Most of the top clubs would snap up Bale in a heartbeat, you may not like him but he's regarded as a top player and is worth a lot of money. Walcott wouldn't command anywhere near as high a fee and doesn't have top clubs after him as was highlighted recently when no club bothered trying to sign him.Originally Posted by Master Splinter
Really the only reason why that **** inked a new deal, imo.
Hype doesn't equate to productiveness. It's nothing to do with 'liking' a player.
Walcott has had a good return in goals and assists for the last few years. Far more than Bale. Hence he's a more effective player than Bale.
Has any top club signed or even shown concrete interest in Bale yet? If he was this apparent world-beater, he wouldn't still be at Spurs.
Pretty much, had a big club dangled some big money in front of him he wouldn't have signed IMO, it's the first time one of our best players has never really had anyone after him, but I guess it says a lot about where we are at the moment.
He'd cost big money and so clubs don't just offer 50 million at the drop of a hat, if he had 6 months left on his contract however I'm pretty sure all the top clubs would be sniffing around.
Bale is the spearhead of many of Spurs' attacks, he's generally the one that unsettles the opposition, I wouldn't say Walcott does. In addition I'd say Bale offers more than just a forward threat having been a full back earlier in his career.
Walcott has been decent this season but overall he hasn't been that great, this is highlighted by the mixed feelings about him by the fans, had he been a big success like Bale he'd be loved by the fans.
There's something about Walcott that just leaves you unconvinced he's the real deal, you don't usually get that with top players.
Last edited by Özim; 28-01-2013 at 08:42 PM.
Liverpool on the verge of signing this Coutinho guy from Inter.
I know literally nothing of him, but he's an -inho so he must be good.
We should sign Moutinho from Porto, very good player.
Bale was moved into a more forward position precisely because he offered nothing defensively. You can often find him being ineffective on the left-wing and on the right and through the centre too, when he's easily nullified by opposing teams. Like yesterday against Leeds. He's just as inconsistent as Walcott. But has so far had an inferior career at an inferior team. He might become a great in the future, but currently he's a good player who has some impressive games in amongst dozens of poor ones. And wouldn't the fact that elite clubs would rather wait to get him on the cheap rather than spend big money on him suggest he's not that highly-regarded after all?
Clubs know he'd cost 40-50 million which is big money for anyone hence the reason noone has bid for him, not many players move for that kind of money. I think he's more than a good player to be honest, good players are players you'd wouldn't be too gutted to lose as they're easy to replace, he's not easy to replace and Spurs would loathe to lose him.
The mixed feelings about Walcott sum him up, he's a good player but not too hard to replace if you're willing to spend a a decent amount, he's one of our better players due to the state of our squad these days, 10 years ago he's have been a player we would have happily lost without noticing much difference. You'll know if Walcott becomes top class because pretty much all the fans will love him like they do with all top players. There's just something about him that's well, unconvincing.
I'd love him to be a great player, it would be great for the team, he's just not and IMO never will be, the best players stand out from a mile.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote