Bruno Guimarães

[Shearergol]

Just now, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I can’t see any successful strategy that involves selling all your elite players, surely. What would be the point? Just so you can continue to buy lesser players and finish in the same position? 
 

Like I’ve said before, I can’t see the Brighton strategy working for us on its own. That can only work if you’re happy to finish in a mediocre league position. If you have ambitions to be higher than that you need to have elite quality in your team. 
 

This may be wishful thinking, I admit. But I feel there has to be something more than just selling good players to buy potential all the time. I don’t think any top club does that. 

 

Yeah this is where I am. Unless we can somehow unearth the next Bruno for £15m I just don't see how we improve the team by not having him in it. I know people will point to Spurs selling Modric and Bale (although I'm certain Spurs win something with Bale there) but there aren't really that many examples of it being successful.

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I can’t see any successful strategy that involves selling all your elite players, surely. What would be the point? Just so you can continue to buy lesser players and finish in the same position? 
 

Like I’ve said before, I can’t see the Brighton strategy working for us on its own. That can only work if you’re happy to finish in a mediocre league position. If you have ambitions to be higher than that you need to have elite quality in your team. 
 

This may be wishful thinking, I admit. But I feel there has to be something more than just selling good players to buy potential all the time. I don’t think any top club does that. 

No, to buy more elite players a la Spurs rather than Brighton.  That’s how Spurs broke into the top six.  Speaking of Spurs, our income is less than half theirs - so we cannot compete with them financially, nor with any of the other big clubs - and we’re not growing at anything like the rate necessary to catch them at any point.  The shortcut is to sell well and buy well.  I think it is wishful thinking unless the rules change in the very near future - not one of the players we have can be said to be off limits.  

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

 

Yeah this is where I am. Unless we can somehow unearth the next Bruno for £15m I just don't see how we improve the team by not having him in it. I know people will point to Spurs selling Modric and Bale (although I'm certain Spurs win something with Bale there) but there aren't really that many examples of it being successful.

We didn’t buy Bruno for £15m.  The point isn’t to do what Brighton did and buy cheap players and sell for big profits.  It’s to buy players like Bruno for big money and sell them for even bigger money.  Bruno wasn’t cheap. 

[Shearergol]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

We didn’t buy Bruno for £15m.  The point isn’t to do what Brighton did and buy cheap players and sell for big profits.  It’s to buy players like Bruno for big money and sell them for even bigger money.  Bruno wasn’t cheap. 

 

How does the Spurs example work then? Bale at £10m, Modric at £15m. Both happened after Spurs were a top 6 team (from 05/06).

 

Who were they buying for big money and selling for bigger money before that year out of interest?

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

 

How does the Spurs example work then? Bale at £10m, Modric at £15m. Both happened after Spurs were a top 6 team (from 05/06).

 

Who were they buying for big money and selling for bigger money before that year out of interest?

NUFC’s revenues were higher than Spurs in 2006.  I’m not referring to league position.  I’m talking about financial might. 
 

All clubs do this - there’s no reason to think that we won’t.  It isn’t a sign of ambition in the present game to cling on to players and leave yourself in a position where you can’t sign anyone else.

 

Again, no-one wants this to happen.  But a new stadium (if it happens) is years away, revenues this season will be roughly what they were last season, and there doesn’t appear to be a bunch of reality-changing commercial deals hurtling down the tracks.  So the only obvious place to increase revenues is through player sales.

 

This isn’t Ashley-era NUFC - the financial headroom would all be used by the club.

 

The club has already expressed that this is the reality of the situation.  Wishful thinking isn’t going to change it.  If NUFC are to get to where they’ve targeted, then this is a necessary evil. 

[Shearergol]

Just now, TheBrownBottle said:

NUFC’s revenues were higher than Spurs in 2006.  I’m not referring to league position.  I’m talking about financial might. 
 

All clubs do this - there’s no reason to think that we won’t.  It isn’t a sign of ambition in the present game to cling on to players and leave yourself in a position where you can’t sign anyone else.

 

Again, no-one wants this to happen.  But a new stadium (if it happens) is years away, revenues this season will be roughly what they were last season, and there doesn’t appear to be a bunch of reality-changing commercial deals hurtling down the tracks.  So the only obvious place to increase revenues is through player sales.

 

This isn’t Ashley-era NUFC - the financial headroom would all be used by the club.

 

The club has already expressed that this is the reality of the situation.  Wishful thinking isn’t going to change it.  If NUFC are to get to where they’ve targeted, then this is a necessary evil. 

 

Ok, so you're using the Bale example I guess?

 

Here's who Spurs signed after selling Bale:

 

Capoue
Chadli
Chiriches
Eriksen
Lamela
Paulinho
Soldado

 

They only had one success in that transfer I would say, in Eriksen (£11m?). So their strategy wasn't to sell big and buy big, it was to sell big and spread their net wide with cheaper options, hoping one would come good. Again, who is the example of them selling big and buying big?

[madras]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

 

Ok, so you're using the Bale example I guess?

 

Here's who Spurs signed after selling Bale:

 

Capoue
Chadli
Chiriches
Eriksen
Lamela
Paulinho
Soldado

 

They only had one success in that transfer I would say, in Eriksen (£11m?). So their strategy wasn't to sell big and buy big, it was to sell big and spread their net wide with cheaper options, hoping one would come good. Again, who is the example of them selling big and buying big?

It could be not so much sell big and buy big as sell big and buy bigger than they could have if they hadn't sold big.

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

 

Ok, so you're using the Bale example I guess?

 

Here's who Spurs signed after selling Bale:

 

Capoue
Chadli
Chiriches
Eriksen
Lamela
Paulinho
Soldado

 

They only had one success in that transfer I would say, in Eriksen (£11m?). So their strategy wasn't to sell big and buy big, it was to sell big and spread their net wide with cheaper options, hoping one would come good. Again, who is the example of them selling big and buying big?

I wasn’t necessarily thinking of Bale alone.  I was thinking of Berbatov, Modric, Carrick, Walker, Keane, Eriksen.

 

Spurs reached a European Cup Final after selling all of them, and are now London’s richest club.

 

We have zero PSR headroom and that situation is not likely to improve without significant sales.  I’m not looking to justify it, that’s simply a fact.

 

The old days of raising funds by selling players is not what we’re looking at here.  NUFC don’t need to make profits in order to fund new signings - this is why it isn’t a ‘Brighton’ model.  It is just to clear accounting headroom.  That is the miserable place that modern football financial governance leaves us in.  If we don’t sell ‘big’ players, we won’t be signing anymore of them.  

[mondonewc]

21 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

Yeah this is where I am. Unless we can somehow unearth the next Bruno for £15m I just don't see how we improve the team by not having him in it. I know people will point to Spurs selling Modric and Bale (although I'm certain Spurs win something with Bale there) but there aren't really that many examples of it being successful.

Liverpool selling Coutinho and replacing him with Allison and Van Djyk springs to mind.

 

I don't fully understand FFP, nor do I have any desire to do so, but I was under the impression if we sell a player for 100m we will be able to invest significantly above that figure from those proceeds? 

[Shearergol]

4 minutes ago, madras said:

It could be not so much sell big and buy big as sell big and buy bigger than they could have if they hadn't sold big.

 

So how much are people expecting us to spend on Bruno's replacement? Given people are suggesting we accept 60-70m for him?

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, mondonewc said:

Liverpool selling Coutinho and replacing him with Allison and Van Djyk springs to mind.

 

I don't fully understand FFP, nor do I have any desire to do so, but I was under the impression if we sell a player for 100m we will be able to invest significantly above that figure from those proceeds? 

This is exactly it.  If Bruno was sold for £80m, you deduct his amortised original fee and that (plus his now gone wages) gives you your headroom.  So that £50m + wages could potentially allow you to buy three £40m players for example. 

[JEToon]

Spurs never really broke into the top 6, they were always kind of, a top 6ish club it was as much to do with getting better managers in

 

They were 5th back in 2005 long before Bale and Modric, it was a bit of a nonsense for a club of their size, playing in London to ever be finishing 10th and 11th really

 

It isn’t like it has been a trading miracle from some small town club

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by JEToon

[Shearergol]

2 minutes ago, mondonewc said:

Liverpool selling Coutinho and replacing him with Allison and Van Djyk springs to mind.

 

I don't fully understand FFP, nor do I have any desire to do so, but I was under the impression if we sell a player for 100m we will be able to invest significantly above that figure from those proceeds? 

 

Yes, but anything you invest over that puts pressure on future years. It's not sustainable. You need the absolute perfect scouting model.

[TheBrownBottle]

2 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

So how much are people expecting us to spend on Bruno's replacement? Given people are suggesting we accept 60-70m for him?

If we sold Bruno for £70m (not sure who’s saying we should accept £60-70m mind) then it would give the headroom to sign a £100m player if that’s what we chose to do. 

[Zero]

You got it wrong. It is not about “who can we get after selling Bruno now”, it is “what options we have if we don’t sell now”

 

you gotta realize there is a scenario that Bruno past his best a few years later AND we still don’t have PSR headroom to buy our next Bruno, because our revenue alone is not enough to cover all the costs and resulted accounting profit 

[Shearergol]

2 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

If we sold Bruno for £70m (not sure who’s saying we should accept £60-70m mind) then it would give the headroom to sign a £100m player if that’s what we chose to do. 

 

It's only 4 or 5 pages back.

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, JEToon said:

Spurs never really broke into the top 6, they were always kind, a top 6ish club it was as much to do with getting better managers in

 

They were 5th back in 2005 long before Bale and Modric, it was a bit of a nonsense for a club of their size, playing in London to ever be finishing 10th and 11th really

 

It isn’t like it has been a trading miracle from some small town club

No-one said it was a ‘trading miracle’.  And you’re also mixing up league placing with financial status.  Ipswich finished 5th in 2001 but they weren’t the fifth richest club.

Spurs didnt finish 5th in 2005 btw.  They hadn’t finished in the top six for 15 years by that point and were consistent bottom half finishers during that period.  
 

The rules mean that if we don’t sell, we don’t buy.  If watching the club go stale is your preference, then I won’t be able to persuade you. 

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

 

It's only 4 or 5 pages back.

Ok - yeah I wouldn’t be selling him for that tbf  

[Shearergol]

1 minute ago, Zero said:

You got it wrong. It is not about “who can we get after selling Bruno now”, it is “what options we have if we don’t sell now”

 

you gotta realize there is a scenario that Bruno past his best a few years later AND we still don’t have PSR headroom to buy our next Bruno, because our revenue alone is not enough to cover all the costs and resulted accounting profit 

 

I've only got it wrong in your opinion like  I'm talking about selling Bruno is likely (in the short term) to make our team worse. People are openly discussing selling him to Man City in January.

[Shearergol]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

No-one said it was a ‘trading miracle’.  And you’re also mixing up league placing with financial status.  Ipswich finished 5th in 2001 but they weren’t the fifth richest club.

Spurs didnt finish 5th in 2005 btw.  They hadn’t finished in the top six for 15 years by that point and were consistent bottom half finishers during that period.  
 

The rules mean that if we don’t sell, we don’t buy.  If watching the club go stale is your preference, then I won’t be able to persuade you. 

 

05/06 they did. They were a top 5 team back in the 80's too.

[Lish007]

Why are we suddenly selling Bruno? 

 

He's the heartbeat of the team and when he leaves, we will miss him! 

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, Shearergol said:

 

I've only got it wrong in your opinion like  I'm talking about selling Bruno is likely (in the short term) to make our team worse. People are openly discussing selling him to Man City in January.

I think selling in January would be shite timing especially with a LC SF waiting - unless Man City put an insane (£90m+) bid on the table, in which case we’d be daft not to.  Seems unlikely to me.  If we’re selling it should be in the summer (unless of course there is a couple of top players earmarked for Jan with the money). 

[TheBrownBottle]

1 minute ago, Shearergol said:

 

05/06 they did. They were a top 5 team back in the 80's too.

They were - 15 years is a long time.  And again, Spurs were in the ‘big five’ of the PL breakaway, but by the mid-00s they absolutely were not financial heavyweights.  It took Ashley for them to get past us in that regard - even when they had started finishing above us.  That their revenue is now more than double ours is incredible, really. 

[TheBrownBottle]

2 minutes ago, Lish007 said:

Why are we suddenly selling Bruno? 

 

He's the heartbeat of the team and when he leaves, we will miss him! 

Given the choice, no-one would be selling any of our best players, and we’d be talking about adding a GK, RCB, RW and kicking on.

 

PSR is causing the discussion, nothing else. 

[JEToon]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

No-one said it was a ‘trading miracle’.  And you’re also mixing up league placing with financial status.  Ipswich finished 5th in 2001 but they weren’t the fifth richest club.

Spurs didnt finish 5th in 2005 btw.  They hadn’t finished in the top six for 15 years by that point and were consistent bottom half finishers during that period.  
 

The rules mean that if we don’t sell, we don’t buy.  If watching the club go stale is your preference, then I won’t be able to persuade you. 

 

I am not mixing up either in terms of league place and finance hence I literally said in the post about the size of the club they were and are, they were patently a completely different conversation and in a different situation to…Ipswich, the mention of them only validates what I am saying, Spurs should have been finishing about Ipswich 

 

Spurs haven’t traded to become the club they are, they have been one of the top 10 clubs in the country for a long time, even when finishing out with the top 10 they were clearly going to be generating better revenue than sides finishing above them. They are  a massive side playing in London, it is clearly a favorable situation to be in and aye, grand it was season 05/6 but it was before Bale and Modric, they didn't break in as a consequence of the sales of either 

 

In terms of your last point, I haven’t said don’t sell players….why would I, it would be idiotic to say it