Its not about the financial situation, we already fill the 25 squad places we're allowed by the FA and that's with Bentley, Keane etc out on loan and Bale and Sandro in the u21 section. Those two have to be given a place next season I think and we can't have senior players without a squad place so we would need to sell those players before bringing in others.
Luka Modric / Signs for Real Madrid
- Thread starter Sassy Colin
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Its not about the financial situation, we already fill the 25 squad places we're allowed by the FA and that's with Bentley, Keane etc out on loan and Bale and Sandro in the u21 section. Those two have to be given a place next season I think and we can't have senior players without a squad place so we would need to sell those players before bringing in others.
I think pie in the sky is a bit of an exaggeration though it would have had us very stretched financially. We were never intending to source all the money needed from banks but you're right in that this is hardly the best time to be building a stadium.
But once they have everything in place, whether its a new stadium somewhere else or the work beginning for the NDP, then I can see them selling.
their backline and gomes is a joke and need replacing.
Brad Friedel has already signed for them
As long as you replace him with an ambitious looking signing, you'll be fine, profilewise.
We probably could have gotten Carroll cheaper in the summer than January, but I reckon he was seen as an immediate priority target for signal reasons as much as for securing him early and ahead of any potential competitors (IIRC, 'arry made a bid too in january). If we simply sold Torres and put the money in the bank for later, we'd basically be signalling we'd become a feeder club for the bigger clubs content to just let all our best players leave. Instead, we came out actually looking like a stronger outfit from our january transfers Think that, combined with our strong finish, played a crucial role in convincing Reina to stay and could well play a role in attracting players this summer.
But the bottomline is, all players can be replaced. If Modric's head has been turned, selling him at a time of your choosing should be the timeframe of "the time we need to identify and secure his replacement(s)", not "at some later transfer window when we're feeling less stubborn." Now is the time you can maximize profits. Keeping an unhappy player not only risks him putting in worse performances for you in the meantime, but also lowering his sell-on value in that period.
Music to Romans ears.
Surprised he said that in the interview. I'd be chatting absolute bollocks through the media about the state of the club's finance if a whole host of clubs were after my top players.
Harry can't help it. He talks non stop, and half the time his own bosses probably wish he wouldn't.
Harry doesn't care, hes just winding the clock down till Capello is gone.
It's not question of "would be here claiming" ... I have already said that Spurs are in good financial shape and could easily spend 30m on a single player if they wished to.
Harry is just being Harry, trying to play the game of smoke and mirrors to lower the expectations of selling clubs ... because he's hardly going to say that the club has plenty of cash when he's trying to sign players for as a little money as possible.
So rather then getting all excited about throw-away comments from Harry, you'd be better off looking at the objective facts ... primarily the fact that Spurs, by a huge margin, have just had their best season ever in terms of income. The end of Spurs' financial year is June 30th, so you won't have to wait long to get verification that what I've said is correct.
Besides, many reports had us bidding 30m+ for at least one striker back in January.
So you obviously now know more than Harry ehhh, earlier it was Levy who's mind you could easily read, why don't you run the club since you know better than everyone else at Tottenham?
Besides every selling club as you said is naive and stupid and will sell you the player at cut price because your manager is claiming he has no money, wish everything was as easy as that
I have no money make me the CEO, simple really
It's not a question of knowing more than Harry, because, as I have already said, Harry is all about deliberately playing games of smoke and mirrors.
Nor have I said that such tactics will work in terms of getting bargain prices for players brought in.
You can take Harry's comments at face value if you wish. But he's the type of manager who'll swear blind he has no interest in player X, then sign them 24 hours later.
The objective fact is a huge increase in income last season - probably around 40% more than ever before. I suggest you focus on that reality, rather than on motor-mouth Harry's attempts to weave tangled webs.
The huge increase in profit also had a lot to do with being in the CL, which probably won't happen again in the near future.
He needs to find a rabbit from the hat to avoid goin' dahn at this court case coming up.
Yeah, or Levy has said you need to 'sell to bring in funds before you can spend' (to quote 'Arry) because you need the cash for other business, the stadium for one.
Asston is such a tool.
Levy - "Modric leaves over my dead body." Gospel.
'Arry - "We need to sell before we can buy." Smoke and mirrors.
Levy - "Modric leaves over my dead body." Gospel.
'Arry - "We need to sell before we can buy." Smoke and mirrors.
Lance feckercut is such a brainless twat.
He apparently can't tell the difference between (a) a line-in-the-sand statement issued by a club chairman who rarely makes publlic pronouncements; and (b) the latest throw-away comment from a motor-mouth manager who seems to give about 15 interviews per day.
The same brainless twat is apparently incapable of registering/dealing with the fact of a huge increase in Spurs income this year, or perhaps he just somehow imagines that all this money has just evaporated into thin air .... and despite the fact of reports that Spurs bid 30m+ for at least one single player last January.
Play nice gentlemen, no need for those comments (as funny as I found it).
Glastonspaz is even boring when it comes to insults.
How could he overlook the far more elegant and effective "Uppercunt"?
How could he overlook the far more elegant and effective "Uppercunt"?
"feckercut."
That is so bad it's almost good.
That is so bad it's almost good.
I think the bigger problem for Spurs isn't just holding on to their best players but rather convincing everybody, especially their own stars, that they are capable of competing with the big boys and winning major trophies.
Making it into the top four once in all these years is simply not going to cut it. Tottenham may not need to sell, but do they need to buy? Absolutely. And not your flea market/Harry Redknapp "let's buy shit in bulk and see which one works out" variety. Spurs need to buy top quality if they want to have a real chance at getting that CL spot back, let alone have a shot at winning something serious.
Will Levi bankroll these big deals? I'm not so sure. Plus, most of the players who could really make a difference don't have Spurs at the top of their list, either. You have to compete for best talent with the clubs that have more money,can offer bigger wages, Champions League football and a real chance of winning things.
That's your biggest concern, not the fact that you don't need money or have your top players on long term contracts.
Making it into the top four once in all these years is simply not going to cut it. Tottenham may not need to sell, but do they need to buy? Absolutely. And not your flea market/Harry Redknapp "let's buy shit in bulk and see which one works out" variety. Spurs need to buy top quality if they want to have a real chance at getting that CL spot back, let alone have a shot at winning something serious.
Will Levi bankroll these big deals? I'm not so sure. Plus, most of the players who could really make a difference don't have Spurs at the top of their list, either. You have to compete for best talent with the clubs that have more money,can offer bigger wages, Champions League football and a real chance of winning things.
That's your biggest concern, not the fact that you don't need money or have your top players on long term contracts.
It's quite easy for Spurs to drop quite a number of players though.
Although their back line is shite, they have a lot of them. Woodgate is already toast. Kaboul being sold wouldn't be a poor bet. I think one of their right backs wanted out.
They're already trying to sell Dos Santos, Keane, and Pav appears on his way out too. Crouch was a bid target last month. Palacious didn't really make a splash last season and has been surpassed by the Brazilian guy.
So selling 5-6 players wouldn't be hard. The problem with Spurs, and Liverpool, is that they just keep buying junk whereas the top sides know you always keep your core and bring in 2-3 quality players each side. Buy crap to replace crap is not a transfer strategy. Nor is buying more crap ontop of the pile of crap you already had.
Not sure what 'Arry will do with himself once he becomes the England manager and doesn't have a transfer playground.. Perhaps he'll start trying to buy players' citizenship to compensate... Almunia likes this.
Although their back line is shite, they have a lot of them. Woodgate is already toast. Kaboul being sold wouldn't be a poor bet. I think one of their right backs wanted out.
They're already trying to sell Dos Santos, Keane, and Pav appears on his way out too. Crouch was a bid target last month. Palacious didn't really make a splash last season and has been surpassed by the Brazilian guy.
So selling 5-6 players wouldn't be hard. The problem with Spurs, and Liverpool, is that they just keep buying junk whereas the top sides know you always keep your core and bring in 2-3 quality players each side. Buy crap to replace crap is not a transfer strategy. Nor is buying more crap ontop of the pile of crap you already had.
Not sure what 'Arry will do with himself once he becomes the England manager and doesn't have a transfer playground.. Perhaps he'll start trying to buy players' citizenship to compensate... Almunia likes this.
Sandro, Walker, VdV, Gallas ... all likely starters for Spurs this coming season (or else strong contenders for a starting spot), all signed since Harry arrived, all costing a combined total in transfer fees of much less than half of what Chelsea paid for Torres, and none of them even remotely "shit in bulk".
Of course Spurs need to buy this summer - primarily a striker or two. But don't kid yourself that big money, sugar-daddy-directed signings are necessarily the better way forward.
So VdV and Sandro are not quality players? Both joined Spurs last season.
And who were the 2 - 3 quality players that Arsenal signed last summer?
Walker has done nothing yet at the top level.
Sandro had one solid season but he's no star.
Gallas is a has been. Hasn't been anywhere near his best since he'd left Chelsea five years ago and will be 34 by the time next season starts.
Van Der Vaart was a good pickup for a reasonable fee but he was offered to Arsenal and Chelsea before Harry snatched him. Also, let's wait and see how far his loyalty stretches if/when you finish outside the top four next year.
None of this changes my view that "shit in bulk" is a laughable summary of the signings made since Harry arrived at Spurs.
Besides, what has Torres done at Chelsea so far? Pretty much SFA is the answer. Conclusion: a 50m fee is no guarantee that Torres will be a better player this coming season for Chelsea than Sandro (costing 8m) will be for Spurs.
"feckercut."
That is so bad it's almost good.
I would have gone with Uppercunt. Prance Uppercunt.
"Uttercunt" is better.
What does Torres have to do with it?
Chelsea had their worst run in years last season and still finished second, way ahead of Spurs, by the way.
All that with misfiring Torres and half of the squad under performing.
The 50m spent in contrast to what you claim are the shit, "flea-market" signings of VdV, Sandro, Walker etc. The point being that these Spurs players may have been signed at flea-market prices, at least by gangster sugar-daddy standards, but that doesn't make them flea-market players. Nor is mega-bucks Torres is guaranteed to be a mega-star for Chelsea this coming season.
Your problem here is that you rate everybody in crude cash terrms: it's shit if it doesn't cost mega-bucks. Still, the fan base becomes like the owner I guess.
PS. How's the Modric bid coming along? Given up yet in favour of an inferior alternative?
Shit, I can't believe I didn't think of that!
I've got a patent on that.
When did Sandro suddenly become this great player? Was it when he scored that swerver against Chelsea?
He caught the eye after a very good display against AC Milan in the CL.
My point is, your squad isn't good enough as it is. You barely made it into the fourth spot in 09/10 but the season after the reality finally set in.
Best players don't consider Spurs a top club and your "one & out" flash in a pan CL stint did nothing to disprove that point of view. Who cares if you don't need the money when you're not good enough to attract real quality anyway?
Your chances of finishing in the top six are still pretty good but you're dreaming if you think Spurs will get back into CL anytime soon. Europa League is your current level.
I'm not particularly bothered if we get Modric or not, there are always alternatives if he stays put. Chelsea will get the type of a player they are looking for one way or the other, Modric is no Messi, I'm sure we'll get over it fast. It's Spurs that should be concerned with the fact their key player is clearly unsettled and publicly voices his desire to leave for more ambitious club.