The Spurs thread | 2017-18 season | Serious thread - wummers/derailers will be threadbanned

[GlastonSpur]

He’s obviously not been impressed by Pochettino in the last few months. Hard to blame him really given Spurs stagnation.

I rather think he was impressed by the size of the wages offered him by Chelsea. As for "Spurs stagnation", last season we were heading out of the EL, this season we're soon to play Juventus in the CL knockout stages, having already beaten Real Madrid.

 

[ixa67]

I rather think he was impressed by the size of the wages offered him by Chelsea. As for "Spurs stagnation", last season we were heading out of the EL, this season we're soon to play Juventus in the CL knockout stages, having already beaten Real Madrid.

Just like Llorente was impressed by the size of wages offered to him by Spurs?

 

[GlastonSpur]

Just like Llorente was impressed by the size of wages offered to him by Spurs?

Possibly so. It's not clear that you're making a different point to the one I've just made.

 

[acnumber9]

I rather think he was impressed by the size of the wages offered him by Chelsea. As for "Spurs stagnation", last season we were heading out of the EL, this season we're soon to play Juventus in the CL knockout stages, having already beaten Real Madrid.

Did they increase their wage offer from you made that post? Maybe Spurs aren’t the draw you were bumming and blowing that they were.

 

[acnumber9]

Were not that far off the pace mate, no need for WUMMERY.

I’m just asking what changed. A Spurs fan told us how Spurs were so appealing he turned down a better team offering more money. What happened?

 

[africanspur]

I think what happened is that for some reason, Man Utd fans on redcafe are still finding themselves wound up by Glaston when by now, its surely obvious what he posts and how he posts and if its something that bothers you, it would surely be better to just ignore him.

I'm unsure of whether we've missed out on Barkley tbh, seems a bit up in the air for me. However, for him, I can't help the feeling that it may be another SWP/ Sinclair/ Sidwell etc. I also wonder what RLC is thinking right now.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Did they increase their wage offer from you made that post? Maybe Spurs aren’t the draw you were bumming and blowing that they were.

I'd guess so ... it seems the most likely reason as to why he turned them down in the summer, but has now changed his mind.

As I've said elsewhere, I hear that he wanted wages exceeding that of Kane to join Spurs this January, an offer which was obviously never going to happen.

If not signing Barkley is the criterion by which you judge Spurs' drawing power, then good luck to you.

 

[acnumber9]

I'd guess so ... it seems the most likely reason as to why he turned them down in the summer, but has now changed his mind.

As I've said elsewhere, I hear that he wanted wages exceeding that of Kane to join Spurs this January, an offer which was obviously never going to happen.

If not signing Barkley is the criterion by which you judge Spurs' drawing power, then good luck to you.

Or maybe he didn’t want to sign for Spurs as much as you say. You were the one bragging about how attractive Spurs are. I’m merely judging your nonsensical claims that Spurs are so attractive they can offer lower wages and still sign players. Something that is actually to be proven.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Or maybe he didn’t want to sign for Spurs as much as you say. You were the one bragging about how attractive Spurs are. I’m merely judging your nonsensical claims that Spurs are so attractive they can offer lower wages and still sign players. Something that is actually to be proven.

It doesn't need proving - witness the players we've signed over the last few years (Son, Wanyama, Alderweireld, Alli, Lloris, Eriksen etc). Most recently they include Davinson Sanchez, whom Barca and others wanted.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Or maybe he didn’t want to sign for Spurs as much as you say. You were the one bragging about how attractive Spurs are. I’m merely judging your nonsensical claims that Spurs are so attractive they can offer lower wages and still sign players. Something that is actually to be proven.

Right honest question, do you think Barkley had a better chance of developing and becoming a better player at Chelsea or at Tottenham?

 

[James Peril]

Why the drama? A player has chosen a bigger, better and more successful club over another club that has not won the league since right after WWII - hardly a big surprise. That being said; Barkley would not get any games at Spurs. Well, the woeful Sissoko is getting games so you never know.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Why the drama? A player has chosen a bigger, better and more successful club over another club that has not won the league since right after WWII - hardly a big surprise. That being said; Barkley would not get any games at Spurs. Well, the woeful Sissoko is getting games so you never know.

I didn't notice any drama lol.

 

[acnumber9]

It doesn't need proving - witness the players we've signed over the last few years (Son, Wanyama, Alderweireld, Alli, Lloris, Eriksen etc). Most recently they include Davinson Sanchez, whom Barca and others wanted.

Who offered those players higher wages?

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Barkley was offered to be a part of Levy's project, and instead has chosen trophies, winner's medals and a club with a broader wage structure.

It's a pretty obvious choice, and hopefully serves as a wake up call for some of the more delusional Spurs fans.

But if you're at a smaller club (like, say, Llorente was) and none of the big clubs are in for you, then Spurs would still be a decent club to sign for.

The good news for Spurs is that there are lots of these type of players to pick from when they're looking for replacing for Alli/Eriksen/Alderweireld/Kane etc soon.

But the reality is that if United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool or even Arse are in for a player, they won't pick Spurs instead.

 

[James Peril]

Barkley was offered to be a part of Levy's project, and instead has chosen trophies, winner's medals and a club with a broader wage structure.

It's a pretty obvious choice, and hopefully serves as a wake up call for some of the more delusional Spurs fans.

But if you're at a smaller club (like, say, Llorente was) and none of the big clubs are in for you, then Spurs would still be a decent club to sign for.

The good news for Spurs is that there are lots of these type of players to pick from when they're looking for replacing for Alli/Eriksen/Alderweireld/Kane etc soon.

But the reality is that if United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool or even Arse are in for a player, they won't pick Spurs instead.

Hmm.... didn’t Llorente literally join Spurs instead of Chelsea? Doesn’t matter of course since Llorente is old and not that good, but still.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Hmm.... didn’t Llorente literally join Spurs instead of Chelsea? Doesn’t matter of course since Llorente is old and not that good, but still.

Did Chelsea actually table a bid for him?

 

[Boycott]

Barkley was offered to be a part of Levy's project, and instead has chosen trophies, winner's medals and a club with a broader wage structure.

It's a pretty obvious choice, and hopefully serves as a wake up call for some of the more delusional Spurs fans.

But if you're at a smaller club (like, say, Llorente was) and none of the big clubs are in for you, then Spurs would still be a decent club to sign for.

The good news for Spurs is that there are lots of these type of players to pick from when they're looking for replacing for Alli/Eriksen/Alderweireld/Kane etc soon.

But the reality is that if United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool or even Arse are in for a player, they won't pick Spurs instead.

Spurs didn't bid for him so not sure how it's a snub. That said I posted my opinion yesterday that it was a mistake to allow Chelsea have a free pass at him because 15m is worth it. At worst you'll recoup the money.

As for your last point, Spurs have managed to finish above all of those clubs recently so that hasn't hindered them. If anything their model is more admirable because they aren't buying the highly rated, top quality players but are grooming them. In addition players who they have had the pick of are now courting the attention of people. A lot of people clamour for Rose who would probably go for a record fee for a left back. But three years ago he was a relative nobody while Luke Shaw was supposed to be left back for the next decade. Now Rose himself isn't guaranteed his starting place because Davies - a £5m purchase from Swansea - has been playing and doing well for the best part of a year.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Barkley was offered to be a part of Levy's project, and instead has chosen trophies, winner's medals and a club with a broader wage structure.

It's a pretty obvious choice, and hopefully serves as a wake up call for some of the more delusional Spurs fans.

But if you're at a smaller club (like, say, Llorente was) and none of the big clubs are in for you, then Spurs would still be a decent club to sign for.

The good news for Spurs is that there are lots of these type of players to pick from when they're looking for replacing for Alli/Eriksen/Alderweireld/Kane etc soon.

But the reality is that if United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool or even Arse are in for a player, they won't pick Spurs instead.

Ok so a footballer should put wages in front of development? Would explain why so many young English players stunt their development.

 

[cyberman]

Why can't he develop at Chelsea though?

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Ok so a footballer should put wages in front of development? Would explain why so many young English players stunt their development.

Having the option of a broader wage structure gives players the opportunity to move right up the pay scale while staying at the same club - which is surely best for their development.

Hazard has developed well at Chelsea, and has gone up the pay scale accordingly, but if he'd moved to Spurs he'd have to've left by now to get the wages he deserved. That move might've stunted his development.

I know Kane is finally being offered a wage approaching what he's worth, but he's the anomaly, not the norm.

And the bottom line is trophies, not wages.

Chelsea win trophies, whereas you guys don't.

Even Arse have won more in the last 5 years than you guys have in the last 20.

You can't blame players for choosing trophies over Levy's stadium project thingy.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Having the option of a broader wage structure gives players the opportunity to move right up the pay scale while staying at the same club - which is surely best for their development.

Hazard has developed well at Chelsea, and has gone up the pay scale accordingly, but if he'd moved to Spurs he'd have to've left by now to get the wages he deserved. That move might've stunted his development.

I know Kane is finally being offered a wage approaching what he's worth, but he's the anomaly, not the norm.

And the bottom line is trophies, not wages.

Chelsea win trophies, whereas you guys don't.

Even Arse have won more in the last 5 years than you guys have in the last 20.

You can't blame players for choosing trophies over Levy's stadium project thingy.

I'm not blaming the player, next year our wage structure will change dramatically. TBH I'm not that fussed we didn't get him, but Barkley will end up like so many Chelsea signings absolutely wasted. He was cheap and English, and considering they need English for their quota it was a no brainier. You mention Hazard but forget about Lukaku, KDB, Salah to name only 3.

Moving up a pay scale has nothing to do with player development.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

I'm not blaming the player, next year our wage structure will change dramatically. TBH I'm not that fussed we didn't get him, but Barkley will end up like so many Chelsea signings absolutely wasted. He was cheap and English, and considering they need English for their quota it was a no brainier. You mention Hazard but forget about Lukaku, KDB, Salah to name only 3.

Moving up a pay scale has nothing to do with player development.

No, but it means that a player can stay at the same club, which if they're developing well, is obviously preferable.

When Alli, Eriksen, Alderweireld, Kane move on to get the wages they deserve and a realistic opportunity of winning trophies, it's a gamble for them - Barkley won't need to do that now.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

No, but it means that a player can stay at the same club, which if they're developing well, is obviously preferable.

When Alli, Eriksen, Alderweireld, Kane move on to get the wages they deserve and a realistic opportunity of winning trophies, it's a gamble for them - Barkley won't need to do that now.

Your totally ignoring my point to simply continue to get ur digs in, do you think Barkley will get the same game time at Chelsea as he would of with us?

 

[acnumber9]

Right honest question, do you think Barkley had a better chance of developing and becoming a better player at Chelsea or at Tottenham?

Wherever he’ll play more. Playing for a better team will help if he can get in the team regularly.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Your totally ignoring my point to simply continue to get ur digs in, do you think Barkley will get the same game time at Chelsea as he would of with us?

I believe that Barkley will develop further for Chelsea than he would with Spurs, yes.

I think with you it'd be similar to the heights he had at Everton (I don't think you'll be in CL next season, and if you are, I don't think you'll far), whereas with Chelsea, I think he will have the motivation of playing in a trophy winning team.

I think he's underrated and will quickly show at Chelsea how good he is in a dominant side.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Wherever he’ll play more. Playing for a better team will help if he can get in the team regularly.

I believe that Barkley will develop further for Chelsea than he would with Spurs, yes.

I think with you it'd be similar to the heights he had at Everton (I don't think you'll be in CL next season, and if you are, I don't think you'll far), whereas with Chelsea, I think he will have the motivation of playing in a trophy winning team.

I think he's underrated and will quickly show at Chelsea how good he is in a dominant side.

Ok who does he replace?

 

[GlastonSpur]

Who offered those players higher wages?

Who didn't? The truth is you don't know and neither do I.

The wider truth is that Spurs have long had little trouble in attracting talented players - as a glance at our squad roster clearly shows ... and as a look at the history of incoming players to Spurs also clearly shows.

You seem to imagine that Barkley signing for Chelsea is some huge and dramatic blow to Spurs when it really isn't. He would have been IMO a useful addition to our squad, providing cover for one or two positions, but he wouldn't haven't begun life with us as part of our best XI.

As I've said, I hear his wage demands were huge, so Spurs gave it a pass. I expect we'll survive without him.

 

[GlastonSpur]

No, but it means that a player can stay at the same club, which if they're developing well, is obviously preferable.

When Alli, Eriksen, Alderweireld, Kane move on to get the wages they deserve and a realistic opportunity of winning trophies, it's a gamble for them - Barkley won't need to do that now.

Ah, the eternal "when", which ever recedes into the distance as the endless stream of doom-laden predictions evaporate like water vapour, transfer window after transfer window.

 

[acnumber9]

Who didn't? The truth is you don't know and neither do I.

The wider truth is that Spurs have long had little trouble in attracting talented players - as a glance at our squad roster clearly shows ... and as a look at the history of incoming players to Spurs also clearly shows.

You seem to imagine that Barkley signing for Chelsea is some huge and dramatic blow to Spurs when it really isn't. He would have been IMO a useful addition to our squad, providing cover for one or two positions, but he wouldn't haven't begun life with us as part of our best XI.

As I've said, I hear his wage demands were huge, so Spurs gave it a pass. I expect we'll survive without him.

I wasn’t the one claiming players signed for Spurs when offered more money elsewhere so the burden of proof doesn’t lie with me. I never said it was a huge or dramatic blow. I just pointed out another example of your nonsensical posturing about how attractive a destination Tottenham is.

 

[Scroto Baggins]

I think it's pretty clear cut why some players choose Spurs over signing for that mega rich club with higher wages. Game time, Eriksen walked into their starting 11 and has grown his game playing week in and week out. He opted for Spurs over City who were in for him as well simply because he would of been sat on the bench behind Silva. Could he have dislodged Silva? Arguable, he certainly didnt have that issue at Spurs. He could still look for that big money move later in his career and would demand a decent wage with the skills he now has.

We see that again with Sanchez, Barca, Bayern, Juve, a host of big clubs were in for him, but he chose a lower wage for what he perceives as more game time, walked into the starting 11 for Spurs. Seems like Sanchez hasnt missed a game except the suspension since he joined.

Spurs are a great stepping stone club for talented young players. Great facilities, top coach, well situated in London, I can see why they are attractive to young talent that is hungry for game time. Players can easily spend their early years at Spurs, then if they so wish, look for a large wage move later on in their career eg Bale. If they are good enough, big clubs will want them, and pay them accordingly.

 

[acnumber9]

Ok who does he replace?

No idea. Who would he replace at Spurs?

 

[GlastonSpur]

Barkley was offered to be a part of Levy's project, and instead has chosen trophies, winner's medals and a club with a broader wage structure.

It's a pretty obvious choice, and hopefully serves as a wake up call for some of the more delusional Spurs fans.

But if you're at a smaller club (like, say, Llorente was) and none of the big clubs are in for you, then Spurs would still be a decent club to sign for.

The good news for Spurs is that there are lots of these type of players to pick from when they're looking for replacing for Alli/Eriksen/Alderweireld/Kane etc soon.

But the reality is that if United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool or even Arse are in for a player, they won't pick Spurs instead.

Gareth Bale says hello.

 

[GlastonSpur]

No idea. Who would he replace at Spurs?

No one - squad cover and fighting to displace someone would have his fate at Spurs, just as it is at Chelsea.

 

[AltiUn]

Who didn't? The truth is you don't know and neither do I.

The wider truth is that Spurs have long had little trouble in attracting talented players - as a glance at our squad roster clearly shows ... and as a look at the history of incoming players to Spurs also clearly shows.

You seem to imagine that Barkley signing for Chelsea is some huge and dramatic blow to Spurs when it really isn't. He would have been IMO a useful addition to our squad, providing cover for one or two positions, but he wouldn't haven't begun life with us as part of our best XI.

As I've said, I hear his wage demands were huge, so Spurs gave it a pass. I expect we'll survive without him.

Looked like you were signing him mainly for depth, he's got talent so I'd wager Spurs were just looking to take a low risk high reward gamble.

On a different topic, I haven't watched as much Spurs recently but I've noticed you've had some inconsistent results this year especially compared to the last few seasons. What's different this season? Are you finding it hard to adapt to Wembley or having injury issues (I know Alderweireld has been out for quite some time)?

 

[NinjaFletch]

Gareth Bale says hello.

Ok great that turned out well for you, but if your only example is a player you signed over 10 years ago then perhaps it's not the strongest argument?

 

[GlastonSpur]

I wasn’t the one claiming players signed for Spurs when offered more money elsewhere so the burden of proof doesn’t lie with me. I never said it was a huge or dramatic blow. I just pointed out another example of your nonsensical posturing about how attractive a destination Tottenham is.

Lol ... as I've said, take a look at our squad-roster and history of attracting talented players.

It seems to me that you are the one posturing - or tying yourself in contorted knots more like - in trying to make out that Spurs are not an attractive destination.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

No idea. Who would he replace at Spurs?

Dembele or rotate with Eriksen who we have no alternative.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

Looked like you were signing him mainly for depth, he's got talent so I'd wager Spurs were just looking to take a low risk high reward gamble.

On a different topic, I haven't watched as much Spurs recently but I've noticed you've had some inconsistent results this year especially compared to the last few seasons. What's different this season? Are you finding it hard to adapt to Wembley or having injury issues (I know Alderweireld has been out for quite some time)?

Both Wembley and injuries to Tony, Victor and Dembele.

 

[GlastonSpur]

Ok great that turned out well for you, but if your only example is a player you signed over 10 years ago then perhaps it's not the strongest argument?

I've already cited Sanchez, who a host of big European clubs wanted. That was last summer - or is that too long ago for you?

 

[AltiUn]

Both Wembley and injuries to Tony, Victor and Dembele.

Oh that makes sense then, Spurs's midfield is brilliant when fit.