The Inevitable Summer Transfer Market Topic

[Sam]

They don't want to pay over the odds for players really which is understandable. United and Chelsea have good squad depth so they don't really need some superstar £40 million player. Liverpool could do with 1 or 2 big signings but like everyone the Man City/Madrid spending has priced them out of the market. The benefit of course for the big 4 is that as all of them aren't spending big money and setting the world alight with transfers they don't really lose ground on one another.

Also why is Harry still chasing another striker? Surely a strikeforce of Pav, Keane, Defoe and Bent is one of the strongest in the league.

[9 to 5]

He probably wants rid ofone or maybe two of them, that's why.

[IAceI]

Because he doesn't like Keane or Bent it appears. Redknapp's policy is basically "do what he can with what he has, then when the chance comes - revamp the whole team" ¬_¬

[therockbox]

They don't want to pay over the odds for players really which is understandable. United and Chelsea have good squad depth so they don't really need some superstar £40 million player. Liverpool could do with 1 or 2 big signings but like everyone the Man City/Madrid spending has priced them out of the market. The benefit of course for the big 4 is that as all of them aren't spending big money and setting the world alight with transfers they don't really lose ground on one another.

Also why is Harry still chasing another striker? Surely a strikeforce of Pav, Keane, Defoe and Bent is one of the strongest in the league.

I don't think that's true. We've made an obvious improvement at right back with Johnson, and although someone like Silva would be nice we haven't been priced out of the market for him by other teams, we couldn't afford him anyway. If we sell Alonso it'll be £35m plus, so we'll get a replacement for him and another one or two. If we went into the new season with the squad we've got at the moment though I'd be happy.

[The Quasi Juice]

Manchester City have agreed personal terms with Arsenal defender Kolo Toure in a deal worth £15m, while the Eastlands club also expect to sign Chelsea captain John Terry and Everton defender Joleon Lescott by the end of August.

Full story: Sunday Times

Hmm, the whole Toure deal has been done a bit under the radar, I wonder if it's actually true. It would be a good buy for City, they really do need better defenders.

And the Arsenal boss is planning to make a £15m move for Real Madrid striker - and Tottenham target - Klaas-Jan Huntelaar and a £10m bid for Wigan midfielder Lee Cattermole (Sunday Express)

I've been hoping for this all along and hopefully Arsenal does buy Huntelaar. I don't believe the 10m story for Cattermole though, because it's just too much money on top of Huntelaar for Arsenal.

West Ham will demand £15m for centre-back Matthew Upson, who is being chased by Tottenham, but if Manchester City fail to buy John Terry City boss Mark Hughes will make a move for Upson. (News of the World)

I was thinking about Upson already 2 weeks ago for City. 15m is a bit too much but I guess we have to blame Real and Liverpool for that. Upson/Toure in the back, pretty decent.

[alldaws1]

Also why is Harry still chasing another striker? Surely a strikeforce of Pav, Keane, Defoe and Bent is one of the strongest in the league.

Just skip over the Sunderland negotiations for Bent did ya?

Because he doesn't like Keane or Bent it appears. Redknapp's policy is basically "do what he can with what he has, then when the chance comes - revamp the whole team" ¬_¬

I'm sure he likes Keane, he did re-sign him from Liverpool after all.

It seems like we've been trying to get rid of Bent which baffles me really. Sure, if a decent offer comes in look into it but I wouldn't have actively looked to ship him. I don't see Crouch as much of an upgrade or anything. Unfortunately it probably also means the Huntelaar deal is dead unless we're looking to get rid of Pavlyuchenko as well which would just be awful

[Scott McFly]

I will still be hugely surprised if Terry leaves for Man City. They're talking like it's a done deal, but I don't think Chelsea would accept a bid for him since I believe he's still got 3 years left on his deal. And that's even assuming that he would want to move anyway, which I doubt he does.

And Crouch to Spurs? There's nothing wrong with the strikeforce they've got, but seemingly Harry has something against Pavlyuchenko, who's far better than Crouch IMO.

Edited July 26, 2009 by Scott McFly

[alldaws1]

Again, Crouch coming in seems to signal Bent's exit, not Pavlyuchenko's.

[Asuka's Gonna Kill You]

Ugh Spurs, even more reason to hate them if they're bringing in Crouch. Vieira however would be a great signing if you ask me, should be interesting to see if they get him.

And I'm shocked that Toure is going to City. Still cant see them ever getting Terry this time round, possibly in the future if things go their way. However, I do see them getting Lescott, but here's hoping I'm wrong.

[Zaz]

Ugh Spurs, even more reason to hate them if they're bringing in Crouch. Vieira however would be a great signing if you ask me, should be interesting to see if they get him.

And I'm shocked that Toure is going to City. Still cant see them ever getting Terry this time round, possibly in the future if things go their way. However, I do see them getting Lescott, but here's hoping I'm wrong.

Why would bringing in Crouch be another reason to hate Spurs? =/

[Asuka's Gonna Kill You]

Ugh Spurs, even more reason to hate them if they're bringing in Crouch. Vieira however would be a great signing if you ask me, should be interesting to see if they get him.

And I'm shocked that Toure is going to City. Still cant see them ever getting Terry this time round, possibly in the future if things go their way. However, I do see them getting Lescott, but here's hoping I'm wrong.

Why would bringing in Crouch be another reason to hate Spurs? =/

Because I hate Crouch? :/

All the complete hype people put around Spurs over the last few years as well. If they want to break into the top properly, Crouch isn't the man to do that. We'll see I guess.

Edited July 26, 2009 by JohnnyPerfect

[therockbox]

Why do you hate Crouch?

[Asuka's Gonna Kill You]

Can somebody not just dislike somebody? I don't like his style, I don't like the way teams sometimes play when he's in their team. Most of all, I don't rate him when it comes to a so called biggish club, which Spurs are apparently supposed to be. There, is that enough?

[therockbox]

Not really. Sounds a bit pathetic.

Edited July 26, 2009 by therockbox

[9 to 5]

Especially when Crouch is awesome.

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

I like to have reasons for disliking players.

A few of these involve Nazi salutes towards Spurs fans.

A few involve punching people in nightclubs.

A few involve transfers.

[Marcos]

I see the list of things Johnny hates has lengthened, now including Peter Crouch and Spurs alongside Scottish people

Edited July 26, 2009 by 'The Boss' Marcos

[Crybaby Bunting]

I can kinda understand why people don't like Crouch, probably down to his England form or the high expectations of him doing something with his height. What matters is that he's brilliant at terrifying defenders during set pieces, and even if he doesn't score that many goals for Spurs, either Keane or Defoe will see a significant rise in their goals scored.

[stokeriño]

I quite like Crouch...but all these striker transfers bemuse me.

Oh, and:

Terry pledges future to Chelsea

[Szumi]

If I was a Tottenham supporter, I know I'd be scared that my club was running under the same transfer policy as Man City. Strikers, strikers, strikers, fuck the back line.

I'd take both Bent and Pav over Crouch, so this really just seems like a bad buy. Although, Spurs are fucking crazy if they're planning on getting all their money back on Bent. He's worth 12million, I imagine, that 10-12 range, but 16.5? Eh, not so much.