Max Aarons

[Japhet]

If Jose doesn't rate him then we shouldn't buy him.

I think there needs to be some clarity on who is actually responsible for signings. If Mourinho wants to take that responsibility I'd give it to him within the financial constraints we live by. Then, if he makes good signings he gets the credit and if they're bad he can carry the can. I've had enough of excuses why we haven't progressed and not knowing who's actually making the decisions.

 

[spurs mental]

I reckon he'd go up a couple of levels if he joined. Working with Jose and playing with better players will help.

 

[wiggo24]

With the likelihood that KWP goes as part of the deal for Hojbjerg and Aurier leaves for a fee, I am all for Aarons coming in as one of the options at RB.

Over time he will develop into a top full back IMO but I would probably like another RB, with more experience, to rotate regularly with Aarons.

Same here but not a chance we'd buy two RBs. We'd sell Aurier and KWP, buy Aarons and leave ourselves short again.

 

[wrd]

I think there needs to be some clarity on who is actually responsible for signings. If Mourinho wants to take that responsibility I'd give it to him within the financial constraints we live by. Then, if he makes good signings he gets the credit and if they're bad he can carry the can. I've had enough of excuses why we haven't progressed and not knowing who's actually making the decisions.

It is a bit tiresome hearing how certain signings aren't who the manager wanted or it was somebody elses decision. They should all be singing off the same song sheet.

 

[Who’s our next manager?]

It is a bit tiresome hearing how certain signings aren't who the manager wanted or it was somebody elses decision. They should all be singing off the same song sheet.

That’s always the same but nobody really knows. Correction to a comment I made aboitnMuve making a big profit on Eriksem.Doubt that he doesn’t even play for them??

 

[C0YS]

I think there needs to be some clarity on who is actually responsible for signings. If Mourinho wants to take that responsibility I'd give it to him within the financial constraints we live by. Then, if he makes good signings he gets the credit and if they're bad he can carry the can. I've had enough of excuses why we haven't progressed and not knowing who's actually making the decisions.

I think we will find out with the documentary.

But I suspect transfers are done in the same way that they are done in 95% of clubs. It's not football manager where the manager does everything. There will be a meeting to talk about targets, the manager likely gets the power to veto but decisions will be made collectively with the recruitment department. Then Levy and his team will go through the targets and do the negotiating, and phone the manager about any options that might come up through agents and whatnot.

If you watch sunderland till I die you can see a slightly dysfunctional example of how transfers are done, and I suspect it's the same kind of thing for most clubs.

Also, there is a big difference in 'not being convinced' about a player and not wanting the transfer. If the manager is not convinced but our recruitment department are fans, we might still go for him if Jose still thinks he can work with him. That wouldn't be an issue, as long as the manager doesn't see the signing limit his ability of getting targets he is more convinced of.

 

[Japhet]

I think we will find out with the documentary.

But I suspect transfers are done in the same way that they are done in 95% of clubs. It's not football manager where the manager does everything. There will be a meeting to talk about targets, the manager likely gets the power to veto but decisions will be made collectively with the recruitment department. Then Levy and his team will go through the targets and do the negotiating, and phone the manager about any options that might come up through agents and whatnot.

If you watch sunderland till I die you can see a slightly dysfunctional example of how transfers are done, and I suspect it's the same kind of thing for most clubs.

Also, there is a big difference in 'not being convinced' about a player and not wanting the transfer. If the manager is not convinced but our recruitment department are fans, we might still go for him if Jose still thinks he can work with him. That wouldn't be an issue, as long as the manager doesn't see the signing limit his ability of getting targets he is more convinced of.

I think it's quite dangerous giving Mourinho free reign (we all saw how Pogba panned out) but I'd prefer there to be some transparency and accountability for who we sign, rather than both sides blaming the other when we miss our targets or buy rubbish.

 

[C0YS]

I think it's quite dangerous giving Mourinho free reign (we all saw how Pogba panned out) but I'd prefer there to be some transparency and accountability for who we sign, rather than both sides blaming the other when we miss our targets or buy rubbish.

I mean, we normally see the blame game on people arguing on forums, which I hope is not a consideration for the club, more than out in public. I think the nature of individual transfers is always shrouded in a bit of mystery. A DoF at least gives someone to blame and definitely can help as an added voice and intel in signing players for a long term future. Though getting that model right can be a challenge if done badly (Roma and Barca are both in a mini crisis in part due to politics surrounding DoFs). I suspect the documentary (that I won't watch!) might shed some light though!

 

[chrissivad]

Lloris, Gazzaniga, Austin
Aarons, Castagne, Davies, Sessegnon, Cirkin
Alderweireld, Sanchez, Dier, Kim, Tanganga
Hojbjerg, Winks, Gedson, Sissoko, Ndombele, Lo Celso
Dele, Son, Lucas, Lamela, Bergwijn, Willian
Kane, Milik

Aarons, Castagne, Kim, Hojbjerg, Willian, Milik with a few out and a few kids sent on loans would do me fine.

Does Gedson need to be included in the squad next season?
If he does your over by 1 non home grown player.

 

[wrd]

Does Gedson need to be included in the squad next season?
If he does your over by 1 non home grown player.

My guess would be to remove one of the wingers, if Willian does come then somebody has to go.

 

[yankspurs]

My guess would be to remove one of the wingers, if Willian does come then somebody has to go.

We wont be making an attacking signing other than hopefully a 2nd striker

 

[yankspurs]

Does Gedson need to be included in the squad next season?
If he does your over by 1 non home grown player.

W’ll need to remove 2 in the EL squad if that comes to pass(provided we even make it)

 

[BuckeyeSpurs11]

Does Gedson need to be included in the squad next season?
If he does your over by 1 non home grown player.

honestly should have a british 2nd keeper and that solves that...Ramsdale if Bournemouth go down would be a solid #2

 

[markt]

Feel we would be buying potential with Aarons and not the finished article, but hopefully would be cheaper with Norwich going down.

 

[double0]

Brooks at Bournemouth is another big shout from me another goal threat is needed within our squad plus his left footed.

 

[Hoddle&Waddle]

Brooks only joined Bournemouth the summer just gone right? He won't be cheap, though probably still cheaper than Grealish. I might even prefer him tbh.

Brooks has just had 2 major ankle surgerys and is hardly performing on the level Grealish is. Seems a bit of a hipster choice to prefer Brooks.

 

[yido_number1]

I think it's quite dangerous giving Mourinho free reign (we all saw how Pogba panned out) but I'd prefer there to be some transparency and accountability for who we sign, rather than both sides blaming the other when we miss our targets or buy rubbish.

I don't think we have seen how Pogba panned out. It looks like he's finding his feet again and is still clearly a very talented player. Players fall out with coaches it happens all the time. At the same time Mourinho has far more successes than failures when it comes to signing players.

 

[spursfan77]

Brooks has just had 2 major ankle surgerys and is hardly performing on the level Grealish is. Seems a bit of a hipster choice to prefer Brooks.

He's looked good since the restart. If Bournemouth go down, someone will pick him up and have a good player on their hands next season.

 

[joey55]

He's looked good since the restart. If Bournemouth go down, someone will pick him up and have a good player on their hands next season.

I agree that he looks good and someone is going to get a very good buy. But from our perspective, what is the point of collecting "good" players, when we have to compete with Liverpool and City, who have brilliant players? We've already got "good" players on our bench. If we buy an attacking player, he has to be a real difference maker at the highest level and I don't think anyone really think Brooks will ever be that. If we can't sign someone, like Grealish, who is the most creative player in the league, or if we can't, then I think we'd be better off trying to improve the squad in other areas. To compete with the best, you've got to have the best.

We actually need to improve in other areas, more than in the attack. But, if for some reason, someone like Grealish were to become available to us, than we should buy them regardless, as it's opportunities like that don't come up often. We missed out big time with Bruno Fernandes. That's the standard we need to buy. If player like Brooks become available, I'd rather let him go somewhere else, as he's not better than Bergwijn or Lamela in my opinion. If the attacking player we are offered, aren't on the level of Son, Eriksen and Kane, then I think we should avoid them, as we've got plenty of attacking players the level below those 3. We need an Eriksen replacement, but it can't be just a good player, he has to be able to have an Eriksen or VDV level impact. Otherwise, no matter what the tactics gang think, we ain't going to be competing at the top.

 

[HildoSpur]

I agree that he looks good and someone is going to get a very good buy. But from our perspective, what is the point of collecting "good" players, when we have to compete with Liverpool and City, who have brilliant players? We've already got "good" players on our bench. If we buy an attacking player, he has to be a real difference maker at the highest level and I don't think anyone really think Brooks will ever be that. If we can't sign someone, like Grealish, who is the most creative player in the league, or if we can't, then I think we'd be better off trying to improve the squad in other areas. To compete with the best, you've got to have the best.

We actually need to improve in other areas, more than in the attack. But, if for some reason, someone like Grealish were to become available to us, than we should buy them regardless, as it's opportunities like that don't come up often. We missed out big time with Bruno Fernandes. That's the standard we need to buy. If player like Brooks become available, I'd rather let him go somewhere else, as he's not better than Bergwijn or Lamela in my opinion. If the attacking player we are offered, aren't on the level of Son, Eriksen and Kane, then I think we should avoid them, as we've got plenty of attacking players the level below those 3. We need an Eriksen replacement, but it can't be just a good player, he has to be able to have an Eriksen or VDV level impact. Otherwise, no matter what the tactics gang think, we ain't going to be competing at the top.

Extremely difficult to get those standard of players in though. The problem we have is that we need to take the odd punt on a player who we feel could become that player and hope they develop. Top level attacking players like Eriksen, Son and Kane don't come onto the market very often and generally come at a premium price, at least not when they are at their peak.

Eriksen and Son are two perfect examples of this, both clearly very talented but neither fully formed and at the height of their powers when we bought them but both came in and over time became incredibly important and influential players for us.