Butterfingers

A RB for me is not priority. I accept that we are going to be starting with some of the side from last season. However, we still need cover for that position, especially if we are able to offload both Richards and Bacua. Currently, we need to address our midfield and strike force as a priority. If that gives Hutton a reprieve then so be it. I think that we will make around 4 more signings. A midfielder & striker before the Wednesday game and two others between then and the end of August. It may be that a RB comes in late but I'm pretty certain that we are going to be starting with Hutton and could even go with him until January or even beyond. If a good quality RB is available this summer, I'm sure we'll be in the hunt for him but I can't see this being within the next 2 weeks.

Reading the actual tweet, he doesn't say that players are leaving, just something like "the old days are over". This could mean the cushy ride that they had- Richards & Gabby were definitely in the group of troublemakers. Lescott probably was as well. Guzan to his credit probably wasn't. I'm surprised Bacuna hasn't had a mention. It's hotting up for a very interesting two week lead up to the Wednesday game-I reckon at least two in and wouldn't like to guess how many out. Hopefully, it will be around 4 or 5.

As others have said, you probably are. He is carrying far too much weight to play RB the way RDM appears to be looking at playing. he cannot bomb up and down for 90 mins. The other problem is the allegations of him being disruptive.

Carlsberg don't post on VT But if they did.....

Not nearly as absurd as the suggestions that we should have an entire side of new signings in place by now. Bear in mind that many who are celebrating the fact that we held out for more money are the exact same people who think we should pay the first figure dreamt up by the selling club. If people could accept that these deals work exactly the same, both ways, there would be far less drama on here.

In fairness, the same could have been said about Benteke. As there doesn't appear to be any PL interest in him and £5million isn't a lot for a striker, we have to keep our feet on the ground a bit. He certainly appears mobile which is what we crave for currently. Who knows, maybe a more well known striker is also being considered as well? There have been suggestions of 2 coming in.

The people who matter will have seen him play and as I trust our management, that is good enough for me (plus I liked the two YT videos)

I think that the majority, if not all will be. Generally, the harder, more difficult deals tend to take place in the run in to the closing of the window and invariably these involve the more sought after players. We've done very well to get the 3 in that we have and I envisage all three to be starting in two weeks time. Other targets will have other options, some will take these other options, others won't. Once a few big sales go through, the merry go round will begin. I remember the last time we went to Wednesday on the opening day of the season, with 6 new signings starting for us. I reckon it could well be the same this time and if not, there will be 5 new faces in the starting line up.

Speaking hypothetically, based on an assumption that Amavi, Aywe, Gana and Adama all stay, we would have creativity from Amavi and Grealish from the left, Adama from the right and Aywe from the number 10 type slot. A new striker is almost accepted by most as going to happen sooner, rather than later. This little lot will then have the protection of Gana and Tishbola behind them. That is not bad at all, with the majority of those players all capable of playing at PL level. If as is likely, one or two of the foreign players leave, then replacements are required. There is a lot of talk about Morrison. I am a great believer of giving people the benefit of the doubt and/or drawing a line under what has happened in the past. We are no longer a PL club and the harsh reality is we are shopping in a different area now. There is a risk element with Morrison However it is a two way thing. Morrison knows that it is a risk for him as if he were to fail here, his career will go backwards. On his day, Morrison is quality. If he gets his head down, he could be a revelation-He could also hip in with goals which would be a culture shock for many Villa fans from a midfielder. Adama seems a bit of a worry, both in terms of fitness and whether he is committed to the long term. I would personally be happy with Morrison replacing him rather than someone who can't get a game for their prospective PL side or someone who is currently playing in the championship or abroad. When you talk about gambles, Morrison is no worse than signing any other creative player within the budget and market we are shopping in. I feel a new striker will definitely be in before the start of the season and also a creative midfielder. A right back would also be a bonus. I also feel at least another 2 players will sign between the Wednesday game and the end of August. Would anybody be unhappy with 7 or 8 signings this window? I know it's taking time but we're not the only club. Most haven't concluded business yet. This is how windows pan out-It has always been the same. I'm surprised that anybody thinks any different.

Well if he's only 5 million then he'll be a bargain. Lets wait and see though.

Perhaps he has a release clause? Seriously-You won't get a striker who scored 20 goals last season for £5million otherwise. We've just paid that for a kid who only has 18 championship matches under his belt.

I would venture to suggest that ours was by far the best offer on the table to him (if indeed there were others), hence the deal being done so early. Do you really think that he wouldn't sign if we said we wanted £8 million for him, not 7? We were his preferred choice, be it because we were PL and/or because we were offering him the highest package. He wouldn't jeopardise that for the sake of £1million on a release clause.

That is not evidence. That simply shows how soppy we were. Now if DDID had shown us that, for example, we dropped £5k a week off our initial offer in return for a lower sell on clause, then I could live with it but to claim he wouldn't sign unless we took a hit on the sell on fee because its in a contract (supposedly) is little more than idle gossip. For me, this is further testimony of why transfer committees do not work and why real football should be in charge of these things, which thankfully seems to be the case moving forwards.

We are of course assuming that it is there. The point is not that it is there, more so that whoever was negotiating these clauses did not do a very good job, however it is dressed up. Why would the club give Gabby his contract that he's on? The bottom line is that we've had mash mellows negotiating on our behalf all the way through the Lerner era. Being a nice person and being a football negotiator simply do not mix. Shirt sales have improved though, so I'm led to believe. At the end of the day, a man like Levy, Wyness or even Doug Ellis would have better represented our club in negotiations than numptys like Fox, Faulkner, Reiley etc.

Dude Can you provide me the evidence that Gana wouldn't sign without that release clause in place? I'll get it then.

Same as my reason for why he picked us over Man City I have no evidence whatsoever that Southampton offered him a contract.

It's ironic that you don't know why he signed yet in the same post you think you know a "pretty accurate description" of the negotiations?

So why did he sign for the side who survived relegation by the skin of its teeth for the 4th successive season? At such an early stage in the window as well? I think It is you who underestimates/fails to grasp things.

Get what? If Gana had any kind of equal offers, he would not have signed for us so early in the window-Do you not understand that? It is similar to some of our targets this summer-They are waiting for other offers that may or may not come to fruition. I'm not confusing anything-I said I'd be happy with £12 million for the pair of them. The point is (which seems to continually fly over your head) is that there was no pressure to implement such a low release clause. Do you really, in your wildest of dreams think an extra million on a release clause would have put the kybosh on the deal? Think about what you're saying.

The Delph situation is entirely different and quite rare. Gana is not Delph. When people talk about understanding negotiations, they need to understand the difference between being in the driving seat (a la Delph) and being pretty keen to join a club in the English PL. The fact of the matter is that whoever accepted this low release clause has f###ed up-Lets stop suggesting anything otherwise. The whole transfer/signing up set up 12 months ago was appalling and it is very rare for release clauses to be implemented that are lower than the fee initially paid out. Assuming of course that we did actually pay more than the figure in the release clause.

Great So why not put a higher clause in Ganas then? Prey tell.

Well Bozby should have said that, To suggest that people aren't aware that negotiations take place is the kind of comment that I'd expect from a 10 year old. We were in the driving seat with Gana. If there was other interest, he wouldn't have signed so early in the window. As others have alluded to, we don't have to stick out for the figure written in the clause, we can accept a lower bid-To place a low release clause in is almost unheard of-Especially for someone unproven, coming over from France.

Correct and that is why I said we should accept a free transfer if an offer is on the table

So you're basically agreeing with my first post then?

If these foreign players had better offers, they would not have joined Villa. We were in the driving seat regarding negotiations. If (as transpired) we went down, we would not want to be stuck with a player on such high wages-Especially given there was no inckling of a takeover at the time. Placing a £5million release clause on a player that you would ideally like to get rid of makes no sense to me. Gana on the other hand will be earning championship wages next season and subsequently is not such a financial burden. There is little to be gained by selling him at a loss, especially when we would have been in a strong position during the negotiations.