Player Watch Player Watch: Brennan Johnson

[mil1lion]

I disagree, the logic of selling Kane was that it was economically rational to get something in return rather than allowing him to leave on a free. Losing our best player massively weakened the quality of the squad and now the money needs to be used wisely in order to build it back up, or else there was little point in selling him to begin with.

We cannot use the funds on mediocrities who genuinely may find themselves as sixth-choice winger. That could legitimately be the outcome of this deal, as there's no guarantee at all that Johnson would beat out any of Perisic, Solomon, or Gil in the pecking order.

The funds need to go to players who will push our first XI, not to make up the homegrown numbers, or else it will be a disgrace.

That wasn't the logic at all. We clearly identified players before we sold Kane and made them first. It's exactly what Ange said. The point is that it makes no difference whether the money is what we had to spend prior to selling Kane or the money we got for him. It matters what the overall budget was and how it was spent. So we have got 3 first team signings in Vicario, VdV and Maddison and made the Kulusevski loan into a permanent. We've signed Phillips and Veliz for the future and took advantage of Solomon on a free. If we sign someone like Johnson it's not the Kane money but just another part of the overall budget. Should we have held off on Maddison, Vicario and VdV until Kane was sold then so we could call it the Kane money? It's nonsense. The most important signings were always going to happen earlier in the window. The later in the window the lesser the quality. If we sign 2 or 3 young prospects now it really doesn't matter what part of the budget was spent. It would mean we have a few first team additions and a few young ones who have potential to get in. I think that's the ideal window. We definitely need to be getting a couple more in but the key signings are done now.

 

[dj_stu]

True but where are those take ons taking place?

What if he struggles with some take ons cause he is often in static situations is up against 2 players or during an offensive phase he has no support so tries to take it alone?

Playing with better players, and and front foot system, means he will face more favourable situations as movement and danger of others will give him more space.

Exactly. As his team's most dangerous attacker (and in a team with minimal possession), it's much easier for opponents to double up / force him into dead ends - hence the poor-looking take-on success stats. Context is everything.

 

[mil1lion]

Does he improve our starting 11? In my opinion no
We are at a stage now where we need to be buying players that will improve starting 11 not rotation options.
Do that and our starters become the rotation options and then sell the previous rotation options.

Sorry but a 22 year old is not a rotation option and doesn't need to improve the starting 11 right away to be a good signing. I swear people have no patience with young players. It's signing a young player who can be coached into potentially an important first team player.

 

[yido_number1]

Sorry but a 22 year old is not a rotation option and doesn't need to improve the starting 11 right away to be a good signing. I swear people have no patience with young players. It's signing a young player who can be coached into potentially an important first team player.

Surely at the reported 50m you need to improve the starting 11

 

[Timberwolf]

Playing devil's advocate a bit here, but already this season there have been about 5 or 6 times I've thought "man...if only Kulu had a bit of pace to beat his man". And those weren't necessarily in the 'deep block' situations people keep talking about, more just general transitions when we won the ball and got it to Kulu on the right only for him to fail to get separation and pass it backwards or win a corner rather than getting a cross in.

Just saying, even without mad dribbling skills that pace alone could prove very useful, especially now that Son's slowing down, and he doesn't strike me as a complete headless chicken like Dan James. Lad looks like he can pick out a decent cross and has a good shot on him.

I defer to Ange on this one though, tbh. Sounds like people who have seen more of him have understandable doubts.

 

[mil1lion]

Surely at the reported 50m you need to improve the starting 11

Richarlison was 60m. It's signing potential and you're judging whether they could be worth that in the long run. Besides 50m is not confirmed and if it includes a player or 2 in return it helps us alter the final valuation.

 

[Joshua]

Not super keen as has been discussed, but if we can fob off some deadwood on Forest it’s probably a reasonable deal. Unfortunately we’re suffering from poor squad management and maybe have to compromise on players to fit. We currently can’t move for non h/g players so if Brennan is the best h/g player they’ve identified then so be it.

 

[Tucker]

Surely at the reported 50m you need to improve the starting 11

The transfer market has moved on. £50 million doesn’t get us a player that hands down improves our forward line. I kept making this point in the Kane thread when you had people saying we should flog him and reinvest. Look at the expensive transfers this summer. Rice, and Caiceido, they both cost over £100 million pounds. These aren’t flashy attacking players either. Good players sure, but defensive midfielders.

This is what £50 million gets you now. A talented youngster that will need to be coached into the player we need him to be.

 

[GetSpurredOn]

I went and looked at a forest forum. They seem to rate him very highly and don't want him to leave.

They also think serge is off to Saudi Arabia

So they may be in need of a RB, one that is familiar to them…..
£20m plus Sanchez & Spence…. Take my money
CB and Brennan would be underwhelming. CB, Brennan and Orban, I’m onboard that train. CB, Brennan, Orban and a CM if Hojbjerg goes, that is about as good a squad rehash as you can expect (ignoring the Kane shaped hole). But 4 incoming seems highly unlikely.

 

[Johnny J]

The transfer market has moved on. £50 million doesn’t get us a player that hands down improves our forward line. I kept making this point in the Kane thread when you had people saying we should flog him and reinvest. Look at the expensive transfers this summer. Rice, and Caiceido, they both cost over £100 million pounds. These aren’t flashy attacking players either. Good players sure, but defensive midfielders.

This is what £50 million gets you now. A talented youngster that will need to be coached into the player we need him to be.

I agree about what £50m gets you. But I think we could get better value abroad for that £50m. Selling Kane and bringing in Johnson is so depressing.

 

[Tucker]

I agree about what £50m gets you. But I think we could get better value abroad for that £50m. Selling Kane and bringing in Johnson is so depressing.

There’s a reason that home grown players cost more money. We don’t have enough of them. We have to square that circle, whether we like it or not.

 

[Joshua]

So they may be in need of a RB, one that is familiar to them…..
£20m plus Sanchez & Spence…. Take my money
CB and Brennan would be underwhelming. CB, Brennan and Orban, I’m onboard that train. CB, Brennan, Orban and a CM if Hojbjerg goes, that is about as good a squad rehash as you can expect (ignoring the Kane shaped hole). But 4 incoming seems highly unlikely.

They’ve signed the Argentine RB Gonzalo Montiel today. Still we should definitely offer him. Any of Spence, Sess, Dier, Tanganga, Reguilon or Sanchez should be up for discussion.

 

[Johnny J]

There’s a reason that home grown players cost more money. We don’t have enough of them. We have to square that circle, whether we like it or not.

Again, I agree. But it just shows the epic squad mismanagement that has led us to this position. For such a key position, and for big money, we should be bringing in the best player we can get, domestic or abroad.

 

[Fredo]

I think this would be a brilliant move for Davinson personally

 

[Nick-TopSpursMan]

Will be typical Spurs to blow £40-50m on a player who doesn’t quite fit and isn’t at the level we need, in a key position. If we get the recruitment right out wide, our ceiling as a team will explode.

If we sign Johnson then imo we will still be looking for a winger in January or the summer once we realise he isn’t good enough. Except we probably won’t have the budget because we’d have blown £40-50m on Johnson.

 

[sidford]

Ah the infamous swap story, anyone remember when we last did one of these?

 

[mil1lion]

Article says he's rated at 40m and we could include a player or 2
People still keep saying 50m to try and amplify their argument
I swear it's like all the Maddison will cost 60m talk

 

[mil1lion]

Ah the infamous swap story, anyone remember when we last did one of these?

Winks and Maddison

 

[luRRka]

Ah the infamous swap story, anyone remember when we last did one of these?

Harry winks and maddison? (Different deals for accounting reasons but effectively the same thing)

 

[yido_number1]

Ah the infamous swap story, anyone remember when we last did one of these?

Lamela and Gil.