zak

Hourihane isn't a vill player, he's left on a free, where we pay some of his first years wages

I commented on this previously. He's said his fairwell to the club. He is only still a vill player by technicality. This should be moved to off topic.

I wouldnt bother with Hourihane, his contract is up after the loan, so he'll never be a villa player again. He has already said his fairwell

Ummm the Friedel that went on and did 4 more seasons at Spurs?

I would! Andy Townsend. The reason I support Villa!

TL;DR

Iv joined as I play anyway. Annoyed I have Benrhama and not buendia but is what it is

not sure Southampton would be that keen on £25k. Think they need at least 1 million!

Yeah, makes sense for a strategy for making top 4 as we will never be able to match them in player skill. Can be much harder working though.

Great, well i am a "certain level" whats that got to do with being a good enough CM for villa. In your original post you put up some parameters to infer certain players where good enough to play for Villa. However if a player is an International or a Champions league player, or has played in games against very talented players that does not automatically deem them good enough to play for Villa.

Also in your original post you said, our players are international players and therefore should be deemed good enough for Villa. like McGinn plays for Scotland so is good enough. I like McGinn and I'm not saying he's not good enough, however being an international for a team like Scotland doesn't make you good enough for Villa. There are many international players who are not good enough for Villa currently, including Scotland Players

This makes alot of sense.....

Was just looking for this to say wasn't going to play this year so all good.

He responded to this saying he knows nothing

I really like JWP. Then Bailey, then Alvarez. And a really good DM who's goodish on the ball

This. Journalists don't care about anything but clicks

It's not naïve at all and I used a fairly clear example of why it doesn't work like that. You'd have to think massive companies (like Liverpool in the Andy Carrol case) were poor at negotiating. Which I would suggest is naïve. Liverpool could have gone elsewhere. They wanted Carrol. Newcastle didn't want to sell him unless for an astronomical figure.

Nah man, I disagree. If theyd accept 50m then they'd accept 50m. Unless we were really bad at negotiating. Some things are more expensive in richer areas for many reasons but football is a fully open market. There are 1000s of players Villa could buy, they don't have to buy WP. If you wanted to sell your car for £50k and I came to buy it and had just won the lottery. If you said £70k, well there are many other cars for sale and I would go elsewhere and you would have lost out by not selling your car. Or you'd hope I could at least convince you I was going elsewhere, if I had any negotiation skills. So would you sell your car for 50k to me? Yeah you would. The media's only interest is revenue, talking about their local teams or the bigger teams gets more views and thus more as revenue. There's no (hidden) agenda

Sure but my point would be that Newcastle would have said he wasn't for sale unless it's a crazy price (35m) and Liverpool decided he was the only guy they wanted so we're happy to pay over the odds. It's a free market where Liverpool could have gone for any player. It just doesn't make sense that they would accept 25m but because Liverpool now have money they'd only accept 35m from them. Liverpool could have walked away and you presume they would have feigned that in negotiations. Then Newcastle would have lost the sale of their player for the money they wanted

Hi Tom, I actually talk about this above but you would have been writing your message. I don't think this can possibly be true but happy to debate it as itd be a big part of conversation if Jack goes

There's a few things like the above which are often said which I find odd. That's just not really how an open market works. If a team value a player at a certain amount they will sell him at that amount, regardless of if the buying team just made alot of money. Now there are times when a team sell a very expensive player and then seem to buy other players for way more than they should cost that I'm sure people would mention. But this would just be the selling team not wanting to sell and so putting a ridiculous price on their player and the buying team deciding that despite it being ridiculous they have just lost their best player and can pay over the odds for the replacement. So if WB are looking for £35m for Leon Bailey and then AV sell Jack. WB arnt going to up their price, as AV will walk away and look elsewhere. Then WB wouldn't even get what they wanted. However if AV sell grealish and decide they need Ward Prowse but AV have already been quoted something ridiculous like 60m. AV might end up paying that now they believe they really need them. Also there's no conspiracy that the media are trying to do things to help the top 6 and not the other teams. I.e by unsettling Grealish but not unsettling players AV want. They are just trying to get "clicks" and Grealish going to Man City will get 100x more clicks than Matty Cash going to AV. Anyway hope Grealish stays!

Sure, i get this, but if you assume the team who will sign that penalty taking player already have a reliable Penalty taker, him scoring a load of penalties doesn't really add anything to your team as youd have scored just as many penalties anyway.

I knew I couldn't go the whole season without losing. With 8 teams going straight into QFs there's not too much difference between finishing 1st and finishing 8th.

Lucky to score so high, but iv been holding 2 DSTs since week 9. Rams and Bills play NE, NYJ and NE during playoffs