What's new

The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - THE LAST DAY! 1st September 2014

Status
Not open for further replies.

DaSpurs

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2013
11,816
13,655
I'm quite pleased that Chiriches and Mason are still at the club as I think both have the potential to be important players for us.

Agreed. I think Vlad is the kind of CB to do very well in Poch's system, and I think Mason will play a vital role replacing Holtby. I like to think that's reason why we didn't look into any loans for him. Very glad he's stayed.
 

cockerel downunder

Well-Known Member
Aug 19, 2008
925
2,214
I think the squad is stronger, more balanced, more suited to pochs style and full of potential for improvement.

To me this reflects a manager getting what he wants, even if a bit boring, rather than a chairman's ego / marketing dept led transfer window with opportunistic exciting signings ending in an unbalanced and ill suited squad.

Let's see what the manager can do with these players over the course of the season. His philosophy is all about a team game rather than individual stars after all.
 

chinaman

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2003
17,974
12,423
Trix has explained things from sources close to Poch. I'm waiting to hear from Grey Fox who seems to have information from somebody else.
 

TheChosenOne

A dislike or neg rep = fat fingers
Dec 13, 2005
48,108
50,110
Sandro's previous injury is why we 'sold' him.
He can and probably will be a big player for QPR but due to the nature of his injury and referred pain and linked issues to that he will also have a lot of time away.
Not ideal to let go of him but take into consideration his contract running down and later sell on value if he has another stop start season, his injuries and also what we have in the same role its a sensible yet not emotional decision.

He was and probably will remain as a "talisman player" in the fans eyes. There have always been these type of players at Spurs in my time that a bit different but when all is said and done it is time to move them on and get some money back if possible. The first player like this in my time supporting Spurs was Alfie Conn but when I look back the stats suggest otherwise
 

knilly

SC Supporter
Apr 12, 2005
1,819
1,033
Since when was that a huge amount of money in football? We always break even or profit and we rake in copious amounts on ticket sales, merchandise and TV money in the process. I'm not saying with throw money around irresponsibly. What I am saying is that if there is a key signing beyond others that the manager wants then that should be the player that we make an exception to the rule for. You seem to see it in black and white. Either be frugal on every purchase and only buy once we've sold, or pay over the odds for every signing, neither of which I am advocating.

Our trouble has been not being able so shift players quickly enough. There's a raft of players who dragged their heels or are still here
 

InOffMeLeftShin

Night watchman
Admin
Jan 14, 2004
15,105
9,122
Arr.....the five year plan thingy.

Didn't Levy start the five year plan with Santini? Or was it Jol?....no it was Redknapp i seem to recall....

It's always a 5 year plan, it's usually how long we give the coaches as a contract. We're usually too impatient but this feels like we are building with a plan. We are definitely not there yet, nowhere near but we are building foundations.
 

iluvsteffenfreund

Well-Known Member
Nov 5, 2004
2,078
2,465
Exceeded expectations, bar a bad 10 game spell at the start of a season that saw him fired.

All I'm saying is that he is hardly going to feel shafted/'Levy'd' having only 5 players brought in for him after his prior experiences.
And all I'm saying is you can't work miracles with a limited squad. He needed to be backed, we all knew that, he wasn't and now we go through the same old spurs, flatter to deceive.
 

thebetamaxboy

Active Member
Jun 5, 2012
382
480
You mean an extremely successful investment firm needs to be lectured on the notion of "speculate to accumulate?"

Why do people arrive at such astronomical theories? You don't think they arrived at the conclusion that the 20m difference between this option, and the one we arrived at, wasn't worth that potential gain?

... lack of investment once in champions league and loss of third leading to loss of prize assets ... extrememly successful?.. maybe in other businesses but not in football. ...

... or actually strike that.. showing profit the last few years .. yes they are a successful football business .. sadly not as a club
 

m*****73

Well-Known Member
Dec 15, 2005
462
732
Just as a going concern we made £1.5m - http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/26847888.app

Is a purchase at almost thirty times that realistic?

I think if we wrote it as 27,000,000 then people might just realise how much money that actually is.

A million here or a million there - well actually that's the difference between us turning a profit or making a loss.

So no, I'm not an accountant, nor am I the club's accountant but I deal with multi-million pound deals and I know how much businesses fight over the pennies.

OK. Your constant support of every decision Levy makes (or doesn't make) has finally convinced me.

Our magnificent little genius of a chairman is right. We should forget about actually spending money on the players that our manager wants and instead compete with the likes of Hull City, West Ham and Stoke for players that we've never heard of (unless you spend 20hrs a day on some idiotic football manager game).

Oh wait... Hull, West Ham and Stoke actually have a higher net spend than the mighty Spurs over the last 5 years.

Nevermind, we'll have our new stadium in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017.... definitely.

Blue & Yellow....
 

MyNameIsNicolaBerti

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2013
2,035
3,834
"Well, that all depends on whether this Stromboli guy is anywhere close to the same level."

I apologise profusely if I've read that wrong (and that's genuine too) - but be honest and tell me that isn't your doubt that he is not the same level as MS.
I have doubts yes. But doubt is not a judgement call. I will most certainly hope he does the business.

Having said that, both players are the same age, one is a World Cup experienced player, the other has yet to earn a cap for the very same country. One is PL experienced, the other comes from a French side that scraped past relegation last season. So I think it's fair to say that the risk element to "Benji" is greater. But that does not mean I have decided he is going to be crap in advance.
 

Only 1 Spurs

Well-Known Member
Jul 12, 2011
642
421
We will struggle against Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and Man City but as of 11pm tonight we have a squad that can and should beat every other team in the league. Nothing shabby about that... for now.

Maybe some of those teams will even do us a few favours against that top 4. Stoke and Leicester have already snatched points.

A 3-0 dicking, losing a fan favourite and not bringing in a name to ease the pain is tough but that's where we are.

Between now and January is Poch's time to get the team playing in a way that only competitive game time can cultivate, and I believe he will.

and yet we wont beat them all will we and the fact Liverpool battered us again without hitting top gear is the worry. We were completely toothless upfront i just hope we adjust to Poch's thinking and system quickly otherwise we could see the fans turn on Poch as they did against AVB.
 

RuskyM

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2011
7,072
23,339
Say no to Ridsdale Management.

we've made net profits of up to £20m every year since 2010. you're really telling me us signing either of the players our manager wanted would have made us go into administration?
 

DaSpurs

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2013
11,816
13,655
... lack of investment once in champions league and loss of third leading to loss of prize assets ... extrememly successful?.. maybe in other businesses but not in football. ...

... or actually strike that.. showing profit the last few years .. yes they are a successful football business .. sadly not as a club

Poor decisions have been made, but they have not been loose with their cash. "Speculate to accumulate" is the name of their game, and I'm not saying the choices have made have been frugal, but you can't expect them to just pay over and above for a player when there are other options far more financially feasible with more than likely not that much of a dropoff in quality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top