Cajun Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Didn't Spurs fans use the "they offered more money" excuse last season when we signed Duff, even though they offered £7m, and we bought him for £5m? We offered him £150m a week wages, dumbass! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alan Shearer 9 Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Stevie's the worst for hating Spurs. Which is amazing when you consider that he supported Liverpool from the ages of 4 to 6, on the advice of a neighbour, moved on to supporting Spurs from 7 to 9, on the advice of a special uncle, and finally turned to the toon at the age of 10 when he grew out of his year-long "Sunderland phase". I have spoken to Stevie about this and he said "BLLLLEAAAAUUUURRRRRRRRHHHHHHHHHH" which translates to "those claims are completely unsubstantiated and such conjecture is further proof of the death of modern civilisation". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Stevie's the worst for hating Spurs. Which is amazing when you consider that he supported Liverpool from the ages of 4 to 6, on the advice of a neighbour, moved on to supporting Spurs from 7 to 9, on the advice of a special uncle, and finally turned to the toon at the age of 10 when he grew out of his year-long "Sunderland phase". From the age of 7 I've never been away from SJP. I think Jol should just pm certain people his ITK stuff to save himself from further embarrassment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheshire Mag Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 To think we could have had Bent for next to nothing a few years ago. Wasnt good enough apparently, according to most people it was just SBR helping his old club out! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Bent would make a lot of sense tbh, he's a target man type and I really can't see Allardyce building a team without a focal point type player. Only turned 23 not so long ago and has had a very good goalscoring record in a very poor team the last few years. I'd welcome the signing, personally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Bent would make a lot of sense tbh, he's a target man type and I really can't see Allardyce building a team without a focal point type player. Only turned 23 not so long ago and has had a very good goalscoring record in a very poor team the last few years. I'd welcome the signing, personally. The only thing i'd disagree with is that I don't quite see him as a traditional target man type. I'm not sure exactly what he does class as though. I'd be for his signing as long as it wasn't silly money. Charlton going down should help, but not if there is stiff competition for his signature. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontownman Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 To think we could have had Bent for next to nothing a few years ago. Wasnt good enough apparently, according to most people it was just SBR helping his old club out! Again, as explained by others before BENT turned us down, not the other way around. He wanted regular first team football, at the time SBR wanted him as back up to shearer and bellars. The deal was good to go, but he decided to stay at Ipswich. He would be a good aquisition, although an expensive one, would probably prefer Anelka, although Bent is younger and is more likely to honour his contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Thing is though, 15m? I reckon we could get Ashton for that, who IMO is alot better. Fair enough he has had a couple of injuries but...... For 15 m we could completely re-structure our defence. I'm sick of spending so much money on strikers TBH. It's not that Bents a poor player but 15m is a massive amount of money for one player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 I hope to god he goes there. blueyes.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parky Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Stevie's the worst for hating Spurs. Which is amazing when you consider that he supported Liverpool from the ages of 4 to 6, on the advice of a neighbour, moved on to supporting Spurs from 7 to 9, on the advice of a special uncle, and finally turned to the toon at the age of 10 when he grew out of his year-long "Sunderland phase". I have spoken to Stevie about this and he said "BLLLLEAAAAUUUURRRRRRRRHHHHHHHHHH" which translates to "those claims are completely unsubstantiated and such conjecture is further proof of the death of modern civilisation". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 To think we could have had Bent for next to nothing a few years ago. Wasnt good enough apparently, according to most people it was just SBR helping his old club out! Again, as explained by others before BENT turned us down, not the other way around. He wanted regular first team football, at the time SBR wanted him as back up to shearer and bellars. The deal was good to go, but he decided to stay at Ipswich. He would be a good aquisition, although an expensive one, would probably prefer Anelka, although Bent is younger and is more likely to honour his contract. Bent did reject the chance but people did often moan about us being linked to the lad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 I think it was more a go at Robson's style of signing at the time rather than signing Bent himself. It was a time where we'd just established ourselves in the top 5 but were going for young players with potential when a lot of fans were after the big name. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kingdawson Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Would have liked Bent at the Lane tbh. Most itk's talk complete rubbish anyway so i doubt this bollocks is true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Most itk's talk complete rubbish anyway so i doubt this bollocks is true. Most sensible thing you have said. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karjala Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Most itk's talk complete rubbish anyway so i doubt this bollocks is true. Most sensible thing you have said. love it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Thing is though, 15m? I reckon we could get Ashton for that, who IMO is alot better. Fair enough he has had a couple of injuries but...... For 15 m we could completely re-structure our defence. I'm sick of spending so much money on strikers TBH. It's not that Bents a poor player but 15m is a massive amount of money for one player. Once again any money spent on Bent would be generated by the sale of either Owens or Martins as we would need to replace them. Therefore we would not be 'wasting' money as you say. Why do people keep claiming it will hinder our other plans? Why does making this buy mean our defence will be neglected to some? Come on now this isn't rocket science! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcjmc Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Thing is though, 15m? I reckon we could get Ashton for that, who IMO is alot better. Fair enough he has had a couple of injuries but...... For 15 m we could completely re-structure our defence. I'm sick of spending so much money on strikers TBH. It's not that Bents a poor player but 15m is a massive amount of money for one player. Once again any money spent on Bent would be generated by the sale of either Owens or Martins as we would need to replace them. Therefore we would not be 'wasting' money as you say. Why do people keep claiming it will hinder our other plans? Why does making this buy mean our defence will be neglected to some? Come on now this isn't rocket science! plus SA has already said he is not going for a trophy signing, so say FFS has given him 20 million to spend why would he want to spend 3/4 on one player when we have a team to build. Iam concerned if both owen and martins both stay we still loose martins in the new year so why not try and take some on the cheap. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Triglett Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 I'd guess that our wage structure is over £40k, with Keano and King on higher wages for sure. I'd guess that Davids was on more too. But yes, it isn't that high, but really, what's the problem? There's been a marked change since the overhaul of playing and coaching staff a few years back, and with that our transfer/wage policy...we haven't looked back with consecutive top 5th finishes, and a far higher calibre of player at Spurs. Jol/Comolli has often said that we don't buy the finished product, we develop them - that means players in their early 20s who aren't already at the biggest clubs, but have the ability/potential to be. 95% of those players will comfortably fit within that wage bracket. That includes players like Berbatov and Zokora. The general feeling is that those who are completely driven by the money aren't really the type of player we want. I was dissapointed when we missed out on Duff and Parker, but now I can look back on it and think we got lucky. Your club is full to the brim with big name mercenaries, something which you fully acknowledge, so in what way are Spurs doing it wrong? Carrick left because of he wanted a quick route to success, and who can blame him? If Berbatov leaves, it'll be for the same reasons, not money. I don't think it's as big an issue as it's being made out to be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest goal! Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Thing is though, 15m? I reckon we could get Ashton for that, who IMO is alot better. Fair enough he has had a couple of injuries but...... For 15 m we could completely re-structure our defence. I'm sick of spending so much money on strikers TBH. It's not that Bents a poor player but 15m is a massive amount of money for one player. Once again any money spent on Bent would be generated by the sale of either Owens or Martins as we would need to replace them. Therefore we would not be 'wasting' money as you say. Why do people keep claiming it will hinder our other plans? Why does making this buy mean our defence will be neglected to some? Come on now this isn't rocket science! Martins/Owen out - £9m (being realistic) Bent in - £16m Where's the sense in that, will cost us £7m replacing like for like... £7m could pay all the signing on fees and a portion of 1st years wages for say Campbell, Ben Haim, Ljundberg and Viduka for starters. We need to look at the whole squad not just a couple of big name signings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 If someone offers £9m for Martins, you don't accept it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 If someone offers £9m for Martins, you don't accept it. One think to add to that: If someone asks you if you'd like to but Darren Bent for £16m, say no. Certainly don't bring it up yourself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 If someone offers £9m for Martins, you don't accept it. Exactamundo! See it's not rocket science!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 If someone offers £9m for Martins, you don't accept it. One think to add to that: If someone asks you if you'd like to but Darren Bent for £16m, say no. Certainly don't bring it up yourself. If someone pays £15m for Martins though, it'd make paying the same money out for Bent worth it though imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leazes1986 Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Sir Bobby could have saved us a fortune a few years ago Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now