P3te

I never said they weren't motivated, I said the pressure had been lifted and subconsciously they weren't playing for their lives any more. Every single player would've wanted to win, but I think the pressure lifting just flipped a switch and focus went

Internet article says:

Doesn't Benteke have a say in it though? Just because someone meets the fee, doesn't mean we have to sell. We don't have to accept the bit, if the player doesn't want to go. For instance if Stoke bid £32.5m, that doesn't mean he's going to sign for them. We DO have to accept the bid, the player doesn't have to move though

Honestly, once we beat West Ham we were safe to an almost certain degree. So many unlikely things would've needed to happen in unison from that point for us to go down. IMO that's the point where the players knew it was done

If nursey said Lerner admitted, which he did, then it's likely true

Reckon Benteke is the big man to go with him. If they pay £5m for Ings and £32.5m for Benteke it's an extremely good value strike partnership IMHO. And what about Sturridge?

Why would spurs do that when the 32.5m would activate the release clause? That post was in reply to a suggestion that we should accept £20M plus Dembélé and Townsend. If Tottenham want to fob us of with players that they don't want then so be it, but they still have to meet the release clause. If they meet the release clause without offering the players then fair enough. All I'm saying is that I'd want £32M from them. They only have to meet the release clause. Why on earth would they give us two players for nothing? Why don't you understand this? Why can't you understand that I'm not saying that if Tottenham offer us £32M and activate the release clause, we should refuse the bid and insist they give us an extra two players. I'm saying if they offer us £20M and a few players we should reject the bid and tell them that the release clause is £32M if they then want to offer us players too then that's up to them. What AntrimBlack is saying is that once they bid 32 million.. we cant refuse it..... they have activated a clause where they can automatically speak to him.. so effectively.. a fee is agreed. So there is no point in them offering players.. Why would spurs do that when the 32.5m would activate the release clause? That post was in reply to a suggestion that we should accept £20M plus Dembélé and Townsend. If Tottenham want to fob us of with players that they don't want then so be it, but they still have to meet the release clause. If they meet the release clause without offering the players then fair enough. All I'm saying is that I'd want £32M from them. They only have to meet the release clause. Why on earth would they give us two players for nothing? Why don't you understand this? Why can't you understand that I'm not saying that if Tottenham offer us £32M and activate the release clause, we should refuse the bid and insist they give us an extra two players. I'm saying if they offer us £20M and a few players we should reject the bid and tell them that the release clause is £32M if they then want to offer us players too then that's up to them. What AntrimBlack is saying is that once they bid 32 million.. we cant refuse it..... they have activated a clause where they can automatically speak to him.. so effectively.. a fee is agreed. So there is no point in them offering players.. How many more times do I have to say the same thing? I wouldn't accept a bid of £20M plus players. If they activated the release clause then fair enough. I'm not saying we somehow reject it and demand that they offer us an extra two players. The idea of taking players in exchange from them isn't mine. I've already said that I think that's a bad idea. Even if they were 2 players Sherwood had on his shopping list and it saved us 5-10m on buying them separately as independent deals?

Take the crossbar down 6 inches and a foot off either side and I think things would get a bit better

What's the deal with that anyway? Obviously the standard is lower across the board but the gap is biggest when it comes to goalkeeping. I've never understood how they could be so bad. Like, they're worse than your average under 14's keepers, and there's no real reason for it I can see. Goalkeeping ruins the women's game for me. Make the bloody goals smaller or something for them, they're just not able for it otherwise

Don't underestimate the mental fatigue the players were released from. I honestly think once they were safe they completely flagged mentally. Like I say though, let's see how it goes in august

The release clause could well be our pocket ace IMO. We have absolutely no reason to sell below that, and even if bids come in for less we just point Christian and his agent towards the clause in the contract they agreed to a few years back. If he wants a move to a bigger club I'm not sure causing ANOTHER ruckus plays to his favour in the slightest, especially in a case as black and white as "If someone bids 32.5m you can go, if they don't you can't"

Honestly, I'm not paying all that much attention to those 3 games, bad and all as they were. IMO, for better or worse, once we were safe (and in the players' eyes, I'm sure we were safe after the win against West Ham), the focus, pressure and massive sense of weight on the players' shoulders would've disappeared. We might not like it as fans, but these guys are human, and they went from being under incredible pressure, to being safe, and when you're not massively experienced, that'll take a toll on performances. I'm more interested in seeing how we come out of the blocks in August. I don't care about those 3 games any more, they're gone. If we continue in that vein, though, I'll obviously not be happy - I just don't think they're necessarily any indication of how we'll fare next season. What I think IS a fair indication is Sherwood's overall league record with us so far, which is 5 wins, 1 draw and 7 defeats in 13 games. Over a season, that amounts to just under 15 wins, 3 draws and 21 defeats, or 48 points - which is the points target I expect this team in its current state, to be able to contest realistically next season under Sherwood

Some DLCs represent value for money, HOWEVER, the concept of DLC only exists because people pay. All the stuff that's developed during main game dev time (which is most DLC, to be fair) would be included in the retail game if people didn't buy DLC. If everyone boycotted it tomorrow, you'd see games offering much more content within a year

They will never get rid of those extra things because people need to buy packs to get those. It's actually impossible to play FUT without spending real money. If you start a new account, you are given a full bronze team with 1-2 non rare gold players. If you win Div 10, it'll take you 3-4 matches depending how good you are and you will get 3-4k in coins all together. Then you start Div 9 and 3-4 games in, all XI of your players now need contracts. You don't have enough coins to buy a pack or you have just enough coins to buy contracts from the market, but now you have zero coins and a crap team. You repeat this process and make coins at a snails pace. But EA gives you the option to spend real money and open packs which will skip the process of you having to buy contracts so you keep your coins, plus you have a very slim chance of getting a good player. This whole game mode is designed to make the user spend real money. You are at such a massive disadvantage if you don't. And while people continue to spend money on it, EA will rightly focus on it. Like all nonsense DLC, it only exists because there are people out there dumb enough to buy it

That doesn't really explain why he's got a goal every other game over 100 matches though. You don't manage that kind of record because your teammates are rubbish, you manage it in spite of your teammates being rubbish.

I wouldn't either if he'd had us all season, but to come in when he did, with the players as low as they've ever been, and get us scoring goals and winning matches was quite an accomplishment. Don't underestimate the mess we were in on February 15th after that hull game

It'd really be all down to Sherwood actually wanting those players, and there's nothing to suggest he does, or that spurs would make such an offer, or that spurs are even interested in benteke. It's all just idle speculation really

Spurs are 2-3 seasons absolute minimum ahead of us. By the time we'd even get close benteke would've packed his bags and gone elsewhere, technically weakening them by the time we're knocking on the door around them (best case scenario)

Why would spurs do that when the 32.5m would activate the release clause? That post was in reply to a suggestion that we should accept £20M plus Dembélé and Townsend. If Tottenham want to fob us of with players that they don't want then so be it, but they still have to meet the release clause. If they meet the release clause without offering the players then fair enough. All I'm saying is that I'd want £32M from them. If Townsend and dembele are 2 players Tim wants, then getting them for essentially 12m is surely very good business given that a cash deal for either of them alone wouldn't be much less? Obviously if he DOESN'T want them then it'd not be worthwhile, but we're talking about potentially saving around 10m (hypothetically) with the deal the poster mentioned. For a club that doesn't have a huge amount to spend, I don't see how it wouldn't be a great deal for us. Not that spurs would offer it anyway

I don't get this tbh. We go on about how good benteke is and how he's worth so much money, yet people rubbish the idea that he'd possibly go a long way towards turning the 6th placed team into top 4 contenders? If he's not capable of that then he's not worth the money we're saying he is. And if he is capable of that, then there's no reason why he shouldn't join Liverpool

Why would spurs do that when the 32.5m would activate the release clause?

For me its not how much you spend....it's who you buy Exactly

I'm quite optimistic tbh. I also don't buy into the spending x to stand still mentality. You can spend a fortune and get worse, or spend nothing and get better

Happens all the time. It's called an "out of court settlement" and it's typically in both parties' best interest. No issue with that at all

I'm as big a Bradley fan as any—he was the best player in the midfield for either team today against Netherlands—but I'd be shocked to see a player come back to the club after such a disappointing experience the first time around. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, as I think he's a Premier League-calibre player and think he could do a job for us, but I would be pretty shocked if something like that were to actually happen. He's on £85k a week at TFC. we won't be signing him