Transfer Talk Topic

[Dwmh]

2 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

And then when we miss out on signing the next big thing I presume no one will complain? Please.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with continuing to try and secure the best young talent available, providing it doesn't come at the expense of investing in the first team. And so far, irrespective of our form or approach that hasn't been the case. We've spent amply in both areas. 

????  Sterling, Disasi, Sanchez, Koulibaly for a moment and of course Nkunku.  I forgot Cucurella and Aubangyeman and a couple of loanees.  It is basically 7 players bought for the team of which 2 have gone already so 5 really.  3 fit players.     Far fewer than the number of senior squad members that have left.

The other 19 players bought aged 22 or mostly younger were definitely bought for the future.  

We have truly Fxxxed the first team as anyone but you can see.
Even if you count all the 21 & 22 yos we only have 20 players if you count all 4 GKs.

[xceleryx]

2 hours ago, Dwmh said:

????  Sterling, Disasi, Sanchez, Koulibaly for a moment and of course Nkunku.  I forgot Cucurella and Aubangyeman and a couple of loanees.  It is basically 7 players bought for the team of which 2 have gone already so 5 really.  3 fit players.     Far fewer than the number of senior squad members that have left.

The other 19 players bought aged 22 or mostly younger were definitely bought for the future.  

We have truly Fxxxed the first team as anyone but you can see.
Even if you count all the 21 & 22 yos we only have 20 players if you count all 4 GKs.

The math ain't mathing.

You can't just put an arbitrary age cap on players that determines whether or not they were signed for the first team or not. 

Gusto, Palmer, Petrovic, Badiashile, W.Fofana, etc were all signed for the senior side irrespective of their age. You can certainly argue if some were/are ready for the size of the senior role they've gone on to have, but you can't just flat out dismiss them as first team players like you're doing either.

[Floyd25]

4 hours ago, xceleryx said:

There's absolutely nothing wrong with continuing to try and secure the best young talent available, providing it doesn't come at the expense of investing in the first team. And so far, irrespective of our form or approach that hasn't been the case. We've spent amply in both areas. 

I agree with that, however the main priority right now should be adding proven experience to our first team squad. The figure I’ve seen quoted for ‘Messinho’ is roughly sixty five million pounds, which is absolutely absurd, there is no way that we should be spending that much on a 16 year old, a lot to spend if you want to make a profit and no guarantees of anything. 

[ROTG]

2 hours ago, xceleryx said:

Gusto, Palmer, Petrovic, Badiashile, W.Fofana, etc were all signed for the senior side irrespective of their age

there you have it 5 senior players signed with a combined total of ~ 60 PL miles on the clock with W.Forfana having ~85% of those PL miles.

And people wonder why the team is pony

[east lower]

4 hours ago, Dwmh said:

Einstein's definition of insanity explains a lot.
Buying 16 yos reeks of moving the deckchairs on the Titanic while the band played on.

Quite, it’s fiddling whilst Rome burns. 

Put your efforts and resources into what will most certainly end up in a crisis, if we’re not there already, then go out and buy your speculative signings. 

But £65m is a particular large gamble, because have no doubt how many 16 year old ‘the next big things’ have not trained-on

The crisis will come if we do not get back into European competition. firstly qualifying for something this season and the CL in seasons after that, we’ll simply not have the trading revenue to be do the squad upgrades/replacements. Some people will put forward arguments that the investment has already been made, not showing so, so far - see further down this post.

The owners have messed up royally and should have tweaked the squad first, kept us competitive and then gone full-on with recruitment of young talent. They’ve put young men in pressure situations, most of them in a league they’ve no or little experience in. In essence we’ve been set-up to fail, not succeed. 

Hope that the investors have balls of steel, they might need them. As might Bohely and his pal if it doesn’t work out, my guess is that it won’t, there’s not much to see over the last two seasons that says we’re going to be fine, far from it. At the end of the season there’s going to be dissenters who will want out, then we’ll see the downside of the 7 or 8 year contracts.

 

Edited January 13 by east lower

[ROTG]

5 hours ago, xceleryx said:

And then when we miss out on signing the next big thing I presume no one will complain? Please.

When have we missed out on a big signing?

5 hours ago, xceleryx said:

There's absolutely nothing wrong with continuing to try and secure the best young talent available, providing it doesn't come at the expense of investing in the first team. And so far, irrespective of our form or approach that hasn't been the case. We've spent amply in both areas. 

The club may well have spent amply in the first team squad, but the quality is something to be desires, hence the league position

[Dwmh]

3 hours ago, xceleryx said:

The math ain't mathing.

You can't just put an arbitrary age cap on players that determines whether or not they were signed for the first team or not. 

Of course you can.  Players 22 or younger given 8 year contracts are signed for the long term.

Of course you can insist that "Gusto, Palmer, Petrovic, Badiashile, W.Fofana, etc were all signed for the senior side irrespective of their age" but only if you think the board has gone totally batshit crazy, because only idiots would try to do that.

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, Floyd25 said:

however the main priority right now should be adding proven experience to our first team squad

Unfortunately it's now the case of bolting the stable door after the horse has bolted 

[Rob B]

6 hours ago, xceleryx said:

I'm no doubt in the minority here, but I don't quite understand why there's the distain shown for us trying to continue to sign young talent? Many bitched and moan for years about us not signing young talent earlier before the ended up at established clubs, now that we are trying to have more irons in the fire, while still retaining intent on first team matters, it's frowned upon? 

I would understand it more if we negated the first team all together but that's not the case, even if there is currently a heavy youth focused approach. Would opinions be different if we were signing established senior options instead or were performing better than we are?

The way I see it is that youth signings serve multiple purposes. We either snag them early, if they develop and become senior players great, if not then they're sellable assets. Now, there's factors at play in terms of initial buy in and everything, but they are investments be it for financial or sporting gain - nothing is risk free after all. 

Would I prefer us to focus more on addressing first team matter? Absolutely. That said, both can also coexist together. 

By all reports this Estevao is one of the brightest talents in South America, outside of Endrick (Real Madrid), the kid that just signed for Man City out of Argentina who's name escapes me, and Kendry Paez who we've already signed. PSG were trying to sign him in the summer IIRC as well. If Endrick didn't have the hype around him that he did from what I understand Estevao would have had more attention.

Certainly not a priority by any means, but at the same time continuing to track upcoming talent is important in itself. 

It’s definitely not distain from my perspective.  More of a cynical intrigue. 

You’ve touched on a few of the reasons why I suspect many fans aren’t jumping for joy at the news but for me it can be largely categorised as follows:

1)  The sheer in-balance of our transfer spend between Prospects* and Senior First Team players

Obviously if we had our 2005 or 2016 team, I think it’s a lot more acceptable, but our transfer business has been bewildering.  For example, we spent £25m and £14m on two goalkeepers who are broadly the same age, and broadly the same ability.  No one knows who our first choice will be when Sanchez returns soon, probably not even the manager. 

We have also spent huge money on three midfielders whilst also buying Andrey Santos, Lesley Ugochukwu, Casadei and Alex Matos there.  Why?!??  
Given the three I mention above (£270m) are all 21/22 themselves, what is the point in this??  We now have 7 central midfielders aged 22 and under for two midfield spots, before Gallagher who is only 23.

All of this but still going into the season with a raw/recovering Broja and a raw Nicolas Jackson as your only two fit strikers!!   There are a load more examples I could list here but I’m sure you get the point. 

* Prospects as in Aneglo, Moreira, Washington, Richards, not Gusto or Palmer. 

2)  The financial implications of these sorts of ‘punts’ later down the line

Totally agree with you that this kid is one of the brightest talents in the world, but make no bones about it, signing a 16 year old from South America for £50/£60m is a punt.  In fact, given the reported sums involved, that’s possibly being kind, many would call it madness. 

What is the financial impact of these deals going to be on players like Gallagher who has been our best player this season? And after that it will be a Bashir Humphrey’s or Alfie Gilchrist that will be next in line for ‘pure profit’ sales so the Sporting Directors can self congratulate themselves on signing the next big thing to justify their roles. 

Do you honestly trust this lot whole-heartedly to comply within the regulations?  For me, some form of financial punishment in the next 1-3 years is a full gone conclusion.   

Edited January 13 by Rob B

[xceleryx]

1 hour ago, Floyd25 said:

I agree with that, however the main priority right now should be adding proven experience to our first team squad. The figure I’ve seen quoted for ‘Messinho’ is roughly sixty five million pounds, which is absolutely absurd, there is no way that we should be spending that much on a 16 year old, a lot to spend if you want to make a profit and no guarantees of anything. 

Don't disagree. The first team is the priority right now and trying to add pieces to improve that, however I also understand wanting to take the opportunity of signing one of the highest rated talents coming through before he ends up at a PSG or other top club. Ultimately, a balance has to be struck. 

[xceleryx]

1 hour ago, ROTG said:

there you have it 5 senior players signed with a combined total of ~ 60 PL miles on the clock with W.Forfana having ~85% of those PL miles.

And people wonder why the team is pony

None of which is relevant to the point being made.

[xceleryx]

1 hour ago, ROTG said:

When have we missed out on a big signing?

We've missed out on several over the years - Aguero, Robinho, Tevez, Tchouameni, Dembele, Rice, Dani Alves, and more over the years going back.

1 hour ago, ROTG said:

The club may well have spent amply in the first team squad, but the quality is something to be desires, hence the league position

Again, wasn't the basis of the discussion and an entirely difficult argument altogether.

[xceleryx]

39 minutes ago, Dwmh said:

Of course you can.  Players 22 or younger given 8 year contracts are signed for the long term.

Of course you can insist that "Gusto, Palmer, Petrovic, Badiashile, W.Fofana, etc were all signed for the senior side irrespective of their age" but only if you think the board has gone totally batshit crazy, because only idiots would try to do that.

All of which is besides the point. 

Age doesn't necessarily determine if a player is to have a first team role or not upon signing. And with heavily driven youth focused rebuild quite clearly a lot of the talent we have signed under 22 were with first team roles in mind.

[xceleryx]

15 minutes ago, Rob B said:

It’s definitely not distain from my perspective.  More of a cynical intrigue. 

You’ve touched on a few of the reasons why I suspect many fans aren’t jumping for joy at the news but for me it can be largely categorised as follows:

1)  The sheer in-balance of our transfer spend between Prospects* and Senior First Team players, (particularly given our performances / results) 

Obviously if we had our 2005 or 2016 team, I think it’s a lot more acceptable, but our transfer business has been bewildering.  For example, we spent £25m and £14m on two goalkeepers who are broadly the same age, and broadly the same ability.  No one knows who our first choice will be when Sanchez returns soon, probably not even the manager. 

We have also spent huge money on three midfielders (c£270m)  whilst also buying Andrey Santos, Lesley Ugochukwu, Casadei and Alex Matos there.  Why?!??  
Given the three I mention above (£270m) are all 21/22 themselves, what is the point in this??  We now have 7 central midfielders aged 22 and under for two midfield spots (before Gallagher who is only 23)

All of this but still going into the season with a raw/recovering Broja and a raw Nicolas Jackson as your only two fit strikers!! 🤔

There are a load more examples I could list here but I’m sure you get the point. 

* Prospects as in Aneglo, Moreira, Washington, Richards, not Gusto or Palmer. 

2)  The financial implications of these sorts of ‘punts’ later down the line

Totally agree with you that this kid is one of the brightest talents in the world, but make no bones about it, signing a 16 year old from South America for £50/£60m is a punt.  In fact, given the reported sums involved, that’s possibly being kind, many would call it madness. 

What is the financial impact of these deals going to be on players like Gallagher who has been our best player this season? And after that it will be a Bashir Humphrey’s or Alfie Gilchrist that will be next in line for ‘pure profit’ sales so the Sporting Directors can self congratulate themselves on signing the next big thing to justify their roles. 

Do you honestly trust this lot whole-heartedly to comply within the regulations?  For me, some form of financial punishment in the next 1-3 years is a full gone conclusion.   

Firstly, thank you for an actual response. 

Re: 1)

I certainly appreciate the imbalance of the senior side playing a factor in the frustration of seeing more young talent targeted. I'd probably think likewise myself if we were abandoning the senior side. However knowing that we've opted for a youth focused rebuilding process it's kinda expected that there'll be a lot of age crossover in terms of signings made. 

I'm not as worried about having a logjam of similarly aged players because we don't necessarily know the plan for each of them. Some are going to be purchased with the first team being immediately in mind, some are going to have to head on loan to impress, and others are probably calculated gambles that will either make the grade or be sold for intended profits. The latter naturally hinges on the initial buy in to obtain such players.

Re: 2)

I suppose it's one of those situations where if we don't enter the contest at this point and he goes elsewhere, we either miss out altogether or he ends up costing more down the line. There's also the risk where he doesn't pan out, but I suppose that's part and parcel of all transfers really - even established proven players can flop, and flop hard. Would be pretty annoying if he ended up being as good as projected and ended up doing the business elsewhere. But as also said, and which I understand, he's not necessarily a priority signing either at this point.

Balancing the books is going to be a juggling act, no doubt about it. Obviously we're sort of all in the dark here, so there has to be an element of trust had where all of this has been planned ahead of time and not just being done on a whim to manage the FFP situation. There's probably counter-measured in place for if thing don't go to initial plan and we can pivot. Now, that may mean having to sell certain types of players to achieve that, but we could've also gone out and spent all this money on established options and found ourselves performing at a similar level like with last season. 

[ROTG]

22 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

We've missed out on several over the years - Aguero, Robinho, Tevez, Tchouameni, Dembele, Rice, Dani Alves, and more over the years going back.

The team continued  win trophy's and titles without these players, so their addition may have or may not have improved the squad further.

[ChelseaJambo]

 

4 hours ago, xceleryx said:

The math ain't mathing.

You can't just put an arbitrary age cap on players that determines whether or not they were signed for the first team or not. 

Gusto, Palmer, Petrovic, Badiashile, W.Fofana, etc were all signed for the senior side irrespective of their age. You can certainly argue if some were/are ready for the size of the senior role they've gone on to have, but you can't just flat out dismiss them as first team players like you're doing either.

 

No way were Gusto and Petrovic signed for the first team.

James was clearly the first team right back and Sanchez the keeper.

I agree you can't base it on an arbitrary age, but you also can't base on people filling in for the actual first team players.

[Rob B]

20 minutes ago, ChelseaJambo said:

 

 

No way were Gusto and Petrovic signed for the first team.

James was clearly the first team right back and Sanchez the keeper.

I agree you can't base it on an arbitrary age, but you also can't base on people filling in for the actual first team players.

They were both very obviously bought for the first team squad.  

[ChelseaJambo]

7 hours ago, xceleryx said:

And then when we miss out on signing the next big thing I presume no one will complain? Please.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with continuing to try and secure the best young talent available, providing it doesn't come at the expense of investing in the first team. And so far, irrespective of our form or approach that hasn't been the case. We've spent amply in both areas. 

 

22 minutes ago, Rob B said:

They were both very obviously bought for the first team squad.  

Agreed, but as per you post above people are arguing it has been at the detriment to the first team. Not the squad. And it quite clearly has been to its detriment.

Edited January 13 by ChelseaJambo

[My Blood Is Blue]

Signing young players for the future is fine and signing young players for the first team/first team squad if we believe they are good enough is fine… but to only do that and not replace any of the massive amount of experience that has left in the last 2 years, is shocking.

[Mark Kelly]

1 hour ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Signing young players for the future is fine and signing young players for the first team/first team squad if we believe they are good enough is fine… but to only do that and not replace any of the massive amount of experience that has left in the last 2 years, is shocking.

When you are crying out for quality in three positions, LB, DMF and CF, and you're under the gimlet eye of FFP, I can only surmise that the boffins apparently running the show are so desperate to show how very clever they are to be gambling our future on sixteen year old boys from a different footballing culture, that they need sacking the first chance we get. 

[Original 21]

🤔 

 

[Bison]

6 hours ago, Original 21 said:

🤔

 

Ha, too good to be true.

[Chelsea_Matt]

34 minutes ago, Bison said:

Ha, too good to be true.

I tell ya, for one season….

[My Blood Is Blue]

2 hours ago, Chelsea_Matt said:

I tell ya, for one season….

Nah, we’d make him crap as well.

[NoblyBobly]

Spurs fans seem super happy to have brought Werner!! Prepare yourselves for a little bit of a disappointment Spuds.