Mourinho on failure to sign new striker: I cannot lie, it's not easy

[daveduvet]

It’s ok. We'll win the FA cup and then Mourinho will disappear and we’ll start the Re-rebuild again.

 

[Shadydan]

1) because we have Kane we weren't looking for some 50m option and 2) our priority options to add on the area were not available january. But that doesn't mean that there wasn't a desperate need for short term solution. Why the hell we were calling all over on deadline day If they didn't see it as neccesity.

You do actually realise everything you said here you're solidifying my point further...think about it you said we already have Kane and there were no decent players on the market, that should tell you enough as to why the club didn't go all in.

Read what you said again...deadline day and necessity don't belong in the same sentence.

We saw them as short term options and wanted a loan on Piatek. Once that failed we were all over the place trying just to get someone in for short term as our manager wanted just some decent option for half a season. We failed. Well Levy failed.

Again you're just backing up my point lol Piatek...short team option, loan - these words absolutely stand out to me that we weren't 100% keen on him, as I said the money was there to purchase a striker, Levy isn't going to bring a player in that Jose doesn't rate - this is not called a failure it's called common sense and good business practice.

By the way have you seen Piatek play, what makes you think he'd be able to be a success here or at least do a competent job?

Not making short term transfers on case of need is also a financial risk (compare costs of loans to prize money available for example) and no matter what your long term strategy is, uanbility to make short term moves in case of need reeks of ineptitude.

Not really...it's only a financial risk if said player guarantees to hit the ground running and fire us into the top four and to trophies, it's more riskier in hedging your bets on a player who hasn't played in this league and pinning all your hopes on him to fire us to top 4.

We didn't because our strategy backfired yet again, we were believing we had Piatek on bag for short term and once Hertha moved we were unable to clinch any other option.

This is just nonsense, our strategy didn't backfire, look at Jose's quotes and read between the lines...he is obviously disappointed to not get a striker in but understands that there's nothing on the market that will definitely improve the team.

Once again another Spurs fan saying that we failed in this TW and not really understanding what actually went on.

 

[FinnYid]

You do actually realise everything you said here you're solidifying my point further...think about it you said we already have Kane and there were no decent players on the market, that should tell you enough as to why the club didn't go all in.

For a permanent long time option, hence they tried to get Piatek on loan, later when that failed tried for Giroud once that went sour due Chelski being unable to get Mertens went for Ighalo, Zahavi and god knows who on last minute.

Read what you said again...deadline day and necessity don't belong in the same sentence.

Yep, they shoudn't and that's why we had pretty failed already on deadline day.

Again you're just backing up my point lol Piatek...short team option, loan - these words absolutely stand out to me that we weren't 100% keen on him, as I said the money was there to purchase a striker, Levy isn't going to bring a player in that Jose doesn't rate - this is not called a failure it's called common sense and good business practice.

Yes we needed some short term option if and when long term options were unavailable. So did ManU and Arsenal and dozens of clubs all over Europe and they did so by making short term deals. That's what you do when there are short term needs, that's what we did with Saha and Nelsen.

Not really...it's only a financial risk if said player guarantees to hit the ground running and fire us into the top four and to trophies, it's more riskier in hedging your bets on a player who hasn't played in this league and pinning all your hopes on him to fire us to top 4.

Without even going into Top 4 or trophies, you get £2m by single improvement on PL position and loads going next round beating RB, so in that context loan of some semicapable striker for 4 months is hardly big financial gamble. Not doing so is. Hence calling all over on deadline day.

This is just nonsense, our strategy didn't backfire

Of course it did and besides Jose I'm pretty sure Levy also thinks so. We were after striker on very late stages and best ITK believed we had one in bag just day before DL (ie. club probably saw it that way too), yet ended up with nothing. Taking a spin that it wasn't a failure is well...really something.

Once again another Spurs fan saying that we failed in this TW and not really understanding what actually went on.

Well we all can't have your great insight.

 

[Shadydan]

For a permanent long time option, hence they tried to get Piatek on loan, later when that failed tried for Giroud once that went sour due Chelski being unable to get Mertens went for Ighalo, Zahavi and god knows who on last minute.

Yep, they shoudn't and that's why we had pretty failed already on deadline day.

Nonsense filler...

How does even rebuttal anything that I said lol, all you're doing is arguing the toss

Yes we needed some short term option if and when long term options were unavailable. So did ManU and Arsenal and dozens of clubs all over Europe and they did so by making short term deals. That's what you do when there are short term needs, that's what we did with Saha and Nelsen.

You would have been seriously happy with Ighalo would you? A player who was incredibly average at Watford? I'll ask this again seeing as you ignored it the first time what makes you think any of these players would be a benefit to us?

The only player I would say who would push us on is Giroud but Chelsea couldn't secure their No1 target, this is hardly seen as a failure...funny how you left then out of your appraisal or are we the only ones who 'failed' that suits your little narrative?

Not sure using Saha and Nelsen is the best example either...

Without even going into Top 4 or trophies, you get £2m by single improvement on PL position and loads going next round beating RB, so in that context loan of some semicapable striker for 4 months is hardly big financial gamble. Not doing so is. Hence calling all over on deadline day.

You're doing it again... you're speaking as if a new striker would be a certified guarantee and you're speaking as if the current side are incapable of improving - it's a weak argument based on supposition and guess work.

I say all this after we've just beaten Man City without this supposedly magical striker who is apparently gonna turn us into world beaters...

Of course it did and besides Jose I'm pretty sure Levy also thinks so. We were after striker on very late stages and best ITK believed we had one in bag just day before DL (ie. club probably saw it that way too), yet ended up with nothing. Taking a spin that it wasn't a failure is well...really something.

'Pretty sure' yeah you're pretty sure is you wanting to believe it because that's what makes sense in your head...once again read Jose's comments and look at the activity surrounding our transfers this January, it will make more sense to you if you actually take a step back and think about it as opposed to hanging onto this we failed narrative.

Well we all can't have your great insight.

?

 

[FinnYid]

Nonsense filler...

How does even rebuttal anything that I said lol, all you're doing is arguing the toss

Well I've been pretty much wondering the same regarding quite a few of your comments.

You would have been seriously happy with Ighalo would you? A player who was incredibly average at Watford? I'll ask this again seeing as you ignored it the first time what makes you think any of these players would be a benefit to us?

Of course I would have been happier with Ighalo on short term than nobody (pending a cost naturally). I mean how are we better off without? If he had served his purpose on few games and given different option to Jose then how excactly we are better off without? Powers that be seemed to think so also by going after him on last minutes. Difference is I thought so on last month too, however I think there are quite a few here that in hindsight say it would've been laughable deal yet had he signed it would have been astute short term business. People that can see nothing to criticize whatever the club does.

The only player I would say who would push us on is Giroud but Chelsea couldn't secure their No1 target, this is hardly seen as a failure...funny how you left then out of your appraisal or are we the only ones who 'failed' that suits your little narrative?

I let them out because they actually have strikers available and can even let Giroud be on stands, that's how different our situations are on that front. And getting into situation where we were dependent on Chelsea with day or so into the window was failure.

Not sure using Saha and Nelsen is the best example either...

Why not? Despite discontent by some fans due their signing we were better off with them than without them for that spring,

You're doing it again... you're speaking as if a new striker would be a certified guarantee and you're speaking as if the current side are incapable of improving - it's a weak argument based on supposition and guess work.

No, I'm comparing cost of 4 month loan to possible gains. Getting off the bench once and scoring a goal that improves our final position by one position is worth a £2m alone.

I say all this after we've just beaten Man City without this supposedly magical striker who is apparently gonna turn us into world beaters...

Great result and we showed some real spirit, yet has to also remember that we didn't have a singe shot before the red card on 60mins on home turf.

'Pretty sure' yeah you're pretty sure is you wanting to believe it because that's what makes sense in your head...once again read Jose's comments

Why should I read them again, It's not like he was going to say opposite on public at this point of his Spurs career.

and look at the activity surrounding our transfers this January, it will make more sense to you if you actually take a step back and think about it as opposed to hanging onto this we failed narrative.

I look at what best ITKs and media - especially part that club feeds info - told last month as month went on and put that together with experience on how we conduct business, how Jose wants to play etc. - it was failure, I reckon Jose thinks so, I reckon Daniel thinks so. We wouldn't have been calling all over desperately last minutes if it wasn't so.

 

[Metalhead]

Well I've been pretty much wondering the same regarding quite a few of your comments.



Of course I would have been happier with Ighalo on short term than nobody (pending a cost naturally). I mean how are we better off without? If he had served his purpose on few games and given different option to Jose then how excactly we are better off without? Powers that be seemed to think so also by going after him on last minutes. Difference is I thought so on last month too, however I think there are quite a few here that in hindsight say it would've been laughable deal yet had he signed it would have been astute short term business. People that can see nothing to criticize whatever the club does.



I let them out because they actually have strikers available and can even let Giroud be on stands, that's how different our situations are on that front. And getting into situation where we were dependent on Chelsea with day or so into the window was failure.



Why not? Despite discontent by some fans due their signing we were better off with them than without them for that spring,



No, I'm comparing cost of 4 month loan to possible gains. Getting off the bench once and scoring a goal that improves our final position by one position is worth a £2m alone.



Great result and we showed some real spirit, yet has to also remember that we didn't have a singe shot before the red card on 60mins on home turf.



Why should I read them again, It's not like he was going to say opposite on public at this point of his Spurs career.



I look at what best ITKs and media - especially part that club feeds info - told last month as month went on and put that together with experience on how we conduct business, how Jose wants to play etc. - it was failure, I reckon Jose thinks so, I reckon Daniel thinks so. We wouldn't have been calling all over desperately last minutes if it wasn't so.

It's clear that Jose wanted a striker - no argument whatsoever. I think that of all the available strikers - and there wasn't a great deal of choice - the only one that had some sort of thought behind it was Piatek but even he probably wasn't Jose's ultimate choice of striker - he was the best available at that time. It was a failure to acquire a short term solution. If Jose doesn't get a striker that he really wants in the summer - then we should be concerned.

 

[Shadydan]

@FinnYid Yeah don't think we're gonna agree on this one

 

[tottenham28]

Sonny out now with a fractured arm..

Anyone else in here still think we were right not to sign a striker?
Only slight plus is, Parrot looks like he'll finally get some minutes to hopefully show us what he is capable of.

 

[FinnYid]

Jose doesn't sound happy, wonder If we might try some free agent on short contract? Not much in the offer though