He is replaceable, but for us, on our wage budget, it's more likely we get a replacement who isn't as good just now, than that we replace one of the best players in this league with someone as good or better, for less money. Such a deal is out there, I'm sure, but I don't yet have the faith in Broughton to find it, nor in our wage structure to get it over the line against probable competition. Even a player as good could take time to settle in and find on-field and off-field chemistry with teammates. In short, it's something that probably could happen but I have limited confidence that it would. I don't think just signing multiple poorer players would have enough of a net impact to compensate for that one player with defence-piercing quality you rarely find in the Championship.

I'm sorry I don't think you phrased that sentence how you meant to, I don't understand what you mean.

Spurs won't have any need to rush the deal. I doubt we will let him go until our defence is sufficiently recovered or reinforced.

He owes us nothing? We found him, raised him and built him. If he owes us nothing, we certainly owe him even less.

Especially if we get promoted. But I don't think that's likely. Especially if we lose BBD.

Decent is akin to 'fairly good', not bang average, and I think the most accurate description of Lenihan by this summer would have been 'good' Championship defender.

Where are you getting 10k p/w from? As far as I'm aware, I was the first person on here to mention that hypothetical figure for him, and I plucked it out of my arse.

Or, by moving he might ruin his obvious potential and never earn that amount of money again.

It was more than fair for Lenihan to be described as a decent Championship defender.

Yes. Yes it is.

Wow, that's an impressively gross oversimplification.

Wow, yeh that's a horror show...doubt he plays that badly again though

Doesn't appeal to me.

In short, I just wouldn't take him whatsoever.

Just checked and we have had 21 shots in the league. So that's 28.5% conversion rate. It's high of course, but nothing like 60%. The main reason for the high conversion rate is the Swansea game. They're a team who obsess over possession, it was at their ground, and they're vulnerable to the counter we used against them. 3 goals from 5 shots. We also don't need to win games 3-0 like we did there.

I'm certain that will be from 10 shots ON TARGET, not 10 shots total. Hell we had 7 shots just against West Brom. So the conversion rate isn't going to be anywhere near 60%.

Good.

Not gonna lie, I wasn't inspired from the highlights reel. But if he comes, we'll see what he's really about.

Great stuff, thanks very much!

If you're drawing the distinction between 'offering' big wages and paying him big wages, you didn't need to. I know we arranged a contract before he turned 17, it was just a figure of speech. The point was more that they couldn't pay him it until now.

Yes, I invented it. As part of a hypothetical contract offer Spurs could make that we would struggle to match. And that even if we did they could go higher without a second thought.

Knocking back the larger clubs is one thing. Knocking back the larger cash is another. If I understand it correctly, due to his age none of the big clubs would have been able to offer him big wages until now.

I am sure we could match 10k p/w. I'm fairly sure we won't match 10k p/w for a 17 year old with 2 games under his belt. It's just not how we operate. And even if we did, Spurs would just gazump it with barely a second thought.

Agree to a large extent, but the problem is if he doesn't do well enough or gets a serious injury he might never land life changing money again. I bet Spurs would think little of throwing a 10k p/w 4 yr deal at him. That's 2 million quid. Enough to set anyone up for life if they're sensible and smart with it. Also, Spurs can just send him on loan to the Championship, especially now he is showing he can compete in it.

We don't want teams sitting deeper. We are better when they come at us.