January Transfer Thread 2024

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

I do. That fucking shady penalty in the CL final. Jota putting stitches in Skipps head and Klopp always acting the cunt.

Fergie time and the constant cheating of that era. Taking Berbatov and Carrick. Sheringham before that.

Ultimately; fuck 'em all, but........... When it comes to the doping and franchise cuntery, they're in the proper club column.
 
I know we need 3 GK in squad but we have 4 because Austin or whiteman ain't good enough as a number 2.

Yeah but if for instance we still had a Walker-Peters, Madueke or Edwards we would have a player who can actually compete and play rather than have a 4th goalkeeper

The question is whether any of them would come back, and whether they would fit into Ange system.

We have dome great recruitment guys so I'm sure they will have looked at all the players you name, and indeed others such as 28 year old Milos Veljkovic who has a had a decent career at Werder Bremen, who gave Mr Kane a tough battle when they played Bayern. IMO still a very good CB/DM and Club Trained but probably wouldn't fit Ange style as he's always used his reading of the game well rather than being speedy.
 
I've only seen him in a couple of games playing as a RB but this kid is one to keep an eye on:


Yes but only aged 17 now so at least 2 or 3 years away from Spurs first team. But great potential I'd agree. Also Rowswell CB/RB was considered a top RB at u16 level, same age as Black now
 
For now. Now that Ratcliffe got United, if FSG gets tired of waiting around for the ESL then Liverpool will be the next club sold to an oil nation.

It is what it is.... If/when the time comes; one re-evaluates (see Newcastle).

FWIW; what i object to isn't country of origin or oil money itself:

- State wealth/influence...... Esp. despotic regimes.
- Sportswashing (see above)
- Cheating


Re: Man U - worth noting that the Glaziers retained the right to sell the club..... Radcliffe can either replicate any incoming bid or suck it up as a minor stakeholder.
 
Last edited:
The question is whether any of them would come back, and whether they would fit into Ange system.

We have dome great recruitment guys so I'm sure they will have looked at all the players you name, and indeed others such as 28 year old Milos Veljkovic who has a had a decent career at Werder Bremen, who gave Mr Kane a tough battle when they played Bayern. IMO still a very good CB/DM and Club Trained but probably wouldn't fit Ange style as he's always used his reading of the game well rather than being speedy.
Yeah of course it's just something that bugs me a little bit a club our size should be able to produce 3 talented enough players every so often to cover the club trained spots and still compete for places. We do produce them but haven't been able to keep them recently. I think I read somewhere recently that Paratici thought we wasn't spending enough maybe it has changes now.

Milos Veljkovic, I remember the name although I haven't watched any werder Bremen for a while.
 
Not true at all - with increased revenue sharing and a fixed spending cap, spending would be equalized across the league.

FFP being tied to revenue only etches the richer clubs' advantage in stone. FFP benefits the top 4-6 clubs far more than it helps anyone else.

So spending one billion on a stadium will really benefit Bournemouth at Spurs expense?

So had FFP been around back in the day, the likes of Portsmouth, Leeds, Coventry, Wimbledon, and Wigan, all FA Cup winners i believe would still have gone into administration?

Prevention is better than cure, and if FFP is enforced the aforementioned would have possibly still been plying their trade in the Premier League.

FFP works, but it's enforcement currently does not.
 
If Leeds want to give us a decent fee now to beat other clubs to him than wait for the summer, then I’d sell this window.

Surely they'd have a lot more money available if they won a promotion?
 
Yeah of course it's just something that bugs me a little bit a club our size should be able to produce 3 talented enough players every so often to cover the club trained spots and still compete for places. We do produce them but haven't been able to keep them recently. I think I read somewhere recently that Paratici thought we wasn't spending enough maybe it has changes now.

Milos Veljkovic, I remember the name although I haven't watched any werder Bremen for a while.

Our entire youth development was halted a year after Kane got into Spurs first team on a a regular basis when Poch sold all of the youth players who had come through around the same time and got some first team experience for a combined circa £100m to buy the likes of Sissoko

And then stopped all loans out as he wanted the youngsters to learn from his training - and that lack of development was precisely why Madueke said in an interview that he refused Spurs offer of an Academy Scholarship to go to Netherlands where he stood a chance of playing.

Poch's youth development skill is best illustrated by buying AM Juan Foyth for £10m , keeping him training for first team (no youth matches or loans) for 2 years,, then surprised when Foyth gave away 2 penalties on his debut (through lack of game experience). Foyth made about a dozen first team appearances before selling him to Villareal where he was properly developed to be a decent RB/CB.

All of our current lack of Club trained players stem from that era - it takes a minimum of about 5 years to develop Club trained players so Devine is pretty much the first post Poch youngster to come through.

Poch was a good coach but lousy manager !
 
It would work in a reunified Football League. The key would be revenue distribution reaching all the way into the National League, and balancing the spending levels appropriately. Spending at League 2 is low enough, it can be made to work.

If revenues were to be shared, top players wouldn't come to the PL as they wouldn't get as much money, and SKY / BT would pay less in TV rights.

Why do you think RM wanted the super league, it wasn't so they could send a weekly cheque to the likes of poor old Cadiz.

You can't have it both ways.
 
Not against Everton being punished. Just pointing out the authorities see them as a convenient "example". They're not going to go after City, and none of their actions will impact City's massive advantage.

But they (PL) are going after City (UEFA with its time barred nonsense failed). But the case against City as way more complicated than a simple breach of an obvious and simple rule.

City are accused of falsifying accounts, hiding and diverting payments to misrepresent the structure, inflating sponsorship etc. This is big legal stuff not simply a clear FFP breach and City are going to go hard legally on the PL, it's going to cost tens of millions etc.
 
Our entire youth development was halted a year after Kane got into Spurs first team on a a regular basis when Poch sold all of the youth players who had come through around the same time and got some first team experience for a combined circa £100m to buy the likes of Sissoko

And then stopped all loans out as he wanted the youngsters to learn from his training - and that lack of development was precisely why Madueke said in an interview that he refused Spurs offer of an Academy Scholarship to go to Netherlands where he stood a chance of playing.

Poch's youth development skill is best illustrated by buying AM Juan Foyth for £10m , keeping him training for first team (no youth matches or loans) for 2 years,, then surprised when Foyth gave away 2 penalties on his debut (through lack of game experience). Foyth made about a dozen first team appearances before selling him to Villareal where he was properly developed to be a decent RB/CB.

All of our current lack of Club trained players stem from that era - it takes a minimum of about 5 years to develop Club trained players so Devine is pretty much the first post Poch youngster to come through.

Poch was a good coach but lousy manager !
That's a good breakdown mate.
 
Our entire youth development was halted a year after Kane got into Spurs first team on a a regular basis when Poch sold all of the youth players who had come through around the same time and got some first team experience for a combined circa £100m to buy the likes of Sissoko

And then stopped all loans out as he wanted the youngsters to learn from his training - and that lack of development was precisely why Madueke said in an interview that he refused Spurs offer of an Academy Scholarship to go to Netherlands where he stood a chance of playing.

Poch's youth development skill is best illustrated by buying AM Juan Foyth for £10m , keeping him training for first team (no youth matches or loans) for 2 years,, then surprised when Foyth gave away 2 penalties on his debut (through lack of game experience). Foyth made about a dozen first team appearances before selling him to Villareal where he was properly developed to be a decent RB/CB.

All of our current lack of Club trained players stem from that era - it takes a minimum of about 5 years to develop Club trained players so Devine is pretty much the first post Poch youngster to come through.

Poch was a good coach but lousy manager !

Yep. As much as I can’t stand the man I think there really is a case that sherwood did more for our youth players at the time than Poch.

Bentaleb - brought through by Sherwood, played a season with Poch but then fell out with him.

Onomah - chased by city and Liverpool but Poch refused to give him a chance

Edwards - see above. No chance given.

KWP - the strangest of them all. Constantly give good performances in the sparse appearances he made only then to be dropped for the next game.

Winks - fair enough, he gave him chances.

Skipp - gave him his debut but then the player never appeared again.


Sure some of them haven’t gone on to set the world alight but if their development wasn’t handled correctly then it’s going to effect the rest of their careers. Poch blew a lot of careers.
 
So spending one billion on a stadium will really benefit Bournemouth at Spurs expense?

So had FFP been around back in the day, the likes of Portsmouth, Leeds, Coventry, Wimbledon, and Wigan, all FA Cup winners i believe would still have gone into administration?

Prevention is better than cure, and if FFP is enforced the aforementioned would have possibly still been plying their trade in the Premier League.

FFP works, but it's enforcement currently does not.
There's different ways to go about revenue sharing. Most leagues that do it are not 100% equal, usually local revenue (ticket sales, stadium advertising sales, etc.) stays with the club.

Like with TV, you lump kit deals together and spend that money more equitably. Can do the same with shirt sponsorships, and other marketing promotional deals.

With revenue normalized, you enact spending max/mins. Some owners will be richer than others because they'll be making more money (like Spurs with the stadium), but they won't be able to utilized that revenue to buy a competitive advantage.

But unlikely to be able to develop these days, big clubs wouldn't go for it. Doubt there's anything, really, that can stop the commercial trajectory the game is on.
 
But they (PL) are going after City (UEFA with its time barred nonsense failed). But the case against City as way more complicated than a simple breach of an obvious and simple rule.

City are accused of falsifying accounts, hiding and diverting payments to misrepresent the structure, inflating sponsorship etc. This is big legal stuff not simply a clear FFP breach and City are going to go hard legally on the PL, it's going to cost tens of millions etc.
I have absolutely no belief the PL will punish City. They will spend years "making an effort", come away with very little, slap City with a nominal fine and move on.
 
There's different ways to go about revenue sharing. Most leagues that do it are not 100% equal, usually local revenue (ticket sales, stadium advertising sales, etc.) stays with the club.

Like with TV, you lump kit deals together and spend that money more equitably. Can do the same with shirt sponsorships, and other marketing promotional deals.

With revenue normalized, you enact spending max/mins. Some owners will be richer than others because they'll be making more money (like Spurs with the stadium), but they won't be able to utilized that revenue to buy a competitive advantage.

But unlikely to be able to develop these days, big clubs wouldn't go for it. Doubt there's anything, really, that can stop the commercial trajectory the game is on.

Brings me back to an earlier point....

Most fans would prefer to think their money contributes towards a competitive advantage rather than some already-rich-cunt's pension fund (as well as the concept of a supporter being something more than a mere flag-waver).............. You can track this all the way back to the OG notion of these being football CLUBS and the so-called owners merely being custodians.
 
Back
Top Bottom