The need to buy players every summer, “to improve”.

[Sly]

We hear the need that teams need to buy players every summer, otherwise they’re standing still.

 

However is this just an outgrown perception? It seems a little silly to me if you think about it logically. Especially with teams looking to grow and inter-grate young / youth players into the first team squads. 
 

Spurs got to a Champions League final, without signing a single player. 
 

I understand the promoted clubs looking to add quality. However the mid to top clubs, trying to improve every season, when you’re basically at one of the best leagues in the world and at the pinnacle of the sport, seems a little hard to fathom. 

 

Just look at every clubs transfers on a club by club basis, then think logically, do they looked better.

 

https://www.premierleague.com/news/2147146

Maybe we can’t find better quality for the money, than we already have. 

Edited 1 August 2021 by Sly

[Babylon]

Depends on the makeup of what you already have and how much your manager is already getting out of them.
 

Could Bielsa rinse any more from his team Leeds team? Probably not

 

Could a top class coach get more out of Arsenal and Man U compared to two PE teachers? Probably yes.
 

An ageing team like we had after the title win, wasn’t going to improve.
 

A young squad like we had last season probably has more room to grow.

[NaijaFox]

Fallacy or not, WE definitely needed to buy to improve our squad depth. However, it’s not one size fits all. As already noted, depends on individual circumstances. 

[Hamilton Fox]

The Spurs example is a massive argument against what your saying, yes they got to the champions league final ( doable in a cup run) but havent strengthened since and have gone backwards in league every year. 

[MGLCFC]

14 minutes ago, Hamilton Fox said:

The Spurs example is a massive argument against what your saying, yes they got to the champions league final ( doable in a cup run) but havent strengthened since and have gone backwards in league every year. 

But they have bought players for big fees that haven't performed, so the intention to improve was there.

[kingston_fox]

New blood is needed to stop complacency and to drive competition for places. Not sure bringing through youth will do that but a Daka will keep a Vardy and Nacho on their toes.

[Ric Flair]

3 hours ago, Sly said:

We hear the need that teams need to buy players every summer, otherwise they’re standing still.

 

However is this just an outgrown perception? It seems a little silly to me if you think about it logically. Especially with teams looking to grow and inter-grate young / youth players into the first team squads. 
 

Spurs got to a Champions League final, without signing a single player. 
 

I understand the promoted clubs looking to add quality. However the mid to top clubs, trying to improve every season, when you’re basically at one of the best leagues in the world and at the pinnacle of the sport, seems a little hard to fathom. 

 

Just look at every clubs transfers on a club by club basis, then think logically, do they looked better.

 

https://www.premierleague.com/news/2147146

Maybe we can’t find better quality for the money, than we already have. 

Spurs problems have come hard and fast since that season though, Pich couldn't sort the malaise and stagnation out and they've regressed massively.

 

The other team who opted not to male many signings of note in 2019/20 and 2020/21 is Liverpool and its that fine balance between being such a finely tuned team that's playing at their optimum and then it becoming less effective and there being no additional quality to kick start it.

 

Signings don't guarantee anything other than a brief shot of adrenaline to the fan base but considering teams are always a work in progress and many seldom can buy every player they need from the off, it's essential to keep building and then progressing year on year.

[fleckneymike]

We stayed up, strengthened with Kante, Fuchs and Okazaki…

Edited 1 August 2021 by fleckneymike

[Captain...]

It's not just about short term success, but long term succession planning and sensible acquisition. 

 

Nobody is immune to losing players, either through selling, injury or loss of form. You need a squad that can cope with the demands of a full season and all the variables it throws up. You can argue we didn't need to buy both Soyuncu and Benkovic when we did as we had Maguire, Evans, Morgan for that season. The benefit was seen the following season when we sold Maguire, Morgan was past his best.

 

You can also look at players like JJ and Fofana, who might not have made a big impact on the first team but would hold their value and be a saleable asset in a few years.

 

You also need to refresh the squad, players often talk about the buzz a new signing brings and how it can rejuvenate the team, obviously buying someone like Slimani had the opposite effect, but coming into to training and seeing the likes of Daka and Soumare tearing it up, the likes of Vardy, Youri, Maddison, Ndidi will be impressed with our new signings, but also start worrying about their place and will know they need to up their game and not coast.

 

Vardy in particular will know he can't rest on his legend status, but also will not be able to complain if Daka is tearing it up and he needs to play a role of the bench. 

[An Away Move]

I think what bodes well for us is that our team is so young. I expect the younger individuals in the squad overall will improve each year.  

[UpTheLeagueFox]

5 hours ago, fleckneymike said:

We stayed up, strengthened with Kante, Fuchs and Okazaki…

"Strengthened" ??? Never heard of them! Crap recruitment!

Pearson sacked, Ranieri in - got a feeling we'll finish bottom with zero points, come back to me in May...

[KingsX]

Most Spurs fans would point to those consecutive windows of adding little or no new blood as the single biggest cause of their failure to win trophies under Poch.  It’s also why that group imploded, rather than declined gradually.  They were aging, wearing out, and tired of listening to him.  Squads have a shelf life under any given manager (an iron rule for SAF).

 

As the richest league, the PL pulls talent from all over the world. Especially at the top end clubs, that process never stops.  XIs are improved (and lesser players jettisoned) every single year.  Players are replaced as -- not after -- they pass their peak,

 

Stand still and you absolutely do fall behind IMO.

[Dan]

What happened to Tottenham is a good example of why you do need to keep buying. I think you need to get a good squad in place and then just gradually improve it year upon year, like we tend to do.

 

When you do what Tottenham did, it will hurt you more in the longer term than short. They're paying the price now for their failure to capitalise and try and strengthen when they were in a much better position to do so. Their run to the Champions League final was extremely fortunate as well, if they had won it they would've been probably as poor a team to ever win it in my lifetime, their rot had already set in to some extent but they just kept scraping through round after round.

 

I think this problem could end up hitting Liverpool as well eventually. They have a brilliant team and have gotten so much out of them, but they haven't really capitalised on it in the transfer market and I feel a decline in the next 2/3 years is kind of inevitable. Salah, Mane, Firmino, van Dijk and Henderson are all 29 or above. Klopp is also a phenominal coach but he's achieved it all at Liverpool, I wouldn't be shocked if he went in the next couple of years himself rather than overseeing the rebuild they will need.

 

I think your performance in transfer windows is often reflected in the next 2/3 years from that window, rather than necessarily the season following. I do think we have a tendency to leave ourselves a player or two short, but for the most part we keep things ticking over really nicely - Soumare and Daka are both excellent buys.

Edited 1 August 2021 by Dan LCFC

[Leeds Fox]

19 hours ago, Sly said:

We hear the need that teams need to buy players every summer, otherwise they’re standing still.

 

However is this just an outgrown perception? It seems a little silly to me if you think about it logically. Especially with teams looking to grow and inter-grate young / youth players into the first team squads. 
 

Spurs got to a Champions League final, without signing a single player. 
 

I understand the promoted clubs looking to add quality. However the mid to top clubs, trying to improve every season, when you’re basically at one of the best leagues in the world and at the pinnacle of the sport, seems a little hard to fathom. 

 

Just look at every clubs transfers on a club by club basis, then think logically, do they looked better.

 

https://www.premierleague.com/news/2147146

Maybe we can’t find better quality for the money, than we already have. 

Adding to the squad can be done without buying players. We’ve done this brilliantly in recent years.

 

Bringing through Chilwell, Barnes and Thomas. Even Choudhury to a lesser extent. Iversen will be valuable to the squad in the coming years.

 

The training ground will almost certainly help us unearth further gems, whether this be for the first team or to bring in extra income. 
 

I think the sentiment of needed to buy to stop a regression is true for all clubs, however some manager better than other by using different means of freshening up a squad. As a progressive club, we’ve used a good balance of the transfer market and the youth setup.

[OntarioFox]

I dunno if the Spurs analogy is the best one to give. That season when they failed to make a single signing was the start of their decline from nailed-on top four to scrapping to get any European footy whatsoever. Champion's League progression papered over the cracks beginning to form in Spurs' setup.

 

You have to keep some sort of flux in the squad or it will get stale and performance levels will drop. We're blessed at the moment to have solid academy prospects in addition to making sparing but sensible signings to keep the squad dynamic and seemingly happy.

 

The comparison with Spurs is an interesting one to make really. I hate to admit it but until recently we were very similar clubs - a great first team but a noticeable drop in the quality of our options from the bench. The difference is that the way we've recruited is genuinely raising that bar and making us a stronger, more versatile setup. There isn't really any regression as we've seen from some of our direct rivals for top 6, and the strength of our youth setup means our pressure to go out and spend is significantly reduced.

[Captain...]

There is no right or wrong way to do it, but you look at clubs that have sustained long periods at the top. United of the 90s were blooding youngsters but also making big money signings, Fergie would systematically rebuild his teams and never let them stagnate.

 

Arsenal of the 90/00s were constantly delving into the transfer market to unearth the next gem, they weren't spending silly money but buying and developing players. Then they had one season where they only signed Cech on a free and that felt like the beginning of the end of Arsenal as a top top team.

 

Chelsea have always been very active in the transfer market and if they get it wrong they just spunk a load of money on new players. Combined with the ridiculous acquisition of young talent that goes out on loan, financially it is not efficient but they have been a top 4 team for a long time now.

 

We are probably not going to be able to spend £70m on an established top player, we have a shallow but talented squad and we can't let it stagnate.