The Deadline Day ITK Discussion Thread - 1st September

[mr ashley]

Not really at the expense of their careers though. They are still getting paid, and will find new teams next season.

Yeah because they’ve all got ages left at the top level

 

[Rob]

I mean I don't think that's true at all. £30m from Fulham for Højbjerg is a huge compromise. Just because people don't like him, doesn't mean that isn't true.

I'm not sure I follow. How so?

You think we should be getting MORE than £30m for him!? Atletico were offering £15m.

 

[mil1lion]

Not really at the expense of their careers though. They are still getting paid, and will find new teams next season.

It will be difficult for some of them to find a good team if they barely play for a season. I think they are on the best wages they will have so maybe why they are willing to take that risk. Sit out their high wages and hope to get a decent free transfer with signing on bonus next summer.

 

[nicdic]

We like the idea of it but it isn't at the core ethos of the club.

Perfect example of this is sacking Mourinho before a cup final as you don't want to pay him a bonus if he wins it.

That just highlights the ultimate concern all the time.

We did OK in the transfer window like I said. We did sell Harry Kane mind for 100 million and are sticking two transfers we made in January into the equation to give us any net spend.

Chelsea on the other hand have gone and dropped a billion quid to try and compete. Aimlessly may I had but at least they are trying to compete. Arsenal as well are really pushing with success on the pitch the main driving factor.

I don't hate the ownership as much as some on here but we need to accept the way it is going to be until they are gone.

Quite a lot fans were very happy with the sacking of Mourinho, and I'm not sure it was motivated solely by the potential of having to pay a bonus. I mean if that's true, that's ridiculous, maybe I'm naive, but I find it very hard to believe that.

Chelsea are basically a real life version of someone playing Football Manager, comparing to them is honestly absolutely nuts.

Arsenal have done less business. 1 defender (who's out for the season with injury), Rice, for an enormous fee, and Havertz again for an enormous fee. And the loan deal for Raya. I'd say that's a pretty comparable window to ours really.

 

[nicdic]

I'm not sure I follow. How so?

You think we should be getting MORE than £30m for him!? Atletico were offering £15m.

Up until the very end last night, they were rumoured to be offering £45m.

If we really weren't willing to negotiate on players, then that's clearly not good, when we need them out.

But we did accept offers for all these players, and yet they're still here.

 

[mr ashley]

I just don’t get what our strategy was with trying to sell Sanchez.

- We know we have to sell this window or he will go free next summer
- So we know we may have to sell for less than our valuation or risk not selling at all. Selling for £5m below our valuation is still better than selling for £0 next summer.
- Yet we still drag it out until the last day to try squeeze those extra couple million out of buying clubs
- But doing that means we can’t buy the replacement as the selling club don’t have enough time to replace them. With no replacement we can’t sell Sanchez.
- So trying to squeeze the extra couple million out of the Sanchez deal means we have lost the full amount for him and will have to let him go for free next summer

I just don’t get it, it’s another classic example of Penny wise, pound foolish from our supposedly financially/business savvy chairman.

Can someone shed light on this as it makes zero sense to me.

Exactly!
it was reported that Rennes wanted him for £10m and we thought £15m was his value
Now we’re stuck with him and he can leave for £0 next summer
Well done Daniel, you really won that negotiation!

 

[Rob]

Arsenal have done less business. 1 defender (who's out for the season with injury), Rice, for an enormous fee, and Havertz again for an enormous fee. And the loan deal for Raya. I'd say that's a pretty comparable window to ours really.

If Arsenal had sold Henry it'd be comparable...

I know you're not trolling us but it really feels like it. We've just lost our arguably best ever player and main goalscorer and you think we've had a comparable window to Arsenal?

 

[THFCSPURS19]

Up until the very end last night, they were rumoured to be offering £45m.

Um not sure that's right?

 

[only1waddle]

And yet in the last two season that has clearly been changing in terms of our recruitment, no?

I haven't stated it hasn't, and it HAD to improve after the disaster of Hitchin, but what we witnessed yesterday was a return to his previous wannabe rockstar deadline day MO.

 

[Rob]

Um not sure that's right?

Of course it's not. But it fits the narrative that Levy "compromised" by accepting £30m for him.

 

[cjsimba]

Exactly!
it was reported that Rennes wanted him for £10m and we thought £15m was his value
Now we’re stuck with him and he can leave for £0 next summer
Well done Daniel, you really won that negotiation!

I’m genuinely baffled. There just be something I’m missing. Please someone let me know.

 

[mr ashley]

Quite a lot fans were very happy with the sacking of Mourinho, and I'm not sure it was motivated solely by the potential of having to pay a bonus. I mean if that's true, that's ridiculous, maybe I'm naive, but I find it very hard to believe that.

Chelsea are basically a real life version of someone playing Football Manager, comparing to them is honestly absolutely nuts.

Arsenal have done less business. 1 defender (who's out for the season with injury), Rice, for an enormous fee, and Havertz again for an enormous fee. And the loan deal for Raya. I'd say that's a pretty comparable window to ours really.

Rice £110m
Havertz £65m
Timber £45m
Raya £5m loan

maddison £40m
Vdv£45m
Johnson£45m
Vicario £15m

let me get my calculator

 

[Aleks]

I just don’t get what our strategy was with trying to sell Sanchez.

- We know we have to sell this window or he will go free next summer
- So we know we may have to sell for less than our valuation or risk not selling at all. Selling for £5m below our valuation is still better than selling for £0 next summer.
- Yet we still drag it out until the last day to try squeeze those extra couple million out of buying clubs
- But doing that means we can’t buy the replacement as the selling club don’t have enough time to replace them. With no replacement we can’t sell Sanchez.
- So trying to squeeze the extra couple million out of the Sanchez deal means we have lost the full amount for him and will have to let him go for free next summer

I just don’t get it, it’s another classic example of Penny wise, pound foolish from our supposedly financially/business savvy chairman.

Can someone shed light on this as it makes zero sense to me.

I just think we couldn't get a replacement for him (clubs weren't accepting our offers, players didn't want to come and be 3rd choice) and having him for a year is worth more than letting his contract expire.

 

[only1waddle]

Um not sure that's right?

He must mean offering for Gallagher, surely..

 

[nicdic]

If Arsenal had sold Henry it'd be comparable...

I know you're not trolling us but it really feels like it. We've just lost our arguably best ever player and main goalscorer and you think we've had a comparable window to Arsenal?

I think our business in, is comparable.

I was gutted to sell Kane, but it seemed pretty inevitable in the end. I guess unlike some here I just didn't think that we were going to be buying a striker to replace him, and it seemed clear that Richarlison was the replacement. I'm not down on that, when combined with purchasing Maddison, completely overhauling our midfield, and adding another couple of options outwide like Solomon and Johnson.

I just can't see that it's an outright awful window.

I'm sure we could have done more to get players out, I would have liked that, but the idea that Levy is actively trying to hamper us doing that and progressing on the pitch is just ridiculous.

 

[DannyNZ]

I haven't stated it hasn't, and it HAD to improve after the disaster of Hitchin, but what we witnessed yesterday was a return to his previous wannabe rockstar deadline day MO.

Agree to know we wanted and needed another CB and then be scrambling around on deadline day is frankly stupidity, negligence and after 20 years who would have thought inexperience.

 

[nicdic]

Rice £110m
Havertz £65m
Timber £45m
Raya £5m loan

maddison £40m
Vdv£45m
Johnson£45m
Vicario £15m

let me get my calculator

Oh, so it's just about how much they cost?

 

[nicdic]

Um not sure that's right?

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I saw reports at different times saying that, so that's what I'm referring to. If that's wide of the mark, fair enough.

 

[Rob]

I think our business in, is comparable.

Maybe, but we needed a LOT more than Arsenal and we did lose Kane. You can't just look at the ins in isolation without the context.

 

[DannyNZ]

I think it’s important to understand that claims of Davies being able to function at cb are optimistic at best.
playing LCB in a defensive back 3 is vastly different to being playing LCB in a pressing back 4.
so let’s be clear- he’s never done it.
huge risk to expect it to work

Not to mention he is the cover at LB for Udogie, so if Udogie out for any reason we are scrambling for a LCB, hello Sanchez and Dier ffs.