Luka Modric / Signs for Real Madrid

Modric is exactly the kind of player we need. Anyone who cannot see that is a fool, no offence.
 
africanspur said:
35-40 if Levy agrees to sell.
Click to expand...

No one will pay 40m now. Chelsea don't need him and they were the only team who would have. Levy should have cashed in last summer because Modric isn't going to want to stay another season, so he'll most likely be sold this summer, but the fee will be far below 40m, I'd say around 30 max.
 
That depends on how he does for Croatia during the Euros, I'd imagine.
 
I would prefer us to spend the money on either M'Vila or Martinez. We have Scholes, Cleverley and Anderson to play in that role. We have only Carrick and Jones to play in the defensive role. Even though Cleverley and Anderson are injury prone, I think it would be better to get a defensive mid than a playmaker this season. And Martinez and M'Vila could be deeper lying playmakers like Scholes is. Kill two birds with one stone.
 
Top said:
That depends on how he does for Croatia during the Euros, I'd imagine.
Click to expand...

Yeah it could have an impact, but you would think only for teams on the continent, because English clubs have seen enough to have a valuation regardless of how he performs at the Euros.

Barca obviously don't need him, niether do Madrid really as they have Alonso already so need a more defensive minded player next to him. In Italy Juve have good centre mids, why would he go to Inter... So maybe AC?
 
Plan M said:
Bollocks, he plays very well in tight spaces from what I've seen.

He's not overrated at all - he's a fantastic midfielder.

But haters gonna hate etc
Click to expand...

GlastonSpur said:
You must be watching a different player: Modric excels at getting away from/out of tight situations.
Click to expand...

africanspur said:
What, that is the exact opposite of Modric? His passing, dribbling and ability to hold onto the ball in tight spaces and under pressure is excellent. His ability to retain possession is one his best assets.
Click to expand...

I've probably watched him 30 times over the last 3 seasons and it's a common theme I've noticed, against midfield's who press him he's been invisible and regressive every time.
 
finneh said:
I've probably watched him 30 times over the last 3 seasons and it's a common theme I've noticed, against midfield's who press him he's been invisible and regressive every time.
Click to expand...

I've watched him over 100 times in the past 3 seasons and its a common theme that he is able to get out of tight situations through his passing and dribbling. Are you sure you're not confusing him with Scott Parker? Modric almost always looks forward, even if surrounded.
 
If we could get him for 30mil-ish it would be worth it. Sometimes you need to pay that much to sort out a fundamental area of the team
 
Theon said:
No one will pay 40m now. Chelsea don't need him and they were the only team who would have. Levy should have cashed in last summer because Modric isn't going to want to stay another season, so he'll most likely be sold this summer, but the fee will be far below 40m, I'd say around 30 max.
Click to expand...

If there's one thing you can say about Levy, it is that he gets the price he wants for the players he sells. For both star players and the squad. If he values him at 40 million, that is likely to be what he will get.

Levy shouldn't have cashed in last summer at all. Modric helped us achieve our aim, finishing in the top 4. We'd be playing in the CL for the second time in three years if it wasn't for a relatively rare event. Selling players for clubs at our stage is rarely beneficial. And it showed last season.
 
Theon said:
No one will pay 40m now. Chelsea don't need him and they were the only team who would have. Levy should have cashed in last summer because Modric isn't going to want to stay another season, so he'll most likely be sold this summer, but the fee will be far below 40m, I'd say around 30 max.
Click to expand...

You had a team competing for a top four spot and technically they made it. Why would you want to sell your best player at the beginning of the season? If I was Levy, I would not have sold him either. fecking Chelsea winning the Champions League is screwing so many things over.
 
Well, that's not how it works is it? Levy can value him at 40million all he wants, but it doesn't mean he'll come close to getting it. No one is desperate for him like Chelsea were last season, and Modric himself wants to leave, plus he's a year older. You won't get 40m, totally unrealistic. Who are you imagining will pay that?

Modric obviously helped you last season, but so would £40million. You are assuming that wouldn't have been reinvested and likewise secured you top 4.

He should have sold last year when Chelsea were interested IMO.

At africanspur
 
RDCR07 said:
You had a team competing for a top four spot and technically they made it. Why would you want to sell your best player at the beginning of the season? If I was Levy, I would not have sold him either. fecking Chelsea winning the Champions League is screwing so many things over.
Click to expand...

Because they were getting offered over his value and the player wanted to leave. Spurs could have sold Modric and used the money to improve other areas of the squad.
 
Theon said:
Well, that's not how it works is it? Levy can value him at 40million all he wants, but it doesn't mean he'll come close to getting it. No one is desperate for him like Chelsea were last season, and Modric himself wants to leave, plus he's a year older. You won't get 40m, totally unrealistic. Who are you imagining will pay that?
...
Click to expand...
If the price was 40m (let's say, for argument's sake) .... has it occurred to you that Levy might not be imagining that anyone will pay that - and would thus set the bar high because he doesn't wish (or need) to sell?
 
Theon said:
Because they were getting offered over his value and the player wanted to leave. Spurs could have sold Modric and used the money to improve other areas of the squad.
Click to expand...

If you were a manager and you lost Modric, would you not want to replace him also?
 
Theon said:
Because they were getting offered over his value and the player wanted to leave. Spurs could have sold Modric and used the money to improve other areas of the squad.
Click to expand...
If not for Chelsea winning the CL, an outcome which nobody could have have really expected, the extra income gained from CL football this coming season would have outweighed any profit gained from selling Modric.
 
GlastonSpur said:
If not for Chelsea winning the CL, an outcome which nobody could have have really expected, the extra income gained from CL football this coming season would have outweighed any profit gained from selling Modric.
Click to expand...

You still could have finished fourth, 40million spent well is far more beneficial than Modric.
 
Theon said:
You still could have finished fourth, 40million spent well is far more beneficial than Modric.
Click to expand...
Could have finished 4th, but probably wouldn't have. And how much of that 40m would we have needed to spend to get a player with even 3/4 of Modric's ability?
 
Theon said:
Err.. Yeah.

That's what I'm saying, reinvest the money.
Click to expand...

They need better centre backs and a GK for the future along with a striker. So you would sell him for £40m and then buy players in all those positions and also a central midfielder for the one you didn't have to sell in the first place.
 
africanspur said:
I've watched him over 100 times in the past 3 seasons and its a common theme that he is able to get out of tight situations through his passing and dribbling. Are you sure you're not confusing him with Scott Parker? Modric almost always looks forward, even if surrounded.
Click to expand...

Maybe I've coincidentally watched his worst 30 or so games, but I honestly don't see him as anything other than a good player.

Actually thinking about it the games I have watched have mostly been against the top 4-7 teams (as I don't tend to watch other teams unless the chances are it'll be a meaningful or good game). This reaffirms my idea that against good midfield's he is underwhelming.
 
RDCR07 said:
They need better centre backs and a GK for the future along with a striker. So you would sell him for £40m and then buy players in all those positions and also a central midfielder for the one you didn't have to sell in the first place.
Click to expand...

What the feck are you on about? Improving the team isn't an all or nothing process. You don't make sense.

I'm saying they should have sold Modric to Chelsea last year at over his value, then reinvested the money on other players, hopefully buying them at undervalue.

If Modric is worth 30m and they sell him for 40m, then they have made a profit on their asset. If they spent that money wisely on players being sold undervalue, then there will be a net benefit to the squad.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Could have finished 4th, but probably wouldn't have. And how much of that 40m would we have needed to spend to get a player with even 3/4 of Modric's ability?
Click to expand...

The way you lot are always banging on about Sandro why would you need to replace him at all?
 
charlenefan said:
Are you saying you'd prefer Sandro in there instead of Parker then?
Click to expand...

Well firstly I don't believe I've ever said anything about Sandro on this site.

Secondl though, yes. In the long term certainly. I believe Sandro can do everything that Parker can do and more. Next season, I'd like to see them rotated and Sandro increasingly being phased in. Sandro will become a box to box player eventually imo, rather than a pure dm.
 
Theon said:
Well, that's not how it works is it? Levy can value him at 40million all he wants, but it doesn't mean he'll come close to getting it. No one is desperate for him like Chelsea were last season, and Modric himself wants to leave, plus he's a year older. You won't get 40m, totally unrealistic. Who are you imagining will pay that?

Modric obviously helped you last season, but so would £40million. You are assuming that wouldn't have been reinvested and likewise secured you top 4.

He should have sold last year when Chelsea were interested IMO.

At africanspur
Click to expand...

If he doesn't get what he wants, then Levy is unlikely to sell. We had the same situation with Berbatov, you spent the whole summer bidding 20/21/22 million etc and he left when you met the asking price, 30 million. Modric still has many years left on his contract.

The market is completely unrealistic at the moment. Some of the prices at the moment are absolutely insane.

What would we have done with 40 million? Lukaku went for 20 million. Mata for 27 million. Downing for 20 million, Aguero for 40 million, Jones, De Gea and Young all for 16-20 million, Crouch for 11 million etc. We were unlikely to get a whole deal for our money. Not to mention we have a wage cap which restricts us compared to 5 other teams in the league.

There tends to be a reason clubs like us, Seville, Aston Villa etc tend to stay at a certain level. We buy good players, they move on, we reinvest the money and almost always go backwards. There's only so many times you can sell and buy well before you get worse and the teams above you continue getting better. Rarely does selling your best players actually lead to anything good.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
As a rule, this is true. You get the odd exception like United selling Van Nistelrooy, but not often.
Click to expand...

We sold Becks and bought Cristiano.

Arsenal sold Anelka and bought Henry.

Liverpool sold Owen and won the CL.

Inter sold Zlatan and won the lot.

Arsenal sold Overmars and bought Pires.

There are plenty of examples, these are just off the top of my head.

I was gonna include Andy Carroll too but was he ever really one of their best players?
 
I'm always right said:
We sold Becks and bought Cristiano.

Arsenal sold Anelka and bought Henry.

Liverpool sold Owen and won the CL.

Inter sold Zlatan and won the lot.

Arsenal sold Overmars and bought Pires.

There are plenty of examples, these are just off the top of my head.

I was gonna include Andy Carroll too but was he ever really one of their best players?
Click to expand...

You're talking of top clubs here. With Spurs, they're hardly going to find a player of Modric's ability at similar wages for a reasonable price. With them not being in the CL either, makes it even tougher to get a player of his quality in. It was the same last summer, had they sold modric, there was no way they were bringing in someone of his quality without the attraction of huge wages or CL football.

In today's market, i can totally understand Levy not selling him on the cheap. Why should he? He's their best player and to progress as a club, you cannot afford to keep selling your best players. He was proved right too when they finished 4th.

Even now, i dont see him selling Modric for less than 35mil, that man drives a hard deal. Am not sure who'l pay 35mil for him though but thats another matter entirely.
 
I'm always right said:
We sold Becks and bought Cristiano.

Arsenal sold Anelka and bought Henry.

Liverpool sold Owen and won the CL.

Inter sold Zlatan and won the lot.

Arsenal sold Overmars and bought Pires.

There are plenty of examples, these are just off the top of my head.

I was gonna include Andy Carroll too but was he ever really one of their best players?
Click to expand...

All clubs in the CL and all able to offer high wages.

What were we going to do last summer for 40 million? Not in the CL. Not able to offer the wages of Man utd, Man City, Arsenal, Chelsea or Liverpool. Best we likely could have hoped for was another Modric. Spend a large amount on a relatively unproven player but with obvious talent and give him a couple of seasons to come into his own.

Also, Inter sold Zlatan and had possibly the best striker, plus money, hoisted into the deal.
 
I'll be honest, at this point I'd rather go for someone like Dembele who's younger, much cheaper and imo has potential to become just as good as Modric.

I realize the importance of the little Croat to Spurs, he's invaluable to the way they play.

Still, keeping an unhappy footballer in the squad is far from ideal and may affect how other players view Tottenham, those already there as well as their potential targets.
 
It's his own fault. You don't sign a six-year deal and then demand a move away a season later. He knew exactly the position Tottenham were in at the time - a good club with good players that is very unlikely to win Champions League or title. Nothing has changed since, they're still in a constant battle to make top 4, if anything they're a lot more stable than they had been when he joined them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.