The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - 20th July

[Hakkz]

Oh right, so it is safe to assume that Lloris would only stay a short while because of the history of goalkeepers specifically coming from only Spain, Italy, and France, but excluding all other foreign keepers (of which there have been quite a few to last a long time!)...sorry but that is a bit too far fetched on the conditional terms for me to be bothered contemplating. What if Spurs progress massively and are competing for the League and in the CL within 2-3 years, would he still leave for pastures new then? What about Schmeichel, another foreign keeper but admittedly not from Spain Italy or France? Did he remain longer because he wasn't from those three countries, or because he was playing for one of the most dominant teams in football at the time??

To consider spending somewhere in the region of £25m on two goalkeepers (especially when we have 1 established striker) is, to be blunt, ridiculous!

Petr Cech, Van der Sar. Etc.

 

[Brazilyid]

After breaking the world record fee for a goalkeeper on De Gea the season before? Don't think so.

Whilst I agree with your point. And I do, just wanted to say Buffon is the world record fee for a goalkeeper.

 

[kdspur]

Is this for real??? This the same team that scored 89 goals last season, with Rooney getting 27 of them???? And you have the nerve to rate my post as dumb???

Oh dear God, I really should have known better than to form my own opinion and try to discuss it with you. After all I've sat here and seen the "discussions" you get into with many other members. I should have just expected the dumb rating you gave me without actually bothering to try to explain.

whats the fucking point in signing a striker if at the other end we constantly let goals in??

ur posts are bordering on been child like!! we are a big club strieving to bring in top players no matter what age from keepers to strikers to coaches to fucking sport scientists or whoever. we need at least 2 goalkeepers to heighten competition. gomez and cudicini are gone and freidel is 42 years of age! we also need strikers .

saying we need strikers more than goalkeeper or midfielder and making preferential notions of whats needed is something i hope spurs are not doing but again it is spurs and would not suprise me. we need players all over the park so spurs should be putting equal effort into all.

you ask any united fan and they will tell you they were and are not at their best compared to years gone by and they are struggling in midfield and need players but they still overcame that in past few seasons and still scored goals. our midfield is better than united but we still finsihed what 20+ points behind them..why was that ?? its not only because they scored more !

united and chelsea have been best teams for past 20 years cos they concede less and in the main score more than any other teams . they have great keepers and a great defence at the root of all that and once you have this success follows 99% of the time. strikers come and go but if you have a proper team and individuals behind those positions its easily overcome.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Spanish players will be forced to ply their trade outside of Spain though, because their league is broke. Even Madrid and Barca are financially strapped. Not saying that we will get a bunch of players for cheap, but just that you can expect to see them coming to England and Germany at a much higher rate in the near future.

Do you know how the spanish league distributes it's TV money (collectively or do teams negotiate individually) ?

Madrid and Barca may have large debt but so do ManU. As long as they are generating big revenue they'll be pretty safe, and both clubs seem to have reined in their spending a little, especially Barca.

Are the rest much worse off financially than many UK teams debt wise ?

 

[Misfit]

Do you know how the spanish league distributes it's TV money (collectively or do teams negotiate individually) ?

Madrid and Barca may have large debt but so do ManU. As long as they are generating big revenue they'll be pretty safe, and both clubs seem to have reined in their spending a little, especially Barca.

Are the rest much worse off financially than many UK teams debt wise ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_F...ns#The_English.2C_Italian_.26_Spanish_leagues

Yeah, it's wiki, but wiki is actually a pretty good resource and, frankly, fuck trawling through multiple sources which will only condradict each other anyway.

Worth remembering a good chunk of the prem's €3b debt is owned by yanited but it's not exactly a pretty picture for any of the top 3 leagues.

 

[HappySpur]

Do you know how the spanish league distributes it's TV money (collectively or do teams negotiate individually) ?

Madrid and Barca may have large debt but so do ManU. As long as they are generating big revenue they'll be pretty safe, and both clubs seem to have reined in their spending a little, especially Barca.

Are the rest much worse off financially than many UK teams debt wise ?

I believe last year they went through a process of collectivization, but even so, it's so heavily weighed towards the two super clubs that its still hard. Although, I could have that wrong, so hopefully somebody knows better if there is a mistake.

And I believe that they are worse off than UK teams because of the financial crisis and Spain's issues within it. Barca's expenditure on Alba has allowed Valencia to be the only other team to purchase so far. I don't think there has been a transfer over a 3 million euros yet, but I am going to check that.

 

[Montasura]

whats the fucking point in signing a striker if at the other end we constantly let goals in??

ur posts are bordering on retarded. we are a big club strieving to bring in top players no matter what age from keepers to strikers to coaches to fucking sport scientists or whoever. we need at least 2 goalkeepers to heighten competition. gomez and cudicini are gone and freidel is 42 years of age! we also need strikers .

saying we need strikers more than goalkeeper or midfielder and making preferential notions of whats needed is something i hope spurs are not doing but again it is spurs and would not suprise me. we need players all over the park so spurs should be putting equal effort into all.

you ask any united fan and they will tell you they were and are not at their best compared to years gone by and they are struggling in midfield and need players but they still overcame that in past few seasons and still scored goals. our midfield is better than united but we still finsihed what 20+ points behind them..why was that ?? its not only because they scored more !

united and chelsea have been best teams for past 20 years cos they concede less and in the main score more than any other teams . they have great keepers and a great defence at the root of all that and once you have this success follows 99% of the time. strikers come and go but if you have a proper team and individuals behind those positions its easily overcome.

Maybe if you took the time to read and understand my posts you wouldn't feel the need to rate them dumb or call them retarded.

First off I didn't say we needed strikers more than a goalkeeper or midfielder...what I said was that to spend £25m on two keepers when we still have no new strikers or Modric replacement is reckless. This is about simple economics. How much money do you honestly believe we have to spend on transfers? This isn't football manager, we don't have an endless well of cash flowing from some Russian oligarchs deep pockets. We have a finite budget that needs to be spent wisely to cover ALL the necessary positions required. So to spend £25m of that pot on two strikers is just stupid, why not one and keep any of Brad, Gomes, or Cudicini as backup, thus freeing up money to fill other essential positions.

As for retarded posts, you clearly stated that United had ground out results over the last few seasons because of a top keeper and defence - interesting that you've now included goals scored into the equation in your post above. So rather than grind out results, they have now played like a more complete team.

As for your question "but we still finsihed what 20+ points behind them..why was that ??" - Spurs conceded only 8 goals more than United, but yet we scored 23 goals less. Yet another fact that makes a mockery of your argument! So you tell me why it was??

Oh and just so you know, Gomes hasn't gone yet, Friedel has only turned 41, and Chelsea finished 11th 20 years ago, so they haven't exactly been one of the best teams for the past 20 years......but hey, don't let actual facts get in the way of your desire to rate someone dumb because they have an opinion that differs from yours!

 

[Bus-Conductor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_F...ns#The_English.2C_Italian_.26_Spanish_leagues

Yeah, it's wiki, but wiki is actually a pretty good resource and, frankly, fuck trawling through multiple sources which will only condradict each other anyway.

Worth remembering a good chunk of the prem's €3b debt is owned by yanited but it's not exactly a pretty picture for any of the top 3 leagues.

Cheers, it's late and I'm also catching up on the Tour de France highlights so was being lazy, hoped HS might know the answers without me having to read up. I'll have a read in a minute.

 

[GeorgeTink]

Whilst I agree with your point. And I do, just wanted to say Buffon is the world record fee for a goalkeeper.

No worries buddy, i was thinking of the UK not the world.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I believe last year they went through a process of collectivization, but even so, it's so heavily weighed towards the two super clubs that its still hard. Although, I could have that wrong, so hopefully somebody knows better if there is a mistake.

And I believe that they are worse off than UK teams because of the financial crisis and Spain's issues within it. Barca's expenditure on Alba has allowed Valencia to be the only other team to purchase so far. I don't think there has been a transfer over a 3 million euros yet, but I am going to check that.

Have Malaga bought anyone yet ?

 

[Lilbaz]

Do you know how the spanish league distributes it's TV money (collectively or do teams negotiate individually) ?

Madrid and Barca may have large debt but so do ManU. As long as they are generating big revenue they'll be pretty safe, and both clubs seem to have reined in their spending a little, especially Barca.

Are the rest much worse off financially than many UK teams debt wise ?

Remember that the media sometimes include liabilities in with the debts. Liabilities can include stuff like season tickets, which are considered a debt as the games have not been played yet but you still owe for the ticket as it has already been paid for.

Swiss Ramble is probably the best place to look. Here is a good article about Barca and Madrids debt.

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Spain

 

[Misfit]

Cheers, it's late and I'm also catching up on the Tour de France highlights so was being lazy, hoped HS might know the answers without me having to read up. I'll have a read in a minute.

Understood. I'll ferret out some relevant details for you now.

At the time of the introduction FFP, several Premier League clubs were known to be spending considerably above their income. For example, between 2005 and 2010 West Ham United recorded an aggregate net loss of £90.2 million, with equity of £13.063 million on 31 May 2010 following a re-capitalization,[9] while Everton, whose manager David Moyes had long received praise for his continued ability to keep the club among the top Premiership sides despite an extremely tight transfer budget, had a negative equity (in group accounts) of £29.774 million on 31 May 2010, making a net loss of £3.093 million in consolidated accounts.[10]
Worse of all though were the finances of Portsmouth, who had a shortfall of £59,458,603 to the creditor in February 2010 (after deducting the book value of the asset)

In the Italian Serie A most clubs also reported a net loss over the previous season: A.C. Milan (group) €69.751 million on 31 December 2010;[14] Genoa C.F.C. €16,964,706 on 31 December 2010; ACF Fiorentina €9,604,353 on 31 December 2010; Bologna F.C. 1909 €4,166,419 on 30 June 2011; Chievo €527,661 on 30 June 2011, etc. Only a few Italian clubs made a net profit, these included Udinese Calcio, Calcio Catania, S.S.C. Napoli (€4,197,829 on 30 June 2011) and S.S. Lazio (€9,982,408 on the group account on 30 June 2011[15]).
Some of the Italian clubs had been losing money for a number of years; for example Internazionale have accumulated losses of around €1.3 billion over the last 16 years,[16] while on 20 May 2005 Italy’s oldest club, Lazio, agreed a 23-year repayment plan to pay back a €140 million overdue tax bill.[17] The club recovered however, showing a net asset/equity of €10,500,666 in its consolidated accounts on 30 June 2011, while net financial debt of the group (Italian: Posizione finanziaria netta) was €9.01 million. Its city rival A.S. Roma SpA, from its ultimate holding company Italpetroli, intermediate holding company "Roma 2000" (the holding company or the head of Roma larger group of companies, holding company of "ASR Real Estate S.r.l." and "Brand Management S.r.l.") to AS Roma SpA (or AS Roma [smaller] group), owed considerable money to banks, including UniCredit. On 30 June 2010, AS Roma SpA had a negative equity (total liability greater than total asset) of €13.2 million on the consolidated balance sheet,[18] which ultimately led to the group ("Roma 2000") being sold to group of investor lead by American billionaire Thomas R. DiBenedetto (25%). Before the formal handover on 30 June 2011, the club had a net financial debt of €53.831 million, with a negative equity of €43.984 million.[19]

Despite being the world’s second richest club according to the Forbes' List, heavy spending on two other players, Kaká, and Karim Benzema with their associated high wages trebled Real’s net financial debt from €130M on 30 June 2008 to €326.7M on 30 June 2009, as the signing Albiol, Benzema, Kaká, Ronaldo and some minor players to 2009–10 squad were included in the 2008–09 financial year.[21] Madrid signed one more big name, Xabi Alonso in August 2009, made the net financial debt only dropped from €326.7 million to €244.6 million on 30 June 2010, still higher than previous 8 seasons (2000–2008). However, the net asset/equity was increased from €195.9M to €219.7M.[22][23][24] Their main rivals Barcelona also continued to spend heavily on transfers and players wages, although in recent years, the level had been slightly reduced. On 30 June 2009 Barcelona's net asset/equity was just €20.844 million.[25][26]
Total debt in La Liga was estimated at £2.5 billion, leaving many of the owners, as so often in the past, having to put more of their own money into the club. In the summer of 2010, Villarreal failed to pay their players because the ceramics industry from which their owner, Fernando Roig made his money was hit hard by the European credit crisis. At the end of the year, Deportivo de La Coruña were more than €120 million in debt, Atlético Madrid owed more than €300 million, while the total for Valencia at one point in 2009 was reported to be as high as €547m.

 

[Misfit]

Remember that the media sometimes include liabilities in with the debts. Liabilities can include stuff like season tickets, which are considered a debt as the games have not been played yet but you still owe for the ticket as it has already been paid for.

Swiss Ramble is probably the best place to look. Here is a good article about Barca and Madrids debt.

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Spain

Great link. Always find myself reading the odd article from there and then forgetting all about the site. Bookmarked it finally. This illustrates La Liga anyways. Jesus, let's hope FFP isn't, as I suspect, just fluff.

 

[Lighty64]

i'm sure i read somewhere over the last week we have a young goalkeeper on trial, thats meant to be the biz. if thats true then i doubt we would follow up Butland and Lloris.

also signing a striker is needed and is more important. keeping clean sheets is important, but scoring more than the oposition is more important

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Remember that the media sometimes include liabilities in with the debts. Liabilities can include stuff like season tickets, which are considered a debt as the games have not been played yet but you still owe for the ticket as it has already been paid for.

Swiss Ramble is probably the best place to look. Here is a good article about Barca and Madrids debt.

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Spain

Brilliant read, thanks mate, answered everything including the TV revenue question. I can't rep you for some reason ?

 

[Original # 10]

We were hot on Butland when Arry was still at the helm. I can't imagine much has changed on that front.

IMO opinion a purchase to loan back move for Butland is far more beneficial to us than a straight cash move for Lloris.

Brad will do fine for me next season

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Brilliant read, thanks mate, answered everything including the TV revenue question. I can't rep you for some reason ?

Probably because I've already liked it. Derr..

 

[kdspur]

Maybe if you took the time to read and understand my posts you wouldn't feel the need to rate them dumb or call them retarded.

First off I didn't say we needed strikers more than a goalkeeper or midfielder...what I said was that to spend £25m on two keepers when we still have no new strikers or Modric replacement is reckless. This is about simple economics. How much money do you honestly believe we have to spend on transfers? This isn't football manager, we don't have an endless well of cash flowing from some Russian oligarchs deep pockets. We have a finite budget that needs to be spent wisely to cover ALL the necessary positions required. So to spend £25m of that pot on two strikers is just stupid, why not one and keep any of Brad, Gomes, or Cudicini as backup, thus freeing up money to fill other essential positions.

As for retarded posts, you clearly stated that United had ground out results over the last few seasons because of a top keeper and defence - interesting that you've now included goals scored into the equation in your post above. So rather than grind out results, they have now played like a more complete team.

As for your question "but we still finsihed what 20+ points behind them..why was that ??" - Spurs conceded only 8 goals more than United, but yet we scored 23 goals less. Yet another fact that makes a mockery of your argument! So you tell me why it was??

Oh and just so you know, Gomes hasn't gone yet, Friedel has only turned 41, and Chelsea finished 11th 20 years ago, so they haven't exactly been one of the best teams for the past 20 years......but hey, don't let actual facts get in the way of your desire to rate someone dumb because they have an opinion that differs from yours!

we have sold kranjcar and corluka bringing in at least 10 million. i have no doubt we will sell modric for alot less than 40 million quoted and either way he will be sold this time, so for arguments sake lets say 30million. thats 40 million on trying to attain replacements right there and im not even throwing in gio, pienaar, defoe, bentley , jenas into that because quite frankly we will be lucky to sell them bar pienaar which looks a done deal. who says we have a definte budget?????
we have signed sig and verts from what i see as maybe what 16 million. we have also retired king , released nelson and saha so investment in team and in all positions has to come , its imply has to and money will have to spent even if it means breaking into future set aside money or transfer windows.

we have got ourself into a situation in keeping position and striking positions especially whereby our personnel are simply not good enough or can be trusted. gomez didnt play at all last year, cudicini is woeful and friedel is ok 41 years of age and by his own admission saying this is his last year. Now we can get away with buying lloris for big bucks and have him challenging brad but if that means missing out on a player like butland for the sake of one season thats been reckless. you have to see long term not just the present and if he can be bought now spurs simply have to cater for that .

in striking area we have only defoe who is simply not good enough and a 18 yr old kid kane is average at best and far far away from first team as you can get imvho. we need 2 strikers at least there too and that simply has to be catered for otherwise we go backwards. money simply has to spent.

My whole argument here is based around having a top keeper at your club and having one is worth its weight in gold and when i one s out there who can be bought then spurs should do it. thats stems from my discussion on butland and how he should be bought. all other top clubs have keeper area sorted except us. you were making comments on strikers and midfielder replacement been more important and i could not totally disagree with you more. if there is potentially a top player been made available withing our price range and who can form the foundation of our side for next 20 years potentially then financilally levy and spurs have to go for it and get that player in. united do it the whole time.. ferguson admiited he had to make moves for rooney , jones , smalling to name just 3 well before he wanted too before other clubs could get them and we should be doing same with butland.

every succesful club and winning team has a great keeper and impressive center halves. and a winning team is built around that in my eyes. spurs might have conceded only 8 more than united. united scored more and conceded less and u fail to mention they were without vidic who is by far there best defender for alot of the season and prob one of the best in europe.

i could not care less what u think of me or what ur opinion of me is .. water off a ducks back .. the bottom line is psurs need to spend on keepers and not just one and also need to spend on strikers and all over the park. have no idea where they will get money but if they want to better 4th it simply has to be done. syaing they can only buy a striker and one keeper cos they can only budget for that is silly and wrong.

 

[Misfit]

We were hot on Butland when Arry was still at the helm. I can't imagine much has changed on that front.

IMO opinion a purchase to loan back move for Butland is far more beneficial to us than a straight cash move for Lloris.

Brad will do fine for me next season

Got to admit, Butland has a look about him. I was worried he was a shot-stopper. Well not worried about that but you know the hype that comes with that. Many an average keepers have pulled off good saves. He looks a bloody good prospect though.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

We were hot on Butland when Arry was still at the helm. I can't imagine much has changed on that front.

IMO opinion a purchase to loan back move for Butland is far more beneficial to us than a straight cash move for Lloris.

Brad will do fine for me next season

I disagree. I think Freidel got away with criticism for some real insipid line hugging all season and goals like QPR and Villa cost us massively.

I don't think Lloris is very commanding of his area but he is much better at shot stopping than Freidel. He would not have let in some of the goals Freidel did last season.