There could be major problems for us on the defensive end in the upcoming transfer windows as The Sun claims that Toby Alderweireld is a target for Manchester City. The Belgian has formed a great partnership at the back with Jan Vertonghen over the years but the report claims that Pep Guardiola is interested in the 28-year-old.
Alderweireld has been in talks with us over a contract extension but that has hit a brick road due to his wage demands and our reluctance to break our wage structure. The 28-year-old’s agent had also spoken out on the fact that his client could leave for greener pastures as the club don’t reward him for his performances, and City could be looking to swoop in on that.
The Sun reports that Guardiola wants to give captain Vincent Kompany the time to recover from all the injuries he has been suffering of late. The Belgian missed City’s 5-0 hammering of Liverpool recently and with age catching up, the Spanish manager has to think of a successor for the former Hamburg defender.
Alderweireld is tied down to a contract for a couple of years but a big money move might be too difficult to ignore for the 28-year-old. We have to work hard and ensure that the £50,000 a week earner does not leave us on the cheap. Replacing him would not be easy either.
We had to pay over the nose to find one good defender in Davinson Sanchez and we have seen how players like Virgil van Dijk are not easy to sign.
Alderweireld moving to Manchester City would be a major failure from us in keeping hold of our players. The Belgian still has a few years at the top of his game and if he does what Kyle Walker did, we would be in a lot of hot water. He is just as important a member to the team as a Harry Kane is and if we cannot keep hold of our stars, we will never be in line to win major silverware at all.
https://youtu.be/2-kdwauZyCQ
The media give varying amounts for the Spurs players’ wages depending on what they want to emphasize – and have been caught out doing so. They also systematically omit performance related bonuses from the equation – could that be because Tottenham are very competitive in this end of the wages scales? I am nearly sure that when Alderweireld signed the media reported it as £70,000 PW.
The truth is, the wealthier clubs in the top six are desperate to break this Spurs team up – because they are afraid of them. They know that they have to do it now as once Tottenham move into the new stadium it will revolutionise their finances and it won’t be so easy to outmuscle them. Wages is the fault-line they are attacking Spurs over. The media are, typically, aiding and abetting them – for varying reasons. I don’t believe a word they say.
Alderweireld had two years left on his contract, plus an additional one at Tottenham’s discretion. That is three years. Contract negotiations are ongoing. According to well-respected Spurs ITK there is a very good chance that he will sign a contract soon. If not he is more likely to be sold abroad. Levy won’t ever do business with Chelsea. United put themselves in that bracket with their disgraceful behaviour over Berbatov. Levy was prepared to do business with City – but they should look on the Walker deal as a gentle introduction to the Daniel Levy school of negotiations, and that pinched some. But I suspect they are doing themselves no favours with their stance that they won’t even allow youth players to join Tottenham because they are rivals. Levy won’t stand for them shenanigans for long.
On the one hand you claim that media reported that he signed for £70thou PW then you say that you do not believe a word the media say just to suit your arguement. The plain fact is that Toby should be paid what he is worth to the team and that should be on a par with our other top earners,if that is not good enough then he must be sold,but would we do that if kane and Alli ask for more.
Wrong. I said I have a memory that it was reported that he was signing for £70,000. That could be an inaccurate memory. But if it is right bit strengthens not weakens my distrust of the media be sure they would be reporting two different figures. My observation is about how the media report wages of Tottenham’s players – I don’t actually know what they are paid. I suspect that the media folk either don’t know either, or deliberately obfuscate. It has been shown, for instance, that they have reported Spurs players’ wages after tax, and then contrasted it with corresponding rivals’ wages pre-tax – to highlight the difference. I’ll give you another example: during the recent Danny Rose farrago, the his reported wage was £50,000, when the media wanted to highlight “how little” he was being paid. Yet when Rose was fined two weeks wages and they wanted to highlight how severely he was being treated, they reported that he was fined £130,000. Now I don’t know about you, but my school boy arithmetic tells me that if that is two weeks wages, half that is £65,000 PW. This is recent and you can check it if you really want to. I’ll give you higher example: when the media wanted to turn the spotlight on Dele Alli they reported how “low” his wage was, only for it to be revealed that they were deliberately referencing his wage from “before” he had signed his previous contract extension – and he was in the process of negotiations for another extension. I’ll given you higher example: well respected ITK’s, with excellent records for providing accurate information, say that Kane and Lloris are on £120,000 PW. But the media continue to report that Spurs have a wage ceiling of £100,000. There is no wage ceiling at all. There is a wage policy – Gareth Bale was offered £150,000 to stay!
I hope you get my point. I didn’t say that if my memory is correct that I believed that Alderweireld was definitively on £70,000. I was highlighting the fact that the media throw about varying figures depending on what they wish to highlight. And they have exposed for doing this, being misleading or just plain making stuff up! So, no, I’m not trying to have things both ways.
I also totally disagree this whole nebulous concept of paying what he is worth. That is part of the whole media mantra, which is, I believe part of a deliberate campaign to destabilise our club and unsettle our players. The very simple premiss bending that they are somehow “worth” more than Spurs can afford to pay them. City (or United) can pay them more – they should go there). Tottenham are the sixth best financed club in the BPL. They have the sixth highest wage bill. They pay exactly the amount of their revenues as a percentage that UEFA recommends. Clubs like Chelsea and Liverpool not only earn greater revenues but also pay a disproportionate amount of those revenues as wages. It is irresponsible. That is them doing it wrong, while Spurs are doing it right. Spurs fans should be applauding that and we advertising it, whilst heaping coals on the heads of irresponsible clubs who spend money they have never earned, distort markets and risk the long term health of the game. Not the other way around.
Spurs should pay what they can reasonably afford within their sensible wage structure, and if the players aren’t happy with the contracts offered they should just plain, plum not sign them. As I said, rival clubs are worried by Spurs, want to unsettle their players, have chosen wages as the fault-line to attack and have to do it now, and they are being aided and abetted by the media. Why do they have to do it now? Because once the new stadium is online, it will revolutionise Tottenham’s revenues. Higher revenues means that the same percentage of revenues in wages will give much higher wages. Therefore Spurs will be much less vulnerable to this type of attack.
What the real story should be is that the sixth best financed club, spending sensibly and planning carefully within revenues generated by the club, are consistently outperforming much wealthier clubs who are throwing money (often unearned) around recklessly on transfer fees and wages. But because this “it’s not all just about money” story upsets the world view of a lot of these journos, they would rather ignore it or try to destroy it than report it!
IWrong. I said I have a memory that it was reported that he was signing for £70,000. That could be an inaccurate memory. But if it is right bit strengthens not weakens my distrust of the media be sure they would be reporting two different figures. My observation is about how the media report wages of Tottenham’s players – I don’t actually know what they are paid. I suspect that the media folk either don’t know either, or deliberately obfuscate. It has been shown, for instance, that they have reported Spurs players’ wages after tax, and then contrasted it with corresponding rivals’ wages pre-tax – to highlight the difference. I’ll give you another example: during the recent Danny Rose farrago, the his reported wage was £50,000, when the media wanted to highlight “how little” he was being paid. Yet when Rose was fined two weeks wages and they wanted to highlight how severely he was being treated, they reported that he was fined £130,000. Now I don’t know about you, but my school boy arithmetic tells me that if that is two weeks wages, half that is £65,000 PW. This is recent and you can check it if you really want to. I’ll give you higher example: when the media wanted to turn the spotlight on Dele Alli they reported how “low” his wage was, only for it to be revealed that they were deliberately referencing his wage from “before” he had signed his previous contract extension – and he was in the process of negotiations for another extension. I’ll given you higher example: well respected ITK’s, with excellent records for providing accurate information, say that Kane and Lloris are on £120,000 PW. But the media continue to report that Spurs have a wage ceiling of £100,000. There is no wage ceiling at all. There is a wage policy – Gareth Bale was offered £150,000 to stay!
I hope you get my point. I didn’t say that if my memory is correct that I believed that Alderweireld was definitively on £70,000. I was highlighting the fact that the media throw about varying figures depending on what they wish to highlight. And they have exposed for doing this, being misleading or just plain making stuff up! So, no, I’m not trying to have things both ways
I also totally disagree this whole nebulous concept of paying what he is worth. That is part of the whole media mantra, which is, I believe part of a deliberate campaign to destabilise our club and unsettle our players. The very simple premiss bending that they are somehow “worth” more than Spurs can afford to pay them. City (or United) can pay them more – they should go there). Tottenham are the sixth best financed club in the BPL. They have the sixth highest wage bill. They pay exactly the amount of their revenues as a percentage that UEFA recommends. Clubs like Chelsea and Liverpool not only earn greater revenues but also pay a disproportionate amount of those revenues as wages. It is irresponsible. That is them doing it wrong, while Spurs are doing it right. Spurs fans should be applauding that and we advertising it, whilst heaping coals on the heads of irresponsible clubs who spend money they have never earned, distort markets and risk the long term health of the game. Not the other way around.
Spurs should pay what they can reasonably afford within their sensible wage structure, and if the players aren’t happy with the contracts offered they should just plain, plum not sign them. As I said, rival clubs are worried by Spurs, want to unsettle their players, have chosen wages as the fault-line to attack and have to do it now, and they are being aided and abetted by the media. Why do they have to do it now? Because once the new stadium is online, it will revolutionise Tottenham’s revenues. Higher revenues means that the same percentage of revenues in wages will give much higher wages. Therefore Spurs will be much less vulnerable to this type of attack.
What the real story should be is that the sixth best financed club, spending sensibly and planning carefully within revenues generated by the club, are consistently outperforming much wealthier clubs who are throwing money (often unearned) around recklessly on transfer fees and wages. But because this “it’s not all just about money” story upsets the world view of a lot of these journos, they would rather ignore it or try to destroy it than report it.