Club's Transfer "Comfort Zone"

[DaSpurs]

It's a long-winded way of saying "all of our most expensive signings - Bentley, Paulinho, Soldado, and Lamela - have been disasters and we don't trust ourselves to spend large sums of cash again any time in the near future."

Well tbf, numerically that list should also include Modric and Dembele. Clearly Modric was a superb success, but one could arguably include Dembele in that list as well (although certainly not to the same extent) given his production:cost ratio.

 

[spurs9]

Its worth noting that they may not of meant that wording to go out to the fans but if true then its depressing that is

That says to me we wont try and sign players to improve the first team and sign squad players.

Whats the point of having highly rated youth players if we are going to block their path with squad players

The issue is since the new tv deal, smaller clubs can pay big fees.

Hence these clubs spending big transfer deals:
Everton - £28million on lukaku
Newcastle - £12m Cabella
Hull - £10m Hernandez
QPR - £10m Sandro
West Ham - £12m Valencia
West Brom - £10m Ideye
Sunderland - £10m Rodwell

With that transfer price we are competing with smaller clubs, not to mention this season spending probably be even bigger since alot of more clubs are more financially secure now and know a bigger deal is coming

It doesn't say we are going exclusively to that policy. I'm sure, it's just main policy but if the right players are available we will spend more if necessary e.g if Depay was available for 20m and willing to join us, I'm sure we would snap him up.

Of all the players we have signed 15m and over, (Modric, Bentley, Bent, Defoe, Dembele, Lamela, Soldado & Paulinho) only Modric has been a success. The best you could say about the rest is "ok squad player" or "at least we somehow got our money back".

 

[spurs9]

Well tbf, numerically that list should also include Modric and Dembele. Clearly Modric was a superb success, but one could arguably include Dembele in that list as well (although certainly not to the same extent) given his production:cost ratio.

Modric was the only success IMO. Dembele, I would class as an ok squad player, that is behind our academy graduates in CM and is behind both a cheaper, younger signing and will be an academy graduate for AM in the summer.

 

[DaSpurs]

Modric was the only success IMO. Dembele, I would class as an ok squad player, that is behind our academy graduates in CM and is behind both a cheaper, younger signing and will be an academy graduate for AM in the summer.

I agree, the context of the fact he has ultimately ended up a squad player behind young academy products does lump him into that category IMO. I don't think he is on par with Soldado, Lamela, Bentley, and Paulinho (which is admittedly somewhat ironic considering Paulinho has scored more in one season than Dembele ever has for us and my argument was production:cost), but for me without doubt has to be included in rationale for why most of our more expensive signings have not turned out well.

 

[TottenhamMattSpur]

In relative terms, he spent big on Berbatov and Modric. Relative to our income at the time, that is, they were every bit as expensive as a £25m signing would be this summer.

And he will not have forgotten that they were two of our most successful ever signings - both in terms of what they delivered on the pitch and what they earned the club in transfer fees. So, if the right player comes along, I think he will still occasionally take the risk.

Zokora, Jenas, Bentley, Gomes, Keane, Palacios,

That's roughly £66m there if I count it on my fingers quickly. Mostly go in the same bucket as Soldado and Lamela as "relatively" expensive loss makers.

 

[spurs9]

I agree, the context of the fact he has ultimately ended up a squad player behind young academy products does lump him into that category IMO. I don't think he is on par with Soldado, Lamela, Bentley, and Paulinho (which is admittedly somewhat ironic considering Paulinho has scored more in one season than Dembele ever has for us and my argument was production:cost), but for me without doubt has to be included in rationale for why most of our more expensive signings have not turned out well.

Yes, I would lump them into the below:

Success: Modric.
Decent Squad player: Dembele & Defoe.
Poor signing that we were lucky to get our money back for: Bent.
ATM Very poor signing that could come good (but I doubt will): Lamela.
Disaster: Bentley, Soldado & Paulinho.

 

[DaSpurs]

Yes, I would lump them into the below:

Success: Modric.
Decent Squad player: Dembele & Defoe.
Poor signing that we were lucky to get our money back for: Bent.
ATM Very poor signing that could come good (but I doubt will): Lamela.
Disaster: Bentley, Soldado & Paulinho.

Agree with that to a T.

I think everyone hopes Lamela will come good, and clearly he is a talented player, but there is no denying from an objective standpoint that that was a very strange and poorly analyzed decision. There is a very good reason no other Prem club in the modern era has spent that much, relatively speaking, on not only a young player in Serie A but a South American player, for which the risk is overwhelmingly greater in cloudy England. Not a doubt in my mind his name is mooted while Prem clubs are monitoring Dybala.

 

[ButchCassidy]

This is the strategy that Arsenal used for years while they built and paid off their stadium, and it kept them in the Champions League.

This is the strategy that Dortmund used to win the Bundesliga and reach a Champions League final.

It is the strategy that Schalke have used to stay in the Champions League for several years.

It is the strategy that Atletico used to win La Liga and reach a Champions League final (only Falcao was > $15m from 2008-2013).

It is a perfectly valid and highly competitive strategy as long as it is implemented correctly.

 

[jambreck]

Well tbf, numerically that list should also include Modric and Dembele. Clearly Modric was a superb success, but one could arguably include Dembele in that list as well (although certainly not to the same extent) given his production:cost ratio.

The list should also include Berbatov.

When Spurs signed him for £11m in 2006, our turnover was £74m. Our turnover now is £180m. So in today's money, £11m would be the equivalent of £26m - as expensive as Soldado but a huge success both on the pitch and as a purely financial transaction.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Find me any player that is better than Kyle Walker and ill donate a crisp fiver to SC, isn't that right @Bus-Conductor

If you can find a player that isn't better than Kyle Walker I'll donate a fiver to SC.

 

[DaSpurs]

The list should also include Berbatov.

When Spurs signed him for £11m in 2006, our turnover was £74m. Our turnover now is £180m. So in today's money, £11m would be the equivalent of £26m - as expensive as Soldado but a huge success both on the pitch and as a purely financial transaction.

I think you have to put in the context of inflation, not club turnover. Rates have not gone up that percentage, just our income as more money has been pumped into the game and more importantly since Spurs have expanded their brand internationally more than tenfold.

Not saying you're wrong btw, I just don't view that purchase on the same level of extravagance of expenditure for the time, nor on the same level of lacking in prudence (Berbs had more than proven himself in Germany and in Europe).

 

[spurs9]

If you can find a player that isn't better than Kyle Walker I'll donate a fiver to SC.

Alan Hutton.

 

[ButchCassidy]

If you can find a player that isn't better than Kyle Walker I'll donate a fiver to SC.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Still my fiver.

 

[jambreck]

Zokora, Jenas, Bentley, Gomes, Keane, Palacios,

That's roughly £66m there if I count it on my fingers quickly. Mostly go in the same bucket as Soldado and Lamela as "relatively" expensive loss makers.

Zokora - hard to believe but I think we all but got our money back for him when we sold him to Sevilla.

Jenas - always a favourite target for abuse but wasn't actually a terrible purchase for us overall. His superb performances in both legs of the 2008 Carling Cup semi final, and the final itself, were almost worth the transfer fee alone.

Bentley - yep, unmitigated disaster.

Gomes - was never the player for us that he had been at PSV but still played a full part in our CL qualifying team in 2009-10. In particular, those two incredible (and crucial) saves against Arsenal in our 2-1 win at the Lane which set us up for the run in.

Keane and Palacios - different situation. Genuine relegation fears. Drastic action required. Desperately needed a DM. Desperately needed a striker, especially after Jermain Defoe was injured for us during his first game back at the club. Both played their part in getting us out of trouble (Palacios especially). Worth their fees for that alone.

Besides which, there are plenty of other relatively expensive players who have proved to be good buys.

So I repeat, if the right player is identified, we will splash out if we have to. We just won't do it routinely.

 

[Sweech]

This this is why Soldado and Lamela are our worst signings.
when levy finally did spend big he got burned. He won't take that risk again..

I think any signing that disrupts the harmony and team ethos of any squad is the worst and neither Soldado or Lamela did that and in fact by all accounts they're very well liked in the dressing room.

I say this because transfers go well beyond money and a team ethic is often something you can not buy.

 

[spurs9]

Still my fiver.

Dawson

 

[JohannTHFC]

Spending big wasn't the problem that Summer. Awful scouting and lack of a plan is what killed us. We can't go back to having windows like last Summer again. The tv deal means that if we keep buying like we did last Summer it's only a matter of time before West Ham, Southampton etc leave us in the dust.

 

[jambreck]

I think you have to put in the context of inflation, not club turnover. Rates have not gone up that percentage, just our income as more money has been pumped into the game and more importantly since Spurs have expanded their brand internationally more than tenfold.

I don't think the RPI is relevant in this context. In fact, I'd say that it demonstrably isn't so. The respective increases in both club turnover and the cost of player purchases are so extreme that they bear no relation to real life. So the only useful way to compare the cost of signings from ten years ago and the cost of signings now is within the context of football.

Not saying you're wrong btw, I just don't view that purchase on the same level of extravagance of expenditure for the time, nor on the same level of lacking in prudence (Berbs had more than proven himself in Germany and in Europe).

I'd say that Soldado was even more proven than Berbatov! But I agree with your general point. And that's why I believe that we will still buy big if and when we feel a player is worth it.

 

[DaSpurs]

I don't think the RPI is relevant in this context. In fact, I'd say that it demonstrably isn't so. The respective increases in both club turnover and the cost of player purchases are so extreme that they bear no relation to real life. So the only useful way to compare the cost of signings from ten years ago and the cost of signings now is within the context of football.

I'd say that Soldado was even more proven than Berbatov! But I agree with your general point. And that's why I believe that we will still buy big if and when we feel a player is worth it.

That's fair, I have to agree inflation also can't appropriately reflect the rise in relative values, but neither can relative costs when you consider just how much income the club has accrued from expanding their international brand. Even ten years ago, almost no one here (US), even in the avid playing community, had even heard of Spurs. Now you hardly see a pickup game anywhere in which someone isn't wearing Spurs apparel of some sort. Have to hand it to Levy, was a very wise move of his to specifically targeting the growing fanbases in the US and in Asia. Has generated tens of millions of pounds, maybe even a couple hundred, that wouldn't have been there otherwise.

It's true Soldado was more proven, but IMO it was less prudent because a) he was considerably older, b) he was not accustomed to playing as a lone striker, and c) we brought in a smaller poacher tasked with continuing that in the world's most physical league - and all that for 2.5x the fee for Berbs.