What's new

Thinking About the Finances of a Rebuild

Would You Prefer Winks, Dier, Dele in the 2020-2021 Squad or 150 Million Pounds from their Sales?

  • Winks, Dier, Dele in the Squad

    Votes: 15 19.0%
  • 150 Million from their sales to rebuild

    Votes: 64 81.0%

  • Total voters
    79

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
I think Levy has had his fingers burnt by the Eriksen saga. By all accounts CE was offered new deals repeatedly but refused all of them. This seems to be the way things are leaning now in football with players wrestling a bigger slice of the pie away from the clubs. People are now saying that we fucked up by not selling him at 130m or whatever 18 months ago. To bring that up to date, we should now be entertaining big offers for the likes of Kane, Son, Dele, but I'd imagine there would be pandemonium if we did - reminiscent of the scenes when Liverpool sold Coutinho, and we all know how that panned out.

I think delving into the loan (with option) market is a sensible way to go for now. Those players are generally out of favour with their clubs but that doesn't necessarily make them bad players. We'll see how Gedson pans out. I also think we should be targetting players who see us as a step up, rather than a step down, but I'm not sure those types of players particularly fit Mourinho's template.

Not yet. Kane and Dele have got four years left. Son has three. We've got a few players who could leave on a free in 18 months - Dier, Rose, Vic, Skip, CCV. The year after that its Lamela, Aurier, Hugo, Foyth & Gazza.
 

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,986
81,913
Chelsea paid 35m for Danny fucking Drinkwater.
This is a good example of what the OP is saying about selling a player at a premium time. Drinkwater was Championship player of the year, a mainstay in their title winning side then put in a decent season and played in the CL. This was the premium time to sell and Chelsea bought a player not of the quality they required.

The OP has put forward Alli, Winks and Dier as players to sell.

The premium time to sell Alli was after his 2nd season when he hit double figures for goals in the Prem twice in a row.
Dier was when he was a mainstay DM for us when we had the defensive record in the league.
Winks' premium time was when he got into the England squad.

Easy to say we should have sold them in hindsight of course. If we had sold these players to domestic rivals at the time I believe most fans would have been outraged at our lack of ambition, Levy being more interested in money than success and calling us a selling club.

Given our current squad situation I wonder if fans would be more accepting of selling our players while on a high or premium time to sell.

Right now the premium players for us to sell are Kane and Son. Not sure I'd want us to sell either.
 
Last edited:

Trotter

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2009
2,169
3,312
I think Levy has had his fingers burnt by the Eriksen saga. By all accounts CE was offered new deals repeatedly but refused all of them. This seems to be the way things are leaning now in football with players wrestling a bigger slice of the pie away from the clubs. People are now saying that we fucked up by not selling him at 130m or whatever 18 months ago. To bring that up to date, we should now be entertaining big offers for the likes of Kane, Son, Dele, but I'd imagine there would be pandemonium if we did - reminiscent of the scenes when Liverpool sold Coutinho, and we all know how that panned out.

I think delving into the loan (with option) market is a sensible way to go for now. Those players are generally out of favour with their clubs but that doesn't necessarily make them bad players. We'll see how Gedson pans out. I also think we should be targetting players who see us as a step up, rather than a step down, but I'm not sure those types of players particularly fit Mourinho's template.


No it doesn't in the slightest mean that we should be entertaining offers for Kane, Dele and Son and that would be comparable to Eriksen.
They all have 3 and a half years or longer on their contract, not 18 months and unwilling to sign a new one.
However any player with less than 2 years left we should be actively trying to sell, if they have value and we don't want to keep, or they won't sign a new deal.
 
Last edited:

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,391
No it doesn't in the slightest mean that we should be entertaining offers for Kane, Dele and Son and that would be comparable to Eriksen.
They all have 3 and a half years or longer on their contract, not 18 months and unwilling to sign a new one.
However any player with less than 2 years left we should be actively trying to sell, if they have value, or have actively been offering new contract to.

I was using Kane, Son and Dele as examples of players that would be highly sought after and would attract big fees. I wasn't saying we should be looking to shift them now, but if you want to interpret it that way and give me a 'doh' rating I guess that's your business.
 

Trotter

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2009
2,169
3,312
I was using Kane, Son and Dele as examples of players that would be highly sought after and would attract big fees. I wasn't saying we should be looking to shift them now, but if you want to interpret it that way and give me a 'doh' rating I guess that's your business.

But totally missed the whole point (in fact only point) people are saying Eriksen should have been sold was length of contract remaining, and you then said that the current comparable situation was with players with 4 or 5 seasons left, whereas the current comparable situation is any player with 18 months or less left on their deals.
It was a "doh" moment from you, and rightly got the rating it deserved.
 

Trotter

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2009
2,169
3,312
Did we actually have a legit 130m bid for Eriksen? From who?


Not as far as I am aware, we reportedly had bids/enquiries from Man U, Chelsea and Real Madrid for around the £100m mark 18 months ago and turned them all down though, with his agent saying club were totally unwilling to entertain offers, and it wasn't a must have for Eriksen, so he didn't kick up a fuss.
 
Last edited:

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,391
But totally missed the whole point (in fact only point) people are saying Eriksen should have been sold was length of contract remaining, and you then said that the current comparable situation was with players with 4 or 5 seasons left, whereas the current comparable situation is any player with 18 months or less left on their deals.
It was a "doh" moment from you, and rightly got the rating it deserved.

Thanks for being so pedantic. I gave examples of future deals which might be similar to what we passed up with Eriksen. Well done for totally mis interpreting what I was saying and then getting all self righteous about it.
 

double0

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2006
14,423
12,258
Realistically the rebuild must be done, other wise we will lose out much more as teams will get better themselves.

This squad has peaked. How I see it what we need:

DM
RB
LCB
CF/WF
LW

When Eriksen goes (IMO) Jack Grealish should be the replacement. John McGin as well (Especially if Villa go down) would be a good midfield player to add.

If we can upgrade on Lloris so be it if not he is still a good keeper (but for mistakes)
 

dimiSpur

There's always next year...
Aug 9, 2008
5,844
6,750
Levy could have stuck with Poch or hired a manager of a similar mould. Instead he hired Jose. Jose certainly isn't expecting us to spend as much as Man Utd did when he was there. But there's no chance there aren't some serious funds available to spend in order to rebuild.

Unless of course Jose thought the squad was better than it actually is before agreeing to join, which I strongly suspect was the case, and therefore believed he'd only need half the amount he needs now to rebuild the squad, which will lead to problems between him and Levy.

Only time will tell.
 

whitelightwhiteheat

SC Supporter
Jul 21, 2006
6,517
3,195
Not as far as I am aware, we reportedly had bids/enquiries from Man U, Chelsea and Real Madrid for around the £100m mark 18 months ago and turned them all down though, with his agent saying club were totally unwilling to entertain offers, and it wasn't a must have for Eriksen, so he didn't kick up a fuss.

I thought I heard we never had any concrete bids for him, I could be wrong though.
 

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,391
Levy could have stuck with Poch or hired a manager of a similar mould. Instead he hired Jose. Jose certainly isn't expecting us to spend as much as Man Utd did when he was there. But there's no chance there aren't some serious funds available to spend in order to rebuild.

Unless of course Jose thought the squad was better than it actually is before agreeing to join, which I strongly suspect was the case, and therefore believed he'd only need half the amount he needs now to rebuild the squad, which will lead to problems between him and Levy.

Only time will tell.

I think Mourinho thought he could do what Poch couldn't and has now found out it's a much bigger task than he thought. At the start of the season it became obvious that Dier was struggling - but too late to do anything about it. Similarly, Wanyama wasn't going to make a miraculous recovery. Vertonghen was left out by Poch, and it's now fairly obvious why. It then became apparent that Eriksen was leaving come what may and that Danny Rose was past his sell by date. When you add in the injuries to Davies, Sissoko and now Kane it paints a pretty bleak picture. The only slight positive was Toby signing up again, even though he's also had his problems. If Mourinho really was happy with the squad he inherited, I'd say he must have not been paying attention for a pretty long time.
 

punkisback

Well-Known Member
Apr 10, 2004
4,410
7,278
Not as far as I am aware, we reportedly had bids/enquiries from Man U, Chelsea and Real Madrid for around the £100m mark 18 months ago and turned them all down though, with his agent saying club were totally unwilling to entertain offers, and it wasn't a must have for Eriksen, so he didn't kick up a fuss.
I thought we quoted them that price when they enquired rather than them bidding.
 

fishhhandaricecake

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2018
18,702
46,941
Seems like a well thought out post but lots of long paragraphs scared me... regarding re-build I think we will have some money but its very hard to tell because it depends on the way that the loans have been re-financed and which pots of money sit where etc.

Simply put if we finish outside of the CL spots we will have less money this summer to spend but we may well be getting rid of a few off the wage bill and also we might NEED to spend in order to get back to the CL spots so who knows.

If we don't the Levy should rightly get some heat.
 

Trotter

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2009
2,169
3,312
I thought we quoted them that price when they enquired rather than them bidding.


Not according to his agent, Chelsea, Man U and Real all put in "huge bids" for him in summer 2018, and we turned them all down
 
Last edited:

Wheeler Dealer

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2011
6,863
12,282
The market has shifted in recent years, because high transfer fees combined with high wages, are beyond the resources of most clubs. In recent times the so called big clubs are now looking at loans leading onto potential permanent deals as opposed to just permanent deals, and this is more prevalent with the Italian and Spanish clubs, but not exclusive, and it is now evident in Premier League.

With this mind, I wonder how clubs, particularly ours are shaping their future transfer / retention strategies
 

scat1620

L'espion mal fait
May 11, 2008
16,280
52,491
With this mind, I wonder how clubs, particularly ours are shaping their future transfer / retention strategies
Haven't cleared it with Rob and A&C yet but I'm gangsta so don't mind taking the consequences of sharing some ITK I have on this subject re: Spur's current, medium- and long-term strategies in relation to this:

giphy.webp

 

Johnny J

Not the Kiwi you need but the one you deserve
Aug 18, 2012
18,123
47,887
It's going to cost a metric fuckton to get us back where we were a couple of year ago. And the ridiculous thing is that this bullshit situation Most likely wouldn't have happened if Levy had just invested properly in the team each window like literally every other team competing at the very top of their leagues.

He thought our squad was good enough, and it was, until everything predictably fell apart due to a lack of fresh ideas and fresh faces. Total negligence.

It didn't even make sense business-wise, because if we'd added a quality player or two each window, we'd have continued to build and raise our profile, which in turn generates more commercial revenue.
 
Last edited:
Top