Player Watch - Tanguy Ndombele

OPModric · Aug 25, 2020

yankspurs said:
Mourinho would pander to a player if he liked him. But Jose has had his mind made up before he even arrived. Ndombele is too creartive and too much flair for a defensive manager. Ironically, this type of player is what Jose’s teams need most.

I think Mourinho compared to Poch generally will buy and play players with better technical ability.

rossdapep · Aug 25, 2020

I hope the club can come up with a solution.

I'd take Rakitic for a year or two as whilst he's on the decline I do think he's got some great qualities that would help us put short term so if we could do a deal with Barca I think itd be worth it.

The club have to think short term here and be willing to take a hit (not a major hit, but perhaps not the full 42m) if it means we can be the best we possibly can be next year. Get back in CL and get the crowds back and finances will certainly return to a prosperous manner.

Unfortunately, I think the club don't budge until they get what we paid, and this will lead us to having a player taking a non HG space in the squad and eating up wages, once again leaving us short. Unless we can make an outright swap with Coutinho or someone of that ilk. Still highly unlikely.

sausage · Aug 25, 2020

joey55 said:
I can't think of a single player we've signed under Levy, 22 years and over, that we've sold on our own volition and can say we've genuinely made money on in real terms.

There have been a few, from a quick think, going on transfer fees alone (some perhaps due to inflation more than anything)

- Stambouli
- Wimmer
- Chadli
- Yedlin
- Holtby
- Siggy
- Fryers

George94 · Aug 25, 2020

daryl hannah said:
This is a hugely significant analysis and the casual match viewer won't have seen this sort of anti-enthusiasm from ndombele. I think it's important for people to watch this to understand exactly what we've ended up with here.

Rosco1984 said:
Unfortunately most people will only see the turn he did on the ball and get a rock on for him. 95% of football is what you do off the ball and he as we saw in so many games does nothing. Modric was a god for us because he was unreal on the ball and never stopped moving off it even in his season where he had already had his head turned when he was on the pitch he ran his ass off that's what makes a world class midfielder not a few good touches.

He’ll probably go to a less physically demanding, slower paced league and absolutely boss it - but if he isn’t interested in being here and putting in the effort we need to just get rid.

joey55 · Aug 25, 2020

daryl hannah said:
That's not quite true though is it... Walker, is one example at £45m [cost £1m]. Trippier another at £20m [cost £3.5m]. Eriksen another [cost £11m]... (remember at one point Levy was supposedly asking £130m for Eriksen, and then that dropped to £80m, before a final sale of £18m-ish with 6 months left on contract).

I believe if our recruitment was any better we'd have made better cash on a number of other acquisitions, also. As it happens, it's been pretty dreadful, with Njie, Nkoudou, Janssen, Stambouli, Fazio, Chiriches, Llorente, Aurier, Fryers, Soldado... the list of flops goes on and on.

You then have player impairment with the likes of Assou-Ekotto and Adebayor seeing out their contracts.

Vertonghen wanted a new contract but didn't get one.

Academy graduates count as almost pure profit - Townsend, Mason, both around £14m each. Pritchard £8m for example. These are healthy sums and it's all good profit.

I believe if there's a punt to be had or a profit to be made then DL will look to do that first - it's the whole reason so much emphasis is placed on the academy.

Reread my post. Trippier is the only exception, which shows how rare it is.

InOffMeLeftShin · Aug 25, 2020

Amo said:
Hasn't he played really well or at least adeptly in a majority of his appearances? You'd think he was David Bentley or something jeez.

Edit: majority = 50% + one game

This is where the big division is coming because those who believe he has played really well in the majority of his games can’t understand why people are frustrated. Those who think he hasn’t can’t understand why people are so positive about him. I get the same way when someone says they think Lo Celso has been disappointing.

In this case I struggle to understand how anybody thinks Ndombele has played really well in more than 1 or 2 games (I’d say none but there have been games where has ability has outshone his flaws). So it’s hard to even come back and have a constructive conversation on him as a player, which is the only bit I’m bothered about as I tend not to buy into all the media stuff.

DiVaio · Aug 25, 2020

Rakitic wants a move to Sevilla

THOWIG · Aug 25, 2020

He's the type of player we desperately need. So we/people are hoping that he comes good or we have an alternative if he goes.

Havre · Aug 25, 2020

I guess the reports about his behaviour are worse than reality? Why wouldn't we sell for 41m if he is that off?

Generally speaking I'm all for being patient as this idea of "just accepting 1m" less etc. compounds over years. If we are "just" to bid 1m more and accept 1m less to make it easier to buy and sell you have quite quickly lost a lot of money compared to the alternative. Not to mention you never know if the goalpost doesn't change again when you start down that road. However, if the reports are even remotely close to reality I honestly don't see why we are not selling as quickly as we can. Do we think we will get more than 30 next summer if he stays on the bench for 12 months? Not to mention the 10m we would have paid him in salary.

I still haven't given up on him, but even if we got 25m for him at this point I would have said fine. Sunk cost. We made a mistake. Now move on. 25m should be more than enough for Joshua King - as an example.

Led's Zeppelin · Aug 25, 2020

joey55 said:
It's actually perfectly in line with how Levy operates. Look at our previous big money disappointments. They always take a while to shift as Levy isn't prepared to take a loss or wants to minimize the loss. The clubs overall value as a business, is heavily dependent on it's ability to show a profit. So accounting profits and losses are key to the clubs value. This is really why we usually end up keeping our flops for a year or 2 longer than we would like. Even if NDombele isn't in Jose's plans, we will probably end up keeping him for another season or 2, as it will probably take that long for his accounting value to decline sufficiently for it to match the offers we get.

Take Jansen, for example, we could probably have got the 6 mill we received for him, after his first season. Poch wasn't going to use him and would have told Levy he wasn't in his plans. So you'd think "why not take the best offer and cut your losses?" But that would have meant we'd written off about 6 or 7 mill. But by selling him for 6 million, 2 seasons later, we actually made a small accounting profit, despite having to pay wages (when he wasn't on loan.) Wages and depreciation are accounted for. It was a similar situation with Soldado and Paulinho etc. Gomes is a good example, as he even said himself that he simply wasn't allowed to leave, even though we never used him. He had to stay for the entirety of his contract, as Levy wouldn't let him leave on a free and would rather loan him out or keep paying his wages, as it was all accounted for and no one matched his balance sheet value.

So, if Tanguy stays, it's because no one has matched his accounting value and it wont even mean that Jose is prepared to give him a second chance. It's more likely we'll be waiting for his contract to run down a bit, so we can off load him more cheaply. Levy's priority isn't looking to profit on individual players per se, as most of the time, players that are sold at a good profit, tend to be those we'd rather keep. Most other players, that are sold at a profit, are down to market inflation or because they came through the academy or we bought when they were U21. It's actually incredibly rare, to find a senior player, that we didn't want to keep, that we sold for more than what we paid, when you take general transfer market inflation into account.

In fact, I can't think of a single player, that we've sold as our choice, that we've actually profited on. Say we pay 10 mill for a player and then 5 years later get 12 mill for him, in real terms that isn't a profit. In terms of what you can buy for that 12 million compared to what you could buy for 10 million 5 years later, you are almost certainly going to be worse off. Generally speaking, the only way to make money, in real terms, from senior players (signed at 22+), is if they are poached by bigger clubs. Other than the likes of Carrick, Berba and Modric, in real terms, we've made pretty much nothing from selling senior players.

Levy's reputation of treating players like investments to profit from isn't deserved and a bit of a myth. As I said, I can't think of a single player we've signed under Levy, 22 years and over, that we've sold on our own volition and can say we've genuinely made money on in real terms. I don't see why Tanguy would be any different. If we really wanted to keep him and Barca or City came in, Levy wouldn't want to sell and would only let him go if we were massively compensated with a fee far in excess of what we paid for him. But with players we don't mind shifting, he'll accept recouping the investment, minus any depreciation.

No, they're not, except in very narrow terms.

In practice, it's more complicated than that.

If you care only about today's share price, then maybe you have a point.

But an owner/ investor should be thinking about future value and not P&L, and when the company is privately owned as THFC and ENIC are, then you really don't have the same considerations as a public company does. And naturally, future value depends on which part of the future you care about most: tomorrow, five years' time, twenty years' time...

There are other issues, such as fund-raising and financial covenants, but Levy appears to have those under control, so the P&L is of far less significance to him than it would be to many other companies.

Unless you know what his long-term strategy isincleding, crucially, his timescales for various activities, you cannot make the assumptions that seem to form the basis of a lot of fans' thinking about transfers.

So, re Tanguy, if they don't sell him it's almost certainly not because no one is willing to match his current book value, (even though the club itself may use that argument as a negotiating tool) it's because no one is prepared to match the value the club think he represents to them. Thery are two different things.

But despite this, I agree with a lot that you say - they don't look at players purely as a trading assets.. Their real value comes from enhancing the value of the club as a whole, so you can easily lose money on a player (wages, bonuses, transfer fees etc) and still profit from having owned them.

Sadly this hasn't yet been the case with Tanguy.

joey55 · Aug 25, 2020

sausage said:
There have been a few, from a quick think, going on transfer fees alone (some perhaps due to inflation more than anything)

- Stambouli
- Wimmer
- Chadli
- Yedlin
- Holtby
- Siggy
- Fryers

Yes, that's what I meant by "real terms"

Literally, it seems like Trippier is the only exception over the last decade.

Norgie · Aug 25, 2020

The youtube video posted is quite damming really, it's basic football that I teach my 7 year old's. You get in to space to be able to receive the ball. If you were playing Sunday league and your team mate was doing the same you been screaming at them and giving them a bollocking as all the pressure comes back on you to find an out ball somewhere else. I know this is taken from one game and a few snippets from that game but it stinks of hiding, no matter if he was injured or carrying a knock is irrelevant as you still go to try and help.

thebenjamin · Aug 25, 2020

The writing was on the wall during that first pre season tour just after he'd signed and Poch left him out of a fucking friendly because he wasn't deemed in the right condition to play. I mean who can't manage 30 minutes in a friendly game

sausage · Aug 25, 2020

joey55 said:
Yes, that's what I meant by "real terms"

Literally, it seems like Trippier is the only exception over the last decade.

Well yes.

...excluding:
- Stambouli (Bought for £5.3m, sold the next season for £7.7m)
- Wimmer (Bought for £5m, sold for £17m)
- Chadli (Bought for £7m, sold for £14m)
- Yedlin (Bought for £2.3m, sold for £5.3m)
- Holtby (Bought for £1.5m, sold for £5.8m plus £2.25m loan fee)

Only Fryers and Siggy were negligible enough to count as inflation.

InOffMeLeftShin · Aug 25, 2020

THOWIG said:
He's the type of player we desperately need. So we/people are hoping that he comes good or we have an alternative if he goes.

I’m still not quite sure what kind of player he is. I’ve heard people describe him as an anchor or as a box to box midfielder. They must have obviously seen something from him before to say those things. I didn’t watch him in France and saw only a couple of his CL games, certainly not enough to judge the type of player we were getting. I guess I’d seen the dembele comparisons so expected that and maybe that’s why I’m more disappointed.

What I see from him is someone who has great skill in a tight space and can create something out of nothing. Yes we need those things in the team 100% but I think we need someone who can be the architect or pull the strings and I don’t think Tanguy has shown any of that. Everything good he has done seems to be in the moment and not pre-meditated.

I don’t think he is the type of player we desperately need. I don’t think he has added anything particularly positive so far (not saying he can’t). I think we desperately need the type of player we hoped he’d be before he came.

Havre · Aug 25, 2020

joey55 said:
Yes, that's what I meant by "real terms"

Literally, it seems like Trippier is the only exception over the last decade.

Kind of obvious though isn't it - if you exclude the ones we didn't want to sell.

The players we are happy to see go are generally speaking not playing much. So why would they increase in value as they are getting older?

RichieS · Aug 25, 2020

George94 said:
This is worth another watch - an exceptionally talented player, but one who just can't be bothered.

That is... I don't even know what it is.

Norgie said:
The youtube video posted is quite damming really, it's basic football that I teach my 7 year old's. You get in to space to be able to receive the ball. If you were playing Sunday league and your team mate was doing the same you been screaming at them and giving them a bollocking as all the pressure comes back on you to find an out ball somewhere else. I know this is taken from one game and a few snippets from that game but it stinks of hiding, no matter if he was injured or carrying a knock is irrelevant as you still go to try and help.

Absolutely! There's one point in the second clip where Skipp does actually have a word. I somehow doubt that Højbjerg will be letting him get away with such shenanigans should they ever play together.

joey55 · Aug 25, 2020

Havre said:
Kind of obvious though isn't it - if you exclude the ones we didn't want to sell.

The players we are happy to see go are generally speaking not playing much. So why would they increase in value as they are getting older?

I'm not saying it isn't obvious, I'm just pointing out why Levy would be prepared to accept the kind of money D1 has said he will.

Havre · Aug 25, 2020

joey55 said:
I'm not saying it isn't obvious, I'm just pointing out why Levy would be prepared to accept the kind of money D1 has said he will.

I'm not sure if it would be that 1 to 1. I see the same in the business I am in where book value of assets complicate things when the overall market is down. Good business opportunities become challenging because of the book value that impacts the relationship with the banks etc. So everyone will end up doing nothing because they can't get out of that spiral. That said if you sell Aurier for 10m more than the current book value you could obviously sell N'Dombele for 10m less and the bank(s) shouldn't care.

And there is a longer game here as well of course. The signal it sends to future buying clubs, players etc.

It's rather complex I would say. Just praying the situation can sort itself out sooner rather than later.

daryl hannah · Aug 25, 2020

joey55 said:
Yes, that's what I meant by "real terms"

Literally, it seems like Trippier is the only exception over the last decade.

joey55 said:
Reread my post. Trippier is the only exception, which shows how rare it is.

I think you're not factoring in amortisation - writing off a players' contract over the length of their contract. The transfer fee when a player is sold also takes into account their wages which shows up as one amortised figure in the profit column, showing a 'profit improvement'.

So it's it's not just about the 'market inflated figure' as you put it - it's not that black and white.

However, if you want to look at it like that, then when your £10m player's 5 contract is down to last year (so £2m left to write off against tax (plus wages off the books improvement once sold)) and you sell him for £17m, you've a profit improvement of £15m PLUS the wages off the books. It might be that that fresh £15m gets put into a transfer kitty, but at least £8m of the original fee has been written off against the club's profits each year over 4 of the 5 years of his contract.

(It may be used to buy houses and land. Who knows?)

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

Player Watch - Tanguy Ndombele

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

?

George

Well-Known Member

Night watchman

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Can't Re Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

?

Night watchman

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Berry Berry Calm

Similar threads