Would you sell Huddlestone...?

[sloth]

Doesn't the fact that the suggestion of Manchester United being interested in him get you thinking - "hang on, maybe there's something I'm missing here with Huddlestone."

When you consider Barry left Villa for £25m - there's no way Hudd will go for anything less if indeed his head is turned and wants to go or you are right, and Tommy is surplus to Spurs requirements.

By that rationale we'd never sell players to anyone equal or better than us because the evidence of their desire would be proof positive that whoever they were interested in should be held on to.

Should Arsene never have sold Thierry Henry? Or Nic Anelka? Or Pires? Or Overmars? When the buying clubs became interested shouldn't he have twigged they needed to be held onto?

But in the specific case of Utd and Huddlestone (not that I lend much credence to the report tbh) I think we happen to already have ready made alternatives within the squad, both in terms of players to fill his void and players elsewhere on the pitch to offer the creativity we'd lose with his departure.

On the other side of the coin Utd don't have a Huddlestone type player in their CM, the closest they have is Carrick ironically enough, and Huddlestone is today a better player than Carrick is. The rest of their centre midfield options are of a certain mould or age.

Finally, I don't think Huddlestone is the long-term solution to Utd's decline, I personally think he lacks the fire and drive of your classic Utd midfielder and so purchasing him will in the long-run be a bit of a white elephant for them.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I think this is just clever psychology from SAF. Making sure our slowest midfielder gets played tomorrow so he can play his pensioners Scholes & Giggs in midfield without worrying about them having to work to hard before the CL games.

 

[StartingPrice]

University has changed you Tash :grin:

It is only right that a University education should make a person wiser and more cerebral:grin:

THIS

wheter or not you believe Huddlestone is over rated or the future of our club we need to become a team that builds and sells on our terms, not because 'bigger' clubs come in for our players and we are forced to sell.

I (and we all) have had enough of Utd buying our players, we are not broke (don't need to sell) and there is no reason we should be selling members of our first team or first team squad (we have plenty of 'dead wood' players to sell first)

All we really need is a top draw striker to complete our squad options and then let everyone grow and gel together over time to become a consistant unit.

F**k man u, they can keep their hands of Bale, Modric, VDV, Defoe, Lennon , hudd and anyone else they feel to eye up.

This. The single most important consideration in any discussion concerning the sale of our players from thispoint on!

1) Statistically BC takes an average of 14 minutes to respond to a Huddlestone post, 2) which probably proves something somehow.

1) :rofl:;
2) :roll: your normal expressive game has deserted you for the all important conclusion to your criticism. Must try harder:-|

 

[Mr Pink]

I don't know about you guys, but I always thought a selling club was one which had to sell players to pay the bills, smaller clubs who'd already reached their level and whose sole goal was to remain where they are and hope something might come along one day to give them a boost.

Under those criteria I think we can safely say we're not a selling club!

But not being a selling club is not the same as being a club which doesn't sell players. And saying that every player has his price is a simple truth. As is pointing out that not every sale is going to have been engendered by us.

We have an objective and that is to build a bigger stadium which will provide the revenue which in turn is a platform for sustainable success. Higher revenue means we can afford better players and a better, larger stadium means will be an added attraction to current and putative players.

How do we afford to build a stadium? How can we keep bidding for the stars of the future? Is the answer to buy big and sell for less? should we never sell the players which command a good transfer fee and only sell those that don't? If we say this should be our strategy, then where does the money come from? Do we borrow money?

The truth is that if clubs were run by fans we'd all be like Newcastle or Leeds, we'd say we're never selling so-and-so or whatisname and then so-and-so would get a bit older or lose form and whatisname get an injury or whatever and we'd be clamouring for the next signing, but the money wouldn't be there because we'd be spending it all on interest payments, because we only ever buy big and sell for less.

None of which makes the case for selling your best players and there are some you simply have to ring-fence and say "no way!", but in order to keep hold of the Gareth Bales of this world you have to say that there are other high-value players for which there might be a price. You've got to be strategic about it, but we've also got be realistic.

In short then, player trading is legitimate as long as it's working towards the long-term success of the goal and the opposite, refusing to do business at decent prices for fear it makes us "selling club", will in the long term harm our prospects.

Fortunately Daniel Levy's our chairman.

Player trading is always legitimate but you dont want to be selling your important players. A revolving door is always going to disrupt stability, development and understanding on the pitch and the general way a team gels and builds up that understanding and team spirit.

Would I sell David Bentley for the right price? Yes, of course. Would I be inclined to sell Huddlestone for a realistic price, not a shot in hell.

We have a huge sqaud now, selling players on the periphery makes good business sense, selling players who are/and have been an integral part to the way we have played doesn't make sense to me. I see no reason to disrupt this impressive progress we are making. Selling key players to rivals only strengthens them and weakens us, its stalls are progress on the pitch no matter how many dollars you have sitting in the bank - it takes time to rebuild again.

Good read from kevin keegan regarding Bale and us keeping him:

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story?id=836868&sec=england&root=england&cc=5739

 

[WhiteHart4Ever]

Some of the comments on here...One of the first names on the team sheet, vital to our style of play, not anywhere near replaceable by anyone in our squad..

 

[morpheus]

Um... we sell another young, top CM to Man Utd and get our old one back as make-weight... No thanks. And stick the £20m in the darkest place of your lillywhite ass.

I think this is another article put about by the press as we are due to play them. It seems that these rumours always come out just before a game with the club

Yeah I've noticed that aswell whenever we play them a story always seem to appear in the papers about them wanting to buy one of our players, the last time it was Bale and before that it was Modric...I'd take the interset with a big pinch of salt!

 

[sloth]

Player trading is always legitimate but you dont want to be selling your important players. A revolving door is always going to disrupt stability, development and understanding on the pitch and the general way a team gels and builds up that understanding and team spirit.

I agree with this.

Would I sell David Bentley for the right price? Yes, of course. Would I be inclined to sell Huddlestone for a realistic price, not a shot in hell.

We have a huge sqaud now, selling players on the periphery makes good business sense, selling players who are/and have been an integral part to the way we have played doesn't make sense to me. I see no reason to disrupt this impressive progress we are making. Selling key players to rivals only strengthens them and weakens us, its stalls are progress on the pitch no matter how many dollars you have sitting in the bank - it takes time to rebuild again.

I agree selling players on the periphery makes good business sense, even if in some cases it's also called cutting your losses.

I guess this debate, like all the others, hinges on the different level at which we value a player. For me Huddlestone is as good as he's ever going to be. Perhaps he'll become more potent goal-scoring wise, his passing may improve a little too, but he's structural deficits are only going to grow worse as he ages.

I also think our side lacks a bit of fire-in-the-belly, I agree with those that say Huddlestone sets the tone for the side, but there's something a bit limp about him which is also conveyed.

On the other hand we have some very good creatives in the side and some potentially good CMs in Palcios and Sandro.

So, while I think on current evidence Huddlestone is our best option to anchor the midfield I also think a player like Sandro has the potential to surpass him and maybe quite quickly. I acknowledge selling him now would be a gamble, so the best option is to wait until the end of the season and get a real feel for Sandro in that position.

But we also shouldn't wait until Huddlestone is no longer in the side having been surpassed, but instead do like Wenger's proved to be a past master at and sell when a player appears to be still on his way up but who in reality as peaked or declined. The fans will always howl about it at the time, but in hindsight acknowledge it was the right decision.

This all assumes of course, that anyone wants to pay £16m+ for Huddlestone, which tbh I doubt.

 

[phil]

I think this is just clever psychology from SAF. Making sure our slowest midfielder gets played tomorrow so he can play his pensioners Scholes & Giggs in midfield without worrying about them having to work to hard before the CL games.

Would I sell? Yes, if the price is right. Definitely, if it meant getting Carrick or Berbatov back.

Are Manchester United really interested? No way. Just mind games after Fergie watched Hudd's (non) display against Inter.

 

[nailsy]

I'm not sure if I'd sell him or not. If we could sell him and sign a world class replacement in the same window it would be very tempting, but do we really want to sell another first team player to United?

 

[Caboose]

If they did sign him, watch him walk straight into the England team

 

[Mr Pink]

I agree with this.



I agree selling players on the periphery makes good business sense, even if in some cases it's also called cutting your losses.

I guess this debate, like all the others, hinges on the different level at which we value a player. For me Huddlestone is as good as he's ever going to be. Perhaps he'll become more potent goal-scoring wise, his passing may improve a little too, but he's structural deficits are only going to grow worse as he ages.

I also think our side lacks a bit of fire-in-the-belly, I agree with those that say Huddlestone sets the tone for the side, but there's something a bit limp about him which is also conveyed.

On the other hand we have some very good creatives in the side and some potentially good CMs in Palcios and Sandro.

So, while I think on current evidence Huddlestone is our best option to anchor the midfield I also think a player like Sandro has the potential to surpass him and maybe quite quickly. I acknowledge selling him now would be a gamble, so the best option is to wait until the end of the season and get a real feel for Sandro in that position.

But we also shouldn't wait until Huddlestone is no longer in the side having been surpassed, but instead do like Wenger's proved to be a past master at and sell when a player appears to be still on his way up but who in reality as peaked or declined. The fans will always howl about it at the time, but in hindsight acknowledge it was the right decision.

This all assumes of course, that anyone wants to pay £16m+ for Huddlestone, which tbh I doubt.

Huddlestone is still only 23. Whilst I agree that his game is never going to based on real surging runs and turns of pace, he still has more to learn. I disagree that he cant get better. Last season was his first full season, up until then it was stop/start in and out of the team. If he keeps playing regularly his decision making and understanding of the game will only get better through aquiring more experience - not to mention his confidence levels.

I like the look of Sandro, I really do but just like its unfair to write off a player too early its also premature to be getting too carried away with two 45 mins apperances in the League (and the CC). Sandro will be given plenty of time to find his feet and I do expect Harry to use him quite a bit this season but I wont be judging him either way for a good bit yet. That said I am quite excited from what I have seen. If he's doing better than others well than he will have earned the right to start. I see him starting at Bolton next Saturday, given our schedule over the next week. Actually I think we might have Sunderland on the Tuesday after so we are about to enter a very busy period indeed.

But I know what you mean when you say we can lack that fire, thats why the VDV signing has stuck out like a sore thumb - the quality is obvious but I think most fans have been blown away with the quality and the commitment from him. Those two combinations displayed so clinically together, from someone who has just joined the Club is actually quite breathtaking.

 

[nightgoat]

If they did sign him, watch him walk straight into the England team

Happened with Carrick... Briefly...

 

[Bulletspur]

If they paid £16m plus I'd sell him. I think he has many qualities but a few structural deficits which no matter how hard he tries he's only ever going to be able to compensate for. I also think we have within the squad potential replacements.

So, if the money was right I'd sell him and I wouldn't mind to who.

This

 

[sloth]

I like the look of Sandro, I really do but just like its unfair to write off a player too early its also premature to be getting too carried away with two 45 mins apperances in the League (and the CC). Sandro will be given plenty of time to find his feet and I do expect Harry to use him quite a bit this season but I wont be judging him either way for a good bit yet. That said I am quite excited from what I have seen. If he's doing better than others well than he will have earned the right to start. I see him starting at Bolton next Saturday, given our schedule over the next week. Actually I think we might have Sunderland on the Tuesday after so we are about to enter a very busy period indeed.

I think that's very sensible advice re waiting before judging Sandro either way.

The only other thing I'd say is it's not only the little glimpses we've had of him in a Spurs shirt but his record, achievements and reputation in Brazil which get me excited by him. But I do agree we have to give him a decent amount of time before coming to conclusions.

 

[There's always next year]

Huddlestone is improving as the team improves. He appears to benefit from having good players around him that allow him to dictate at his pace. If we add a top quality striker on our books, then Huddlestone will shine even more and theren will no need for hm to look elsewhere to develop his career, as hopefully we'll be pushing harder on the heals of Utd, Arse and Chavs.

 

[Damian99]

I think this is just clever psychology from SAF. Making sure our slowest midfielder gets played tomorrow so he can play his pensioners Scholes & Giggs in midfield without worrying about them having to work to hard before the CL games.

I mean just imagine if AF was really serious about Huddlestone and actually made a bid, you would look an even bigger John Thomas :grin:

 

[Damian99]

Are Manchester United really interested? No way. Just mind games after Fergie watched Hudd's (non) display against Inter.

Yes a man with the football know how of AF watches one game and see's a player play very badly and comes to a conclusion that he can't possibly be anygood :duh:

 

[Wiener]

On the other side of the coin Utd don't have a Huddlestone type player in their CM, the closest they have is Carrick ironically enough, and Huddlestone is today a better player than Carrick is. The rest of their centre midfield options are of a certain mould or age.

Do you think Huddlestone is a better player now that Carrick was in his last 2 seasons for us?

Personally I think the best holding midfielders I have seen in recent times are Alonso and Carrick (Viera wasn't bad either). They both have the composure, reading of the, passing range and sufficient athleticism to play this role to perfection. Sandro looks to have the potential but early days yet.

I guess if Sandro develops into the player we all hope for and Palacios recovers his form, we could afford to sell Huddlestone. Perhaps next summer.

I find it bizarre what has happened to Carrick at Manchester United. Jol built a team around him as a holding midfielder and he seemed to thrive on it. I think he is doing OK at Manchester United, but the fact that Fletcher seems to get more games (not sure he does, but that is my impression) tells me that things are not going that well for him there. Big fish little pond perhaps? Perhaps he is not as good as I thought.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

If they paid £16m plus I'd sell him. I think he has many qualities but a few structural deficits which no matter how hard he tries he's only ever going to be able to compensate for. I also think we have within the squad potential replacements.

So, if the money was right I'd sell him and I wouldn't mind to who.

I mean just imagine if AF was really serious about Huddlestone and actually made a bid, you would look an even bigger John Thomas :grin:

But I'd be a reasonably content John Thomas.

 

[beals]

No way especially to UTD, he has been improving steadily over the last few seasons. We have to show we are no longer a selling club. FO Fergie.