Luka Modric to Chelsea: Why Not Selling Modric Was a Mistake

Wesley LewisContributor IIAugust 31, 2011

LONDON, ENGLAND - AUGUST 28:  Luka Modric of Tottenham looks down dejected during the Barclays Premier League match between Tottenham Hotspur and Manchester City at White Hart Lane on August 28, 2011 in London, England.  (Photo by Michael Regan/Getty Images)
Michael Regan/Getty Images

The summer transfer window has slammed shut once again and Luka Modric is still a Tottenham Spur.

Most Spurs fans should be happy about this—Modric is obviously a great player and will hopefully help the team in the future.

Chelsea's continued interest in the Croatian should be proof enough of his worth (unless Torres is an example to go by, £50 million mistake so far).

The fact of the matter is that Spurs fans are probably a little confused by this transfer window, as they should be.

Was keeping Luka Modric a good strategy for building a top-four team?  Yes, of course.  Was doing it at the expense of £40 million really worth it?  No.

What could Redknapp and Levy do with an extra £40 mil in their pockets?  I bet they'd love to know.

With an exodus of fringe players at Tottenham worthy of the Bible, the Spurs had the opportunity to use a giant pile of cash along with tons of freed up wages to buy the players that were truly needed.

Sure, Mr. Redknapp, if Scott Parker is who you want, go chase him.  But with your extra resources you could get any number of other, arguably more needed players.

With the sale of Modric alone, the Spurs could've bought Sergio Aguero and the fringe wages freed could have kept him happy.

The sale could have pried Giuseppe Rossi away from his beloved Villareal and then some. 

The point I'm trying ever so frantically to make here is that £40 million for Modric, however important he might be, could be reinvested in the team in the form of two or three players that could strengthen the squad as a whole.

Another thing should be considered: Daniel Levy was clearly trying to make a point by proving that Tottenham is not a selling club.

So what did he do instead?  He sold a bunch of fringe players and kept one big one.

Lastly, could selling Modric to Chelsea improve them enough to hurt Tottenham?  Going by the start of the season, I don't think that matters right now.

And Chelsea is no doubt going to throw huge lumps of cash at their Modric substitute (who now seems to be Raul Meireles).

Keeping Modric was good.  Missing out on £40 million to reinvest in other areas of the squad was bad.

The worst part is the transfer window is closed.  So now we all have to wait until January for a new saga of "almost" transfers a la Gary Cahill, Mark Van Bommel and several others.