Spurs to make Micky van de Ven and Edmond Tapsoba decision for Ange Postecoglou's defence

[mawspurs]

Tottenham are set to decide whether to push through a move for Wolfsburg's Micky van de Ven or Bayer Leverkusen's Edmond Tapsoba at this stage as they try to revamp their defence.

Source: Football London

 

[Nine while nine]

 

[yid-down-under]

If that’s the case I can see why lenglet is still in the picture- it’ll be either lenglet and tapsoba or tosin and vdv

 

[mmidgers]

Both please

 

[whitechina]

Nah
shift the 4 we have and get all 4 of them in.
Simple really.

Sponsored by Carlsberg and alot of JD n coke

 

[Misfit]

So the official line being given is that it's either or. Go hard for Tapsoba if he's willing to come then.

 

[Japhet]

So the official line being given is that it's either or. Go hard for Tapsoba if he's willing to come then.

Maybe today's line, but a few days ago we wanted both. Journo's just making stuff up to suit now.

 

[Misfit]

Maybe today's line, but a few days ago we wanted both. Journo's just making stuff up to suit now.

*audible gasp*

 

[wrd]

I don't see why we don't just get both and then 4 more after that.

 

[bigspurs]

Players deserve a chance to redeem themselves I reckon. Conte’s style of anti-football, square pegs into round holes BS would have demoralised everyone to a certain point. Some were able to rise above it, like Kane… actually, it’s probably just Kane that retained his form throughout, but never-the-less, the others may yet come good under the new guy. That’s about as positive as I get these days.

…I still want two new centre backs though! Splash the cash I say!!

 

[McFlash]

Anything other than going for both is going to feel like a cop out to me.
How long are we going to avoid properly sorting out our biggest weakness?
Both players are available now and for pretty reasonable prices.

We've bought one decent defender since Jan and Toby, surely those at the club can see where our biggest weakness is and the need to address it properly, not just patch it up here and there.

This is a great opportunity to sort out our defence long term, all for pretty much the price of a Bastoni, who we were "apparently" after previously.

We are not skint, so I honestly will be pretty pissed off if it's one or the other, not both.

 

[Japhet]

Anything other than going for both is going to feel like a cop out to me.
How long are we going to avoid properly sorting out our biggest weakness?
Both players are available now and for pretty reasonable prices.

We've bought one decent defender since Jan and Toby, surely those at the club can see where our biggest weakness is and the need to address it properly, not just patch it up here and there.

This is a great opportunity to sort out our defence long term, all for pretty much the price of a Bastoni, who we were "apparently" after previously.

We are not skint, so I honestly will be pretty pissed off if it's one or the other, not both.

I agree with the sentiment but with Tapsoba in particular, we have no idea how reasonable the price is, do we?

 

[mawspurs]

I agree with the sentiment but with Tapsoba in particular, we have no idea how reasonable the price is, do we?

Rumoured to be as much as 50M

 

[Neon_Knight_]

Anything other than going for both is going to feel like a cop out to me.
How long are we going to avoid properly sorting out our biggest weakness?
Both players are available now and for pretty reasonable prices.

We've bought one decent defender since Jan and Toby, surely those at the club can see where our biggest weakness is and the need to address it properly, not just patch it up here and there.

This is a great opportunity to sort out our defence long term, all for pretty much the price of a Bastoni, who we were "apparently" after previously.

We are not skint, so I honestly will be pretty pissed off if it's one or the other, not both.

Money / club ambition aside, why would both agree to join in the know that we are signing both plus already have Romero (a World Cup winner who is sure to be in the manager's plans for the starting XI)? In all likelihood, one would reject us unless we sign the weaker of the two first under false pretencies (i.e. tell them we intend for them to be a regular starter, then sign another CB within the same window and demote them to a squad player).

 

[McFlash]

Money / club ambition aside, why would both agree to join in the know that we are signing both plus already have Romero (a World Cup winner who is sure to be in the manager's plans for the starting XI)? In all likelihood, one would reject us unless we sign the weaker of the two first under false pretencies (i.e. tell them we intend for them to be a regular starter, then sign another CB within the same window and demote them to a squad player).

Because I'd like to think they've got the belief and confidence to believe that they can make the spot their own.
Ven is certainly young enough not to expect to play every game and we need healthy and proper competition for places.

Every big team has decent second choices and they all play a decent amount of minutes.
Should we just have a decent 11 and then a sub par bench?
No, we should have proper competition throughout because that's the only way we'll progress.
Players have to earn their starting birth, and have the belief that they can.

Where are we going to get if we only sign players who are happy to be back-up?!

 

[yid-down-under]

Because I'd like to think they've got the belief and confidence to believe that they can make the spot their own.
Ven is certainly young enough not to expect to play every game and we need healthy and proper competition for places.

Every big team has decent second choices and they all play a decent amount of minutes.
Should we just have a decent 11 and then a sub par bench?
No, we should have proper competition throughout because that's the only way we'll progress.
Players have to earn their starting birth, and have the belief that they can.

Where are we going to get if we only sign players who are happy to be back-up?!

Lol

 

[McFlash]

Lol

Yeah, fuck you!

I can't even edit it now, I've just got to own that shit!

 

[Neon_Knight_]

Because I'd like to think they've got the belief and confidence to believe that they can make the spot their own.
Ven is certainly young enough not to expect to play every game and we need healthy and proper competition for places.

A lot of the strong back-up options that our rivals have were originally signed as upgrades to their starting XI, but were then upgraded upon (and retained as a back-up) in a subsequent window.

Every big team has decent second choices and they all play a decent amount of minutes.
Should we just have a decent 11 and then a sub par bench?

Every big team keeps back-up players happy by rotating between first choice / second choice players for important games on the weeks when they have mid-week European / league games. We won't have any European games next season, so (injuries aside) our squad players will mostly be limited to playing in the early rounds of domestic cups, which really isn't much of a draw for recruitment / retention.

No, we should have proper competition throughout because that's the only way we'll progress.
Players have to earn their starting birth, and have the belief that they can.

It's a two-way street. Us signing two relatively expensive CBs at once would suggest to each of them that we don't have much belief in them to make that starting LCB spot their own. Both will be likely to receive more offers than just ours, so this doesn't seem like a great way to convince them to choose us.
They would both have belief that they can displace any of Davies / Dier / Lenglet. It's simply common sense that Romero will be in the manager's plans as the starting RCB though. Therefore, it's common sense that their chances of being a regular starter are diminished compared to if we signed only one of the two of them.

Where are we going to get if we only sign players who are happy to be back-up?!

By regularly improving our starting XI and selling our fringe players instead of the players who were starting XI before that transfer window.

For example, if we buy a new LCB, sell Tanganga + Rodon + Sanchez and retain Dier + Davies, we will have improved our starting XI plus our bench. If we sell Dier + Davies, we will realistically end up with two of Tanganga / Rodon / Sanchez on the bench.

 

[McFlash]

A lot of the strong back-up options that our rivals have were originally signed as upgrades to their starting XI, but were then upgraded upon (and retained as a back-up) in a subsequent window.

Every big team keeps back-up players happy by rotating between first choice / second choice players for important games on the weeks when they have mid-week European / league games. We won't have any European games next season, so (injuries aside) our squad players will mostly be limited to playing in the early rounds of domestic cups, which really isn't much of a draw for recruitment / retention.


It's a two-way street. Us signing two relatively expensive CBs at once would suggest to each of them that we don't have much belief in them to make that starting LCB spot their own. Both will be likely to receive more offers than just ours, so this doesn't seem like a great way to convince them to choose us.
They would both have belief that they can displace any of Davies / Dier / Lenglet. It's simply common sense that Romero will be in the manager's plans as the starting RCB though. Therefore, it's common sense that their chances of being a regular starter are diminished compared to if we signed only one of the two of them.


By regularly improving our starting XI and selling our fringe players instead of the players who were starting XI before that transfer window.

For example, if we buy a new LCB, sell Tanganga + Rodon + Sanchez and retain Dier + Davies, we will have improved our starting XI plus our bench. If we sell Dier + Davies, we will realistically end up with two of Tanganga / Rodon / Sanchez on the bench.

Meh, it's late and I'm now slightly drunk, so there's not going to be much reasoned debate from here.
I still think we should be signing both of the though. Ven can get games at LB because that's a bit of a weak spot for us at present.

 

[Neon_Knight_]

Meh, it's late and I'm now slightly drunk, so there's not going to be much reasoned debate from here.
I still think we should be signing both of the though. Ven can get games at LB because that's a bit of a weak spot for us at present.

I'd be very happy if we signed both. I just think expecting us to is unrealistic / overly optimistic. A club like Man City could, but we don;t need to discuss the differences there.