Ange – Small C Conservative?

Nathan put together this really excellent video about why we struggle against the narrow low block and some potential solutions. If you listen to our podcast, The Extra Inch (Spurs Podcast), you’ll know that Nathan is convinced that we are a dribbly winger (or two) away from being a hell of a team. I’m struggling to convince myself that Ange agrees.

Firstly: Brennan Johnson and Timo Werner. He sanctioned the signings of these two fairly non-dribbly wingers. I also do think, in Yago Santiago, we have the dribbly winger profile in the squad but, aside from a few bench appearances when we were down to The Bare Bones™, he has not had a look-in.

Recently I’ve been saying that I think that Ange, whilst being a (somewhat) radical and extremely ideological coach, is somewhat conservative with team selection and substitutions. I think there’s a case that he could be *more* radical and *more* ideological.

What I mean by that is that he could stick more rigidly to the profiles for the roles that he needs rather than selecting from his most experienced players despite them not having the right tactical profile. For example, he could do that by thinking outside the box in terms of using a central midfielder as an inverted full-back. I say this since those roles are more closely aligned than the inverted full-back and more traditional full-back in some aspects, specifically how much they are asked to receive the ball with their back to play.

Or he could use the Academy. Yes, yes, Windy, we get it, you are obsessed with the Academy.

On the former, as a long-term transformation, it would of course require re-training, re-shaping, re-thinking, video analysis, and one-to-one sessions to convert, say, Oliver Skipp into a long-term back-up for Porro. It’s radical. And, even then, who’s to say it would work? I mean I actually don’t think Skipp has the creative passing (like Porro) or carrying (like Destiny Udogie) to be an Ange-ball full-back, and I think having one of those is a necessity. So I’m not sure why I chose Skipp as an example, but whatever, stick with me anyway here. As a one time shot, a 45 minute ‘just get on the ball and progress it’ thing, I don’t see why that’s any more risky than just leaving Emerson Royal on there to struggle as he did against Wolves. And that’s not meant to be a brutal slight on Emerson Royal, who I think is a competent traditional full-back… but one that is totally unsuited to the inverted role.

On the latter — using the Academy — I believe we have had three key occasions this season to utilise young players that are arguably better profile fits than the alternative ‘experienced’ player.

  • The centre-back crisis. We could have picked Alfie Dorrington (18) over Emerson Royal.
  • The injuries to James Maddison and Giovani Lo Celso. We could have picked Jamie Donley (19) over, for example, Oliver Skipp.
  • The lack of dribbly wingers. We could have picked Yago Santiago (20) over *points at all the non-dribbly wingers*.

I’m not going as far as saying I’d be involving brilliant Under-18s inverted right-back Leo Black (18), because I think there’s a strong argument that he’s not physically ready — he hasn’t played Under-21 football yet. And I’m not suggesting we play our other outstanding young players, Tyrese Hall (18, incredibly press-resistant midfielder) or Mikey Moore (16, dribbly winger!) because I think they probably do need more experience at Under-21 level. And, to be clear, I’m not even saying I’d start our young players — I’d have eased them in gradually with a view to testing how they cope with the environment and then starting them if they do okay. Aside from a tiny handful of minutes for Donley, we’ve been so painfully conservative on this.

Whenever I suggest this kind of thing I gets lots of push-back. We’re fighting for the Champions League, we can’t take ‘risks’ with young players. Well, there are plenty of recent Premier League examples to cite. Eddie Howe has used Lewis Miley, 17. Roberto De Zerbi has used Jack Hinshelwood, 18. Pep Guardiola has used Oscar Bobb, 20, Jurgen Klopp has used Conor Bradley, 20. Erik ten Hag has used Kobbie Mainoo, 18. These are all examples of managers — in pressure situations — picking young players over more experienced players because they’re closer to the tactical profile they need for the role they want fulfilled. There are more similar examples too: David Ozoh (18), Rico Lewis (19), Evan Ferguson (19), Luca Koleosho (19), Alejandro Garnacho (19), Wilson Odobert (19), Facundo Buonanotte (19). They’ve all got to start somewhere.

Yeah but their players have had loans at a higher level so are ahead of ours. Wrong. In all but one of the original five examples (Bradley, who had a season in League One) those players have all come in having not had previous experience in men’s football. Like Donley, like Dorrington, like Santiago.

Yeah but our players aren’t as good as those. I disagree. We have comparable England age-group recognition to Mainoo and Miley — Hinshelwood, for example, had received no international recognition before his Brighton debut.

The only difference, in my opinion, is the coach doing the selecting. The opportunities afforded to the young players.

I love Ange dearly. I think he’s the best coach we’ve had in years. As a guy, he’s the best person we’ve had in charge in my lifetime. I urge him to be even bolder, even more ruthless. To stick to his idealogical approach to the max, profile above (nearly) all else. Please, no more Emerson Royal as an inverted wing-back or Oliver Skipp as a number eight.

Halfway

We’re just over halfway through the season, and I wanted to reflect on the season so far, and what it’s meant to me and then think forward to next season in terms of squad building and transfer planning. So this will be half ‘heart’ and half ‘head’.

I use the phrase ‘what it’s meant to me’ very deliberately because it has been quite a transformative season for me so far. Ange Postecoglou is almost entirely responsible for that. I’d like to offer a couple of brief personal vignettes by means of explaining what I mean.

I don’t know if you realised, but I host a podcast. I wouldn’t expect you to know, I barely ever mention it. It’s called The Extra Inch (Spurs Podcast), you should check it out. I have the joy of speaking to two of my closest friends about Spurs every Monday. It is generally a complete and utter pleasure to do so, and although I often speak about the podcast as a second job, the actual hour and a half or so we spend on Skype once a week does not feel like work — it is pleasure. At least it is now.

During periods of the tenures of José Mourinho and Antonio Conte, sometimes the thought of sourcing questions, writing a running order, setting up my kit and logging on felt like the biggest drag. Or, alternatively, it felt like a form of therapy — communally talking through how shit our fandom felt, how the connection with the club we’d all been embedded in for decades was being eroded on a weekly basis. At the very least I tended to think of it as a chore, rather than something to look forward to.

Woe is me, poor podcaster, ‘having’ to turn up and talk about a hobby. Yeah, you’re right, I’m being dramatic and the other option was to simply not turn up. The reasons I kept turning up, of course, were that firstly, this is Nathan’s actual job and so I have obligations. But also because I knew that what’s happening now was a possibility. That we would appoint a coach who would deliver what had been craving since Mauricio Pochettino (*spits*) was still on the scene.

The other, similar example is that when I met my wife, I went hard on the fact that I was football-obsessed and that it was also my job. I didn’t want to get into a situation where a few months down the like she was like ‘so, uh, are you ever not watching Spurs?’. Better to be up-front. Anyway, she was surprised about how calm I would be during matches, sometimes barely even cheering goals. The 6-1 defeat to Newcastle back in April stands out because I essentially shrugged/laughed it off. Now she’s experiencing my fandom just as differently as I am. She’s loving how excited I am (except when I scare the dog). In fact, she has been somewhat sucked in by the drama and especially by Ange. Big Ange.

I feel like I keep stopping short — on social media, on the podcast — of explaining why I think he’s been so transformative for the club and us all as supporters, possibly because it feels grandiose and a bit cringeworthy. But I’ll have a go here.

I think there are two really obvious qualities that a football coach needs in order to succeed: leadership skills and a deep level of tactical insight. Obviously all football coaches at the highest level have some level of tactical insight, but it becomes about ‘levels’ at the very top, right? I think you can get away with just having leadership skills (Harry Redknapp) but I don’t think you can get away with not having extreme tactical depth. I think there are some coaches that have aspects of leadership — and massive side-eye at Conte and Mourinho here — but not the whole package. Maybe they’re good in some situations but they’re inconsistent or they fail to acknowledge the realities of lives for young footballers, or they’re too ego-centric to properly engage or empathise.

I genuinely think Ange Postecoglou is the full package. This morning I watched this video that Nathan had linked to. It illustrates how Ange utilises training drills effectively to coach situations that his teams will subsequently recreate on the pitch. It shows the link between tactics and technical coaching. Whilst this build-up approach is just one aspect of his complex tactical set-up, I think it is illustrative.

But the part of Ange which I think everyone — Spurs fans, non-Spurs fans, the media — has recognised is the way he is. Who he is, how he holds himself, how he treats people. He’s extremely assertive but also affable, empathetic, authentic and human. Timo Werner gave an interesting interview this week, where he said:

Already in the first days you see how, first of all, the team is behind him, that’s the most important thing. Everyone in the group is speaking very, very well about him. Also, when you see him in the meetings as well as before the game and in the game, he will always push you. He will give you clear information about what you have to do.

Football.London

As much as I enjoy listening to Ange, so do the players. He is clear, authoritative and just thoroughly decent.

So onto the head part. Here’s where we currently stand with our Premier League Squad List. We could easily create capacity for more signings by selling one of those listed in red or, as we did in August, simply by not naming poor old Brooklyn Lyons-Foster in the squad.

When planning our January transfer window obviously we’re also thinking forward to being in a European competition next season, hopefully the Champions League. So this is how our squad is shaping up for next year’s European competition.

Those in red may leave or be loaned in this window or next. If you take into account all of those players we would still only have space for four players, plus as many Under-21s as you like. Though it’s worth noting with potential signings Antonio Nusa and Adam Wharton in mind, List B players must have been at their club for two years, hence Ashley Phillips and Alejo Véliz are listed in List A. The regulations state:

A player may be registered on List B if he is born on or after 1 January 2002 [will be 2003 for next season] and since his 15th birthday has been eligible to play for the club concerned for any uninterrupted period of two years, or a total of three consecutive years with a maximum of one loan period to a club from the same association for a period not longer than one year.

UEFA Regulations

In addition, amazingly we found a loophole to make Pape Matar Sarr ‘homegrown’ for Premier League purposes (as we registered him before loaning him to Metz), so I’m actually wondering if he might be classified as Club-Trained in the Champions League.

So, we have space for four or five players based on my assumptions — let’s say four. I think those would need to be:

  • Right-back
  • Left-back
  • Central midfielder (6 or 6/8 profile)
  • Central midfielder (10 or 8/10 profile)

Should Ryan Sessegnon be able to stay fit and turn out to be a good profile fit (obviously there are big question marks there) this may change slightly, but I think this is roughly where we’re at. We can then have a conversation about whether we loan out Véliz since we have Troy Parrott returning, creating space for another centre-back or, say, Timo Werner on a permanent basis.

As a slight aside, the justifications for the central midfield profiles are that we would then have cover for each of the three distinct roles. I do think some multi-faceted cross-over players would be really useful — i.e. Rodrigo Bentancur can clearly cover 6 and 8, which creates more options for rotation and cover.

I think this analysis shows how delicately balanced our transfers need to be, and explain why I felt so frustrated about the opportunistic signing of Manor Solomon. We don’t have a great deal of wiggle room, and so each incoming player needs to be immediately impactful or have the potential for future impact (like Udogie, Sarr, Phillips and, hopefully, Nusa).

I think this activity also illustrates why Alfie Devine, Jamie Donley, Alfie Dorrington, etc etc etc are so critical and not just ‘nice to haves’ at this point. Having Club-Trained players is so useful for the purposes of UEFA competitions, and so having pathways for Academy players is essential. I watched Alfie Devine make his Plymouth debut yesterday (thread here) and I do think he can make a meaningful contribution next season, but that decision would be balanced against how many minutes he would get. But these are the sorts of conversations that will be happening: can we utilise Alfie Devine for 8/10 cover minutes, or do we need to sign someone for that role? And, if so, what does that mean for other potential signings?

Not only am I loving the vibes and excited about player recruitment and how next season looks, I also genuinely think we can have immediate success. We are so well-poised for a strong finish to the season. I wouldn’t back against us finishing top three, and I mean any of the positions in the top three. We are good enough. COYS.

(If you spot any inaccuracies in any of the spreadsheets above, please leave a comment below. I’ve been looking at them so long that I’ve gone blind to errors!)

Transfer Window Thoughts

Forgive me for being a few days late on this, I’m currently on holiday and have been writing it during my limited screen time (which I heartily recommend). As an aside, I could not recommend Hvar more as a relaxing holiday destination.

We went into the summer knowing that there were some critical areas of the team and squad requiring improvement. The appointment of Ange Postecoglou changed these a little, understanding that the new system required specific characteristics and skill sets. For me the key areas for focus were goalkeeper, centre-back, creative midfielder and – particularly if Kane were to leave – a forward.

I think we’ve managed to tackle all of these priorities fairly effectively. What we’ve really struggled to do, though, is add depth — more on that later, but broadly: it’s good that we’re only playing one game a week, as we are going to need to stay fit and injury-free.

Goalkeeper

Guglielmo Vicario is already proving his worth, his ability with his feet is as impressive as his traditional goalkeeper attributes. This is critical for Ange-ball, and we saw in the League Cup exit to Fulham how much the drop-off is to Fraser Forster in terms of our ability to build up effectively. Vicario was a good price, is a good age and seems a good character. I’m really happy with this transfer.

Centre-back

Micky van de Ven is a baller. He’s a good foil for Cuti Romero because he’s less of a maniac, whilst still being Actually Good At Football. He can pass, he can carry, he can play out of tight spaces. He’s also strong, rapid, a good reader, and seems a great fit for the high line. He’s going to be a huge favourite.

Creative midfielder

James Maddison fits Tottenham like a hand in a glove. We’ve wanted to sign him since he was a teenager but it has happened when he’s at the peak of his powers, and for a knockdown price because he was approaching the end of his contract. We got him for around half what a player of his ability should be worth. He is the closest thing we’ve had to a Christian Eriksen since he left (and boy has he been badly missed). When you don’t have a creative player like this, you can’t always quite put your finger on what’s missing — because your team is seemingly doing all of the football things, without this sprinkling of genius — and you end up getting frustrated at players that simply don’t have it in their lockers. Maddison’s vision and execution are exceptional. He can take the ball in tricky situations and look after it, but he can also pick locks that look impenetrable. He can change the tempo with injections of forward thrusts on the ball or zipped passes or, conversely, putting his foot on the ball. What a player. I know I’m going to love watching him.

Attacker

I believe, in an unusual-for-Spurs piece of forward (pun intended) planning, we had already signed our “replacement” for Harry Kane last season in Richarlison. We spent £60m doing it, and we got a player who can play both through the middle or wide on the left. He can press and harass but he can also score goals, illustrated both in the Premier League (mainly from the left) and for the Brazilian national team (nainly form the centre). Clearly he is never going to achieve the levels of output that Kane did for goals or assists — few, if any, in world football can — but he’s a good system fit and a solid player (albeit many are currently feeling doubtful of him).

My view is that Ange Postecoglou’s *system* will help to replace Kane. Indeed, the numbers of goals from defenders and midfielders already show this is already true to some extent. We have the ball more, we have the ball in the box more. Son and Kulusevski will take some time to adjust to the roles required of them when out wide. Both will adapt, because they’re very good players, but they might not be ideal for what Ange requires. With that in mind, I’m a little underwhelmed by some of our rotation options.

Brennan Johnson adds electric pace, versatility and a directness that I think will be genuinely useful. A lot of people have raised concerns over his data: it doesn’t look good when compared to other, similar forwards, or even to other similar forwards at Nottingham Forest. When you watch Nottingham Forest or Wales, however, he stands out — Nathan produced some ‘per touch’ data where things look a lot better.

I think Spurs fans who haven’t seen much of him will be pleasantly surprised by what he can bring in terms of running behind and getting onto passes from our creative passers (Maddison and Kulusevski in particular). He doesn’t have one-vs-one dribbling ability in the way you would hope for an Ange winger, but with his pace he will look to play give-and-gos and run in behind at pace. And he has good cut-backs and decent composure in front of goal. I don’t quite know where he fits in yet — right, left or centre — but I do think he’s good, albeit expensive due to the home grown premium.

Ivan Perisic, overall, had a very disappointing time under Conte as a left wing-back. He does already look marginally better under Postecoglou. He is a reasonable match for what’s needed: a winger who can go both inside and out, has the ability to beat his man, and who can cross the ball. But he is an old man now. A rapidly declining old man. A rapidly declining old man who I’m told isn’t exactly a popular member of the squad. I think we’d have let him go had an offer come in.

Despite his very solid showing against Burnley, I have some concerns over the signing of Manor Solomon (and that’s ignoring the circumstances of his transfer). I’ve watched all of his Spurs minutes, all of his Fulham minutes and some of his pre-Fulham minutes and I see a player who is quick footed and can create enough separation to allow him to get shots away when in the pocket on the left. But, he doesn’t do it *that* regularly, and can get doubled up on and crowded out easily. There’s lots of coming towards the ball when under pressure and returning it to where it’s just came from, with him 10 or 15 steps deeper than he was on receiving it. In those situations you want him to be brave and take a touch and try to turn. He’s a very situational player and those situations are: receiving on a counter 1v1 against a lesser player and coming on against tired legs. That skillset has its uses, especially against teams that leave as much space in behind as Burnley did. Glass half full, he’s a right-footed Andros Townsend (which would not be a bad thing). Glass half empty, he’s a marginal improvement on what Lucas Moura had become. Sorry, I know that’s quite a pessimistic take, especially after his providing two assists twice and everyone will yell ‘give him a chance’, but I’ve watched this player and this is what I’ve observed and one match against Burnley won’t make me do a 180 (yet) — though, I trust Ange so much that I frankly think he could get something out of nearly every player.

The most frustrating thing about the Solomon signing for me, though, is that it has clogged up a 25-man squad place, and we’ve ended up in a situation where because we didn’t have enough spaces, we had to put signings on hold. I’d rather have had Conor Gallagher in the squad than Solomon. So, with that, on to midfield.

I think, in terms of our midfield options, in an ideal world we woul want two more profiles — a goal-scoring midfielder (that isn’t the creative one — i.e. not Maddison’s role), and a back-up to Yves Bissouma at six. Conor Gallagher would have given us the profile of the former. Reports suggested that the two players Ange wanted from the off were Maddison and Gallagher. If that’s the case, I think it’s really poor that we didn’t deliver him, particularly if the primary reason we didn’t deliver him was that we did not have space.

The most suitable back-up to Yves Bissouma within the squad is Pierre-Emile Højbjerg, who himself was a central figure in our transfer window. I think there’s a recognition that he’s good enough to start at a lot of teams and, therefore, that he might want to leave in search of a starting berth. It appeared that he’d join Atlético Madrid and, frankly, I think everyone would have been happy with that (assuming they’d have paid a fair price). He’s one of the most divisive players in the Spurs squad and, in the eyes of many, linked to our recent mediocrity. Under Ange, he’s looked really useful as a game-closer, and looked genuinely really good playing as the six in the pre-season friendlies. He seems to have taken his demotion pretty well, but I still expect him to move on in January.

It looked like Bryan Gil was being made available for loan or even a permanent transfer, and there’s a part of me that’s glad that he didn’t end up leaving, since I still believe he has something to offer. He’s certainly one of our few players who has genuine 1v1 ability in wide areas, and his tenacious pressing will be useful. Let’s wait and see once he’s fit.

Ashley Phillips was a ‘one for the future’ signing, but the exit of Davinson Sánchez has made him a ‘one for now’. He has enormous potential and, whilst I’m rolling my eyes a little at how a signing has immediately jumped ahead of our fantastic home grown centre-back, Alfie Dorrington, I’m pleased to see that Alfie’s name has also been mentioned in terms of cover for the first team. I’d have Dorrington — also ‘physically ready’, as people have said of Phillips — ahead of our signing from Blackburn in the pecking order based on Under-21 performances and frankly because it sends a great message to our Academy players, but it’s fairly typical of English football that it works this way instead; Phillips with his 500-odd minutes of men’s football is preferred. How are we providing minutes to our young players? My parochial little rant over, I’m happy to see Postecoglou putting faith in talented young players who fit the system ahead of older, more experienced players who don’t.

There has been a huge amount of criticism of the club, and specifically of Daniel Levy, for the failure to offload several of our players. Even some of those we eventually found loans for were players that sections of the fanbase felt we should have sold permanently or released. I agree with the principle entirely but, from what I know, it’s not as simple as has been made out.

When Mikel Arteta joined Arsenal, he was given permission to get rid of several squad members for little or no money. Within two windows they had sold or released Henrikh Mkhitaryan, Willian, David Luiz, Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang, Calum Chambers, Sead Kolasinac, Sokratis, Mesut Özil and Shkodran Mustafi. Mattéo Guendouzi and Lucas Torreira were sent on loans and then left on permanent transfers. Héctor Bellerín and Alexandre Lacazette left the season after, both for nothing. This clearing of the decks was seen in the wider community as fairly desperate and wasteful, but we have to accept that the scorched earth policy worked and led to a genuine title challenge.

Ange Postecoglou, it seems, has been given similar permission. The criticism has been that Daniel Levy — operating without a Sporting Director because he has not yet appointed one — has been asking for too much money for unwanted players, or has been unwilling to tear up contracts. I believe that the truth is somewhere in-between. Whilst it is true that we could agree to mutual terminations of contracts, what we would basically be doing is paying players the remainder of their contract value in order for them to not be registered for the club anymore. Lloris, Perišić, Dier and Forster all have a year left remaining, so would have been possible options for this. Spurs were never going to pay off two years of Tanguy Ndombele’s huge contract, though. My understanding is that Spurs were open to accepting offers lower than they were hoping for for some of our players, but that the players themselves rejected numerous moves. In the case of Hugo Lloris, I am told that he rejected at least four moves. Davinson Sánchez rejected several too, before agreeing to move to Galatasaray, who have Champions League football. Eric Dier wants to see out the last year of his contract before moving to a European team on a free transfer in the summer. So, whilst I think that some criticism can be levelled at Levy — particularly for not hiring a Sporting Director in time to manage the huge amount of business required during the transfer window — some of this was outside of his control. Well, I guess you could blame him for signing them in the first place — though, frankly, not many of them were sneered at at the time.

I would also add that the type of re-build that we are doing here is greater than one transfer window. So whilst it’s frustrating that we end the transfer window with players on our books that we’d ideally like to have shifted permanently (Sergio Reguilón, Tanguy Ndombele, Japhet Tanganga and Joe Rodon spring to mind), we have to project forward one window, or maybe two and remember that these players will be gone, creating more capacity for younger, more suited players.

All this being said, and with some distance from the mania of deadline day, I do think this has been a very promising transfer window overall for us, with the age profile of the squad moving in the right direction, and the squad moving towards being one suited to playing progressive, possession-based, high energy, pressing football. We’ve dealt with key issues, and dealt with them well. We have players we can enjoy watching and who are capable of playing the type of football that Ange wants them to play.

COYS!

P.S. Nathan is currently working on a video about Brennan Johnson, look out for that on The Extra Inch Patreon.

Ahead Of Schedule

I’m so pleasantly surprised by how much the team has picked up Ange-ball (see: Have Spurs already mastered build-up play?). I honestly thought it would take several months for us to successfully transition from the dismal shit that Conte was trotting out to a modern positional play model, complete with intriguingly high defensive line, intense high pressing, inverted full-backs and a single pivot in midfield.

The first three games of the season were — on paper — tricky. And yet, we’ve looked highly competitive and, at times, dominant in each, improving along the way. For example, the latest game saw, in my view, the best use of substitutions yet. Ange Postecoglou changed the flow of the game with his bench options.

One of those that came on and helped secure the win was Pierre-Emile Højbjerg. He has been touted around this transfer window, and I think he’s a useful player to present as a case study for our squad management in this transfer window (and beyond).

Højbjerg is an interesting one as he’s both our best alternative to Yves Bissouma, and also arguably our best ‘game closer’ in the role he was used in against Bournemouth. But he’s also a highly saleable asset: a competent Premier League player with bags of experience and, at 28, probably either peak age or just post-peak. As such, in this crazy market he must be worth around £35m. The amounts we’ve been offered this window, it seems, fall well below that.

So should we sell? Well, I don’t think so. But the predicament we’re in is that we’ve *already* got too many players for the 25-man squad before we even consider adding new players. So we’ve left ourselves potentially accepting bids for players we’d ideally rather not sell (Davinson Sánchez is probably also in this boat) else we risk players being left out of the 25-man squad and, thus, sidelined and miserable until January and, in the meantime, losing value.

So what do we do? The options appear to be:

  • Sell the likes of Højbjerg and Sánchez now for fees probably (significantly?) below what they’re worth.
  • Loan or even release a bunch of players in the final day or two of the window.
  • Accept that we will have to leave players out of the 25-man squad.
  • Possibly a combination of all three.

Højbjerg out of the starting XI with two years left on his contract and one of the older players in the squad. Selling him makes sense from a business perspective, particularly as he is one of our more sellable assets and actually has suitors. However, given his still-important role in the squad, the only scenario which I’d sell Højbjerg and even Sánchez in now would be if we were to replace them… which kinda defeats the purpose unless we get Under-21 players or, possibly (depending on others we can shift), home grown players. So, we find ourselves in a tricky spot.

We’ve been lumbered with more players than we’d have liked because:

  1. A bunch of our players have lost value over the last few seasons because they’ve either been under-utilised, frozen out, set-up to fail, or they were poor team fit signings in the first place.
  2. Wages in the Premier League are higher than in other European leagues and players don’t often actively choose to lose money.
  3. Some of our players are deluded and think they should be playing at a level that, at this point, is frankly unachievable. I’m looking at you, Hugo.
  4. Prices have gone bananas so you better be sure you’re paying up for someone you really want.

But I do think we need to see this window as the start of a longer-term process. It’s going to take us two or three more windows to re-shape this squad, which had become bloated, poorly balanced and was older than I’m sure Daniel Levy would have liked given the choice. We’ve made great strides, and we are ahead of where I expected us to be right now, but there’s lots more work to do. Don’t let ‘perfect’ be the enemy of ‘good’ as they say.

COYS.

Home Grown Players (HGP) Quota – Summer 2023 Transfer Window

Each year I write about the Premier League’s 25-man squad requirement and the implications of the home grown players rule and how it will impact on Spurs’ transfer strategy. The home grown player numbers could impact on how many signings we can make, the nature of those signings and/or the size of our squad for the rest of the season.

The Premier League ‘Home Grown Players (HGP)’ Rule

The basic point is that we can name a maximum of 17 non-home grown players (HGPs) in our squad. The common misconception about the requirement is that clubs must name eight HGPs in their squads. We could name fewer than eight HGPs, but would need to also name fewer than 25 players in our squad — for example, if we only have seven HGPs, we can name a 24-man squad, 6/23, 5/22, etc. 

Remember, an HGP is defined as one whom, irrespective of nationality or age, has been registered with any club affiliated to The Football Association or the Football Association of Wales for a period, continuous or not, of three entire seasons, or 36 months, before his 21st birthday (or the end of the season during which he turns 21). Source: Premier League.

As ever, we will not need to name players who are under 21 on our squad list, so could augment our squad with youngsters. This would mean that we could manage with, say, a 22-man squad with just five HGPs, but would need plenty of under 21 players who are ready to play. For the 2023/24 campaign, players considered ‘under 21’ will have been born on or after 1 January 2002. This means that for the current season we could still have a number of ‘freebies’ who are fairly well-known names, the likes of: Troy Parrott, Pape Matar Sarr, Max Robson, Yago de Santiago Alonso, Maksim Paskotši, Nile John, Matthew Craig, Josh Keeley, Jude Soonsup-Bell, Dane Scarlett, Alfie Devine. Some of these players will ultimately be sent out on loan, of course.

From this season, Bryan Gil and Harvey White would need to be named on our squad list should we wish to use them as they were born before 1 January 2002.

The UEFA ‘Home Grown Players (HGP)’ Rule

Obviously we are not in any European competitions next season, but the UEFA rules may factor into our squad planning as, hopefully, we will be planning for a European campaign in a year from now.

The UEFA rules are a little different to the Premier League rules — have a look at article 45 (‘Player Lists’) of the regulations. UEFA don’t just want clubs to have players trained elsewhere in the FA structure; they have additional requirements for club-trained players. They want to encourage clubs to bring through their own young players.

The good news is that last year a rule change was implemented whereby Welsh players who trained at clubs affiliated with the English league system now count as ‘homegrown’ in Europe. Previously they counted as ‘foreign’ players. For us, this is Ben Davies and Joe Rodon, who trained at Swansea. They would now count as ‘homegrown’.

If we wanted to name a ‘full’ (25-man) squad in a UEFA competition, we would need at least four ‘association-trained’ players and four ‘club-trained’ players in List A (players over 21). Those that currently qualify are:

Club-trained players

  • Harry Kane
  • Alfie Whiteman
  • Brandon Austin
  • Japhet Tanganga
  • Oliver Skipp
  • Brooklyn Lyons-Foster
  • Harvey White
  • Troy Parrott (from 2024/25 season)
  • Max Robson (from 2024/25 season)

Association-trained players

  • Fraser Forster
  • Ben Davies
  • James Maddison
  • Joe Rodon
  • Ryan Sessegnon
  • Djed Spence

Players under 21 can be included on List B so long as they have been ‘eligible to play for the club concerned for any uninterrupted period of two years since his 15th birthday by the time he is registered with UEFA, or a total of three consecutive years with a maximum of one loan period to a club from the same association for a period not longer than one year.’

We have a whole host of potential List B Players who might be useful were we to qualify next year though, of course, several will likely be out on loan.

Summary

We currently have 30 players who would need to be named on the Premier League squad list if we wanted to play them (the maximum allowed is 25). A good few of these players are expected to leave (Giovani Lo Celso, Davinson Sanchez, Hugo Lloris, Ivan Perišić, etc), Brooklyn Lyons-Foster is a previously unused youth player, plus we have two goalkeepers in Brandon Austin and Alfie Whiteman. Therefore, it’s difficult to draw too many conclusions about whether the squad list restrictions will be an issue for us at this point; but I would say probably not.

Of the 30 players, 17 are not HGPs. We will, no doubt, be selling several non-HGPs, and so it should not be a problem, but it is something the club will need to keep in mind when signing further non-HGPs.


I am the host of The Extra Inch; a Spurs podcast that delves into the analytical side of Tottenham games. If you already follow the podcast, consider becoming an xSub for additional content, including videos, extra podcasts and access to our Discord server.

I have a Donate button to this site. It’s on the ‘About‘ page. I explain why on there. Cheers!