back. Would have been perfect for AVB in his heyday, but as of the last half of last season, which is, after all, the player who retired, likely to sadly be a liability
Nelsen - half-season's worth of old-mandom, that no-one wanted, hardly played and was bound to be even more decrepid this season. Not ever really the type of defender to suit AVB, even at his peak, and that was long-ago.
Bassong - half-decent first season, but with some blatant flaws, total pish since, lost confidence completely.
Exchanged for
Vertonghen - Ajax captain, at peak of game, coveted by our rivals and most of Europe, suits the style of play that AVB promises, also may offer genuine goal threat.
Steven Caulker - Young, exciting, played a similar to AVBs in EPL and played it well.
Verdict = IMVHO, younger, fitter, leaner, more suitable.
King made a huge difference in the first half of the season. Yes he declined in the last half, and there was no way of stopping that, however the difference he made to our form in the first few months should not be discounted. At this time last year King was still capable of putting in some incredible performances.
Vertonghen has the potential to be one of the best in the league. I'm also looking forward to seeing Caulker progress.
So, King gone and replaced by Verts = touch and go on this. Certainly better than King in the 2nd half of the season - not so sure about being better than King in the first.
Caulker replaces Nelsen = improvement.
This leaves us one CB down on last season. In a way it's a good thing Kaboul got injured before the window closed, otherwise we'd be minus Dawson as well. Overall, we have less options so I'd say it's slightly worse than last season.
FULL-BACKS:
Corluka - not happy with being second-best, signs of disruption over Modric debacle. Good player, I always rated him, and especially the way he could put Lennon through that seemed to go under the radar with most folk. At the same time, he had a pace-deficit and was highly likely to get punished for it time after time in an AVB system.
Danny Rose - I was one of the few who thought he was promising, so quite surprised he went, but only a loan, and may be because he wants to play.
Recplaced with
Naughton - can play both sides, good pace, comfortable on the ball and so suited to AVBs predilictions (and, unlike some, I think he is a decent player).
Verdict = difficult to call. In regard to Naughton/Corluka, overall, and specifically in regard to an AVB system, I think a fast and contented Naughton is a better option than a malcontened and slow Corluka, even if Charlie is ATM a better player. Can only assume that Smith can come in if needed, otherwise we could be in trouble if both our 1st choice full-backs got crocked or had a terrible loss of form (some may say that has already happened with Walker
You're right - Naughton can play both FB positions. Is he particularly good there? Not really, in my opinion. Whether or not Corluka was happy isn't the issue here - it's whether or not a player of his ability has been replaced. The answer is no. Corluka was better cover for Walker than Naughton is.
As for LB...well both Bale and Vertonghen can cover, however that means moving them from their usual positions (because..y'know...Bale isn't a LB
Overall - weaker than last season.
It's hard, really, to categorise in midfield, but I'll try:
ON THE LEFT:
Pienaar - well you may remember that I rated Pienaar and wanted him at the Lane. Thought he was a bit unlucky, and not treated the best. Hoped for him to get a chance under AVB, as I think he would be well suited. Sadly was not to be. But, to be frank, he never played, so we are losing a player who never played.
Krankjar - a disenchanted fatty with no pace who was, like Charlie, always going to side with Modric, and by last season, if not earlier, even Mr Redknapp didn't trust him. Another player who was not likely to suit AVBs predilictions, and, frankly, by dint of hardly playing can hardly be counted a big loss - even if he gave us some great moments when he first came in.
Replaced with
??? I am presuming Townsend (unless he has gone out on loan and I've missed it) - who always seems full of drive and purpose to me.
Verdict = Hard to say on this one. If we are replacing two disaffected players who hardly played with a faster one who is eager then I don't see the loss.
ON THE RIGHT:
GDS - is that a joke?
Bentley -
Replaced with
Presumably Dempsey.
Verdict = so that's conclusive, The Phantom of the Opera would be an upgrade. Having someone of Dempsey's quality and experience, capable of covering Lennon, amongst other things, has to be a Yay.
IN THE MIDDLE:
Modric - massive loss. Was not firing on all cylinders, afaiac, last season and was always going to go. Would have been hugely disruptive if he had stayed, I'm afraid - and you do have to consider that.
Replaced with
Dembele, I suppose - we all know Moutinho was supposed to eb the Modric replacement, making it harder to argue this one, but the general concensus was that we would be better trying to adopt a different system with a player suited to that, anyway, so, maybe Dembele will compensate. He does at least promise more goals
And we do have THudd (if he doesn't go out on loan) and Jenas
Verdict = there's no doubting it, we have lost a great player. Only time will tell whether a fully-motivated Dembele who actually wants to be here as his stepping up, rather than an unmotivated Modric, fretting over his stepping-up happening, is adequate cover. So, as a first team, we are weaker for that.
MIDFIELD/STRIKER LINK-UP:
VDV - again, we all know this is a loss, but, the sad truth is that he went for the sake of his family life. I believe he was professional enough to stay focussed through that, but there was clearly a part of him that wasn't happy. Also, I don't want to sound churlish, but he was injury prone and lacked a degree of fitness.
Replaced with
Sigurdsson - as good as VDV. No, not now, maybe not ever. But he is more athletic, younger and not injury prone (as of yet)
Verdict = Again, clearly the first team is weaker, but hoepfully Sigs fitness and athleticism will compensate. I personally also feel that Sigs is more genuinely versatile than VDV, who I never liked on the right.
I'm going to discuss the midfield positions as a whole, as many of the players concerned could play multiple positions:
Dismissing Kranjcar as a disenchanted fatty is ridiculous. He was a quality player, and under AVB's fitness regime he would have done well.
Pienaar was a brilliant squad player to have in my opinion. A versatile midfielder that would have been an asset. I do remember you rating him as well.
I think you've missed the obvious upgrade in this area - Dempsey. Left midfield is where he played most of his games for Fulham, and if Bale gets injured I suspect he'd be played there instead of on the right. That Dempsey can play on the right as well means he is a great additon to the squad. In many ways his versatility is close to being a more attacking replacement for what Pienaar brought to the team so an excellent signing in my opinion.
Bentley? Agree that he didn't add anything. Lost whatever talent he had. As for Gio - this won't be a widely held view but I actually thought he could do well in AVB's system. The kid has got talent, but has never had an opportunity at Spurs to show this. Look at the games he played. Look at the minutes. They were few and far between, yet some still think he failed regularly for us.
Sig as good as VDV? You're having a laugh SP. I have a lot of confidence in Sig, but I don't think he'll ever be in the same class as VDV. Not now - not in 5 years - not ever.
Dembele is a good player, but not anywhere near as good as Modric, which thanks to us missing out on Moutinho, is what he'll be expected to be.
Overall our midfield is weaker. The best players at the club have gone, and some great options that gave our squad depth have been sold. In my opinion we're weaker in midfield.
STRIKER:
Come on, Spurg, you are being a bit disingenuous, here - Saha replaced Pav, you can't rightly include the two.
Saha - another half-season wonder with injury troubles who isn't what he as back in the day.
Replaced with
Dempsey - I suppose.
Verdict = fitter.
I admit that Pav was replaced by Saha. I should have known you'd spot that
Difficult to say whether or not we've improved here. Some could say we've got Dempsey in, who can score goals and play as a striker, and they are right he does do that. But in that case who is replacing the goal scoring contribution of VDV? If Dempsey is a Saha replacement, then VDV's contribution has not been replaced. I still consider Sig to be more of a Kranjcar replacement in terms of quality and capacity to score. If Dempsey is a VDV replacement then we've released Saha and not brought in a new striker. Some will say that Dempsey can cover both, and that Saha didn't really offer a regular goal scoring threat. However if you look at the team at the beginning of last season we had pav, who whilst unpopular with many, and also lazy, would certainly score goals. We also had VDV. Dempsey only represents a replacement for one of those, and in the case of VDV he's not an improvement.
It's not a bad squad by any means, however I feel that we've left ourselves short up-front, in midfield, and in our full-back positions compared to the squad we had this time last year. It's also questionable whether or not our centre-backs are an improvement on what we had. The only area where I'd say we've definitely improved is inthe goalkeeping department.
So in conclusion - I have too much time on my hand (though in truth I'm waiting for a cottage pie to finish cooking
I'd say we're about two or three players short of a squad that could be said to have improved on last season. Moutinho and a back-up striker for Ade (or even better - someone like Leandro), would represent that.
The crux of my argument is that the players we have coming in are fitter and more suited to AVBs system, and that the first team is weaker for losing Modric, VDV and Ledley (not so much the Ledley of last half of last season, I'm afraid), but that the majority of our outgoings were flabby (in some cases, literally
I would also consider that, if we take AVB at his word, he said that he was going to assess the squad in pre-season, and that that included having a good hard look at the younglings. It may well be that he has some of them in mindwhen he allowed some of our outgoings/accounted for squad cover, that you aren't seeing/considering and are looking for purchases to cover.
It is, of course, all subjective, but IMVHO the squad is thinner, leaner, more dependable, more versatile and more motivated.
Two seperate lists with no reference point between them, followed by a terse reiteration of your subjective viewpoint (not that I'm rejecting that as invalid - if that was what you thought).. (and the most optimistic hope that AVB and co. can actually tutor him, rather than unleashing him). 
).
The way you presented your argument
1) You made the following statement:
I posted a list of the incoming and outgoing players as a direct (and obvious to most people) follow-on from your statement. In fact you could say I listed all the players we have bought and sold in order to see if your statement stands out more starkly. I presented the information you referred to, and offered a brief statement to show how I don't think it implies that the squad has improved in the way you believe.
2) I don't think we have enough depth, and you've not really addressed that issue. Strange really considering the lack of squad depth is the most obvious issue here. If we say that Dempsey replaces VDV, Vertonghen replaces King, Lloris replaces Friedel, and Dembele replaces Modric, we're left with the following additions (or returning players) to the squad that aren't part of the first team - a first team you concede is weaker than the one we had last season:
Sigurdsson
Caulker
Naughton
Compare this to the squad players we released or loaned out:
Pienaar
Kranjcar
Corluka
Gio
Rose
Nelsen
Bassong
Bentley
Saha
Now sig has the potential to be far better than Kranjcar, and could become a first-team regular. Caulker too has a lot of potential and is arguably an improvement on either Nelsen or Bassong. However - 3) are you honestly saying that we're better off having less players with premiership experience to call upon? One injury to Dempsey and we have no cover for Adebayor, Lennon, or Bale (4) unless you want to make claims about Townsend that are based on very little evidence).
5) You call the squad thinner and leaner. 6) I suspect the crux of our differences of opinion is down to you seeing that as a positive thing. Personally I feel that although Saha, Bentley, Bassong, Gio and Rose might not have been great options to call upon in an emergency, they were significantly better than no options at all, which is 7) exactly what they've been replaced with - nothing. There will be injuries and suspensions, and I fully expect the team to be down to the bare bones on too many occasions between now and January at the least - and suffering as a result of it.
8) Probably due to you writing the following sentence:
That's called a 'statement'. If you add one of these - ? - it changes that sentence from a statement into a question. You follow it up with: If you'd written the first part in a way that matched how you intended to express yourself then it would make sense. Instead it reads as if you're entertaining the idea that you believe he could be as good as VDV, with the caveat that 'maybe' he won't ever be. It's not really a huge point, but 9) seeing as you're so quick to adopt an entirely unjust approach of dishing out insults this evening I'm happy to pick you up on it.
10) Also pretty sure I'm younger than you
I can assure you that I was in hearty good humour, and can only imagine that any inference to the contrary was wholly without foundation. ). Maybe the truth is going to be somewhere in between - but which one of is right depends on exactly where we draw that line. Clearly I am being more optimistic than you, but what of that - one of us will be proven wrong, but we don't know which one yet (and I shouldn't need to say that this is what makes our opinions just that and not the statement of a fact being perversely contested).) to make it clear that I considered this to be a discussion with a poster capable of such. Perhaps you could show me where I hurled insults readily at you?
I can't remember dishing out any insults - I did go out of my way to add my usual symbols of bonhomie (such as
Being younger than me doesn't disqualify you from being past-the-sell-by-date, alas
