QldVilla

21 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

There's a stark difference between a squad building policy which revolves around loan players, such as the one he inherited, and signing a current England international on loan to compliment a squad in the second year of the PL. I actually can't remember exactly how Purslow phrased it tbh, but I would much rather our CEO tweak his thinking in the face of evidence than be dogmatic, as I said. 

Maybe if asked about it now he would tell you why we have taken the view that one or two loan signings ain't that bad after all. Wouldn't you rather have all the information at hand before you get annoyed? Because signing Ross Barkley on loan is hardly an existential threat to the future of the club. 

Aside - we don't actually know whether we have an option. 

Rather than making assumptions that I’m annoyed, actually undertake some research, confirm what was said and comment from a position being informed.

The comments were made and all I stated was obviously that the policy had changed.

2 hours ago, Kiwivillan said:

When did Purslow say we will never make another a loan signing? I suspect he didn't and was perhaps the club wants to move away from too many loan signings. Do you have a link to the quote?

Barkley is phenomenal addition for the season. Can't imagine that anyone would think otherwise

Both Purslow and Smith made the comment in the interview the day after we won promotion from the Championship play off. It’s for all to see on YouTube. They said they would not make loans in the future to improve the players for them to go back to their home club without a buy clause inserted.

3 hours ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Really strange post. What suits them suits us. Would you prefer they stubbornly refuse to improve the squad even if they are at the limit of spending because Purslow said before we don't want to rely on loans?

Bearing in mind fans will complain about any petty old shit, you must realise you being the only person to take issue with this says a lot.

I made a one line comment that the policy had changed, others have taken me to task. The club can do what it believes is best for the team, but they obviously have changed tack on loans and that is their prerogative, but when they made it they were quite adamant. Asking for consistency in the leadership of the club isn’t a strange request, it’s the lack of consistency in policies that saw the club relegated over many seasons.

Just because you don’t understand the point I’m making, doesn’t mean you divert to me as complaining. The club had a policy, they changed it, I simply stated that it had changed, that’s not a complaint, it’s making a point.

3 hours ago, TheAuthority said:

I think you just want to be angry about something.

Based on?

That’s a simplistic view, but do tell? I made a one line comment that the club had changed it views on loans. It wasn’t an offhand comment by the club, they were quite adamant when the comment was made. All I have done is state that that policy had changed 12 months later. Everyday someone on this forum questions decisions by the club, but this topic is taboo...?.

5 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Didn't he start the first 3 games after he arrived? You could also point to Luiz, who is effectively only here on loan if Man City decide he is. With a nice chunk of change for developing him coming our way, at least.

I understand your point, but personally I would rather see the slightly less dogmatic approach they're now taking over loan signings as a positive.

I don’t agree with your point on Luiz, things change, Luiz May want to stay Moving forward. Drinkwater was an emergency signing. I also agree about a loan signing if right for the club then make it. But I’m sick of CEO’s/owners  making global statement at Villa and then not following through. I understand the sentiment at the time  and it was good to hear from the club, but it didn’t last long and probably never should have been said.
 

I also don’t believe Barkley was their first choice they wanted to sign an 8 but obviously not available for the price they were willing to pay. 

5 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

So Purslow said we didn’t want to loan players then a year later we have loaned a player.   He probably shouldn’t have said that. But why do you care so much? 

I want leadership from those who are running the club and I want them to say what they mean. I don’t want to see Global statements made as if policy and then change when it suits them.

I get it supporters don’t care, if the club is making the best decision then I’m supportive of it, but be honest. Anything else just makes you sound like a used car salesman.

6 hours ago, Jas10 said:

8 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Well actually it took them about 5 months. We signed Drinkwater on loan in January.

Different context, Drinkwater was a January short term signing, due to injury crisis and we couldn’t buy anybody, he wasn’t brought in as a first team starter.

8 hours ago, avfcDJ said:

Nothing wrong with a club changing it’s mind to suit a good opportunity. 
 

Btw, you’re suggesting we need to wait and see if it’s a good deal, perhaps you could do that too?

If the club wants to ‘change its mind’, that’s up to the club, but I prefer the club sending the same message, it’s changing it’s mind which got it into trouble the past decade. If your going to paraphrase, at least get the context right. No ones doubting the lads ability, but history tells us he’s not consistent through a season.

1 minute ago, Greenfly said:

I don't know, that was my interpretation. Either way, they were probably wise to realise that this could be a necessary signing, even if it's just to help us consolidate as a PL team.

Happy to be proven wrong, but consistency has been his problem week in week out for several seasons.

1 minute ago, avfcDJ said:

So the club should stick to its guns and miss out on a good opportunity through stubbornness?

Is Martin O’Neil in charge?

I didn’t say that. I’m simply pointing they were quite public with that acclimation and 12 months later it’s not relevant. The end of the season will tell us whether it was a good opportunity, he has lacked consistency his whole career.

1 minute ago, Greenfly said:

Their stance was to do with developing players for other teams, if I remember correctly. Barkley is very well established by now, so that's not really an issue. Arguably he can help us just as much as we can help him.

I’ll bite, it wasn’t developing players, it was we wouldn’t loan players, improve them and then have to give them back without a buy clause. It was in reference to Mings, Tuanzebe and Abraham.

3 hours ago, avfcDJ said:

Would you have turned down Danny Ings?

Personally I think Barkley is perfect for us, strong on the ball, good range of passing, links well with other players and also is fairly tall and robust - something we lack with our three current midfielders.

Perfect!

Not a fan of Barkley, just my opinion. At the end of the day Smith sees something in him, happy for him to prove me wrong. It is a definite upgrade to our midfield, but will he be consistent over the course of a season to make the difference we need? Time will tell.
 

PS only took 12 months for the club to change its views about loan signings.

Really not interested in either, one is made of glass and injured most of the time, the other is on high wages and outside our wage budget. Just don’t see either happening.

1 hour ago, Philosopher said:

That's what Jack does when played in the middle. Dictates the play.

He’s a different type of player to Grealish.

Doesn’t matter anyway as Smith has said there’s no truth to the rumour.

6 minutes ago, rayk said:

I totally agree....it was the comparison to Bacuna I was questioning.

Sorry mate, missed the Bacuna comparison.

A lot of big clubs were interested in him a few years ago, but did his knee and all went cold. Was a slow recovery as knees are, but close to his best again.

Thinking of him, Luiz and McGinn in a midfield three...big upgrade.

10 minutes ago, rayk said:

You’re kidding right?

 

He’s a very good player, but he doesn’t necessarily stand out, but makes the team tick, he’s a conductor, something we’ve been lacking for a long time.

Does this mean Purslow and Smith have gone back on their, ‘we won’t loan any players again, improve them, only to go back to their parent club?’  Does this mean they will be wanting a buy clause at the end of the season? Not been a big fan of Barkley but has been playing well under Lampard.

Will be interesting to see how this develops.

34 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said:

Odd how you say that, yet there have been no links to this at all. Yes as fans we all say that we need one, but how have you come to conclusion the club think that’s a priority?

Because we’re short for quality in the midfield, we were linked to a quality CM earlier in the year and a couple of journalists have hinted that the club is interested in an 8.

I’m wondering whether the club needs to move the dead wood on and clear the wages, prior to signing any new players.

Still don’t believe Rashica is coming, seems to be a new CM as a priority and possibly a new striker.

Milner would be great to have around the club for his experience and leadership and could still do a job for a season, but would have to be a free or nominal fee. Saying that, don’t see it happening unless it’s for Leeds.

Like most have said, quite apparent we need an upgrade in the CM position. Our bench is still bare and we need someone who can come on late in The game and have the ability to change things. We’re not far away but still need another two signings that can make a difference in the wing and CM.

11 hours ago, VillaChris said:

Most journos seem to think we're still in for another striker. Less talk of CM or CB although I see we've been again linked to Sanson and Cyprien from France, perhaps one of those would be a season loan with option to buy next summer. Both are decent players. Cyprien is an attacking midfielder so think he'll be a plan b if we can't pull off Rashica, 1 in 4 scoring record for Nice so pretty decent record.

I think we need another CM but has to be an improvement on what we already have, Sanson could be that player. I like Cyprien, but Sanson is better defensively, will be interesting couple of weeks.

I still believe there’s the possibly of two more signings the club wants to make, Rashica and a CM ( the club was linked to Sanson earlier in the year). If we move on other players then the possibility of further additions, but think it’s another 2.

I think they can come, just can’t work ie training, play.