paul514

3 hours ago, WallisFrizz said:

Re the wages...

If we’re going up against teams such a Fulham and West Ham for players, it has already been discussed how London clubs have an automatic advantage (especially if the player is already based there). Our reputation is not what it was and will take a while to rebuild so they probably are going to have to offer big bucks to convince players to come.  
 

Our wage structure is low which has served us well during the pandemic but realistically if we want to maintain PL status, it will need to rise. 

Fair enough if they are a high profile player we want (they have high wages already) or if they are of high quality with lots of other clubs willing to pay the wages.

We are talking about players in an inferior league, at an inferior club, looking for their first big move with wages much lower.

Also please take into account wages are what get clubs stuck in future transfer markets, 3.5m a year wages for a player coming in from the championship replicated to other players coming in will greatly reduce future budgets, also where does the contract when the player does well go? if you give them 40 and it goes well give them 60 or 70 not 70 and take it to 100 plus.

They are also easier to shift to a new club if you haven't gone crazy on the initial wage.

3 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

"Going to go for", or resigned to getting as the others have either said no or are too expensive?

Perhaps but if we had bidded for said players its likely the agents, media, players or maybe even clubs would have leaked it to get better terms, higher bids or other clubs to bid.

IMO

25 minutes ago, jacketspuds said:

If we are signing Watkins as the only striker this window, for a £25m fee and £70k / week salary you are taking a massive risk.

I get a tiny niggling feeling we are going to go for all the lesser players....

Eduoard - Watkins
Aarons - Cash
 

6 hours ago, dudevillaisnice said:

Meant to add Eduoard too 

Fair enough then 

I can’t believe people still believe he will sign, if he was going to he would have already.

50 minutes ago, dudevillaisnice said:

I see what you mean but maybe Smith isn’t comfortable with signings like that after last season (A huge turnover) or he just can’t attract them, who knows. I think there was something in our interest in Trippier but why would he come here? Hence Cash who I don’t think was first choice in my opinion. I do agree though, we need to be more ambitious. As another poster said Cash, Watkins and Swift would be the best part of around £75m.. 

Those three are 40m not 75m!

1 hour ago, Delphinho123 said:

I can’t see a situation where Smith wouldn’t be interested in Rico Henry. If he’s available for around 10m, we’ll be in the mix. 

I don’t get the love affair of some with this guy but he’s got to be better than Taylor not to mention much younger.

All this buy players from the championship and get relegated is bull they are either good enough or they aren’t.

It’s called scouting.

I want Aarons as he seems like a sure thing to me but I’m not going to write this guy off until I’ve seen him play in our team for a while.

1 hour ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Second time I’ve seen this. Do you honestly think we’d be the only club that tried to sign Aarons?

No idea, what I do know is if you don't try and buy them you don't get them.

1 hour ago, TrentVilla said:

It's an interesting one.... I saw a lot of him in his early days at Forest when he was playing midfield and used to say to my mate who is a Forest fan that he would be a better RB, he never agreed. Obviously he ended up making the move there and it suits him, he has great energy and is very attacking as you'd expect from a former midfield. I'm not quite sure how that would work in a side set up like ours and I'm not sure about him defensively at PL level.

My lad was with Forest for a while so I used to see Cash at the training ground and he is a good guy, committed to the game if a little flash.

He wouldn't be my first pick for a RB this summer, that would be Aarons who is I think much better but he is a good player and I can see why we are interested.

I don't believe he was actively seeking a move and I'm not convinced Forest are eager to sell one of their best players, they don't need the money.

 

Id be sad if we got Cash instead of stumping up a bit extra for Aarons

1 hour ago, Zhan_Zhuang said:

Must admit, I had to Google him.

Guilbert out then?

More like Elmo

Just now, rodders0223 said:

Actual footage of Birmingham City transfer budget?

Just now, dudevillaisnice said:

I think Guilbert is fine personally, certainly more pressing areas that need addressing. That said I don’t understand why we would offer £10m when it had been rejected before (albeit by another club). Not entirely sure on this story. 

Perhaps it is straight cash and no add ons?

Just now, CarryOnVilla said:

Seeing as Matty Cash is to my knowledge the first player this window we have apparently bid for I thought it would be worth adding a thread for him.

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/aston-villa-10m-bid-rejected-18847570

25m is a serious bid throw it in and see the response, it will probably cost more but you have to start somewhere.

First time this window I have seen a paper say we have actually bid for someone 10m for Matty Cash rejected they want 15m

Waiting to sign someone 

1 hour ago, zab6359 said:

Fair enough....won't accept anything under 30 mil future England LB!!

Well if the club thinks it can get it after all he would be a replacement for a 50m sale I just can't see us getting a lesser player than him with that money and a pretty decent chance it is an improvement

Alex Grimaldo from Benfica is apparently available for 30m a vastly superior player.

1 hour ago, zab6359 said:

Targett isn't good enough for Leicester this is garbage clickbait!

Probably but there isn't much else to talk about so we may as well chew the cud over this hypothetical 

30 minutes ago, Junxs said:

I don't understand why some of our fans are happy for us to let Targett go for 25m, and at the same time happy for us to sign championship players for the same price?

Surely a good solid season in the premier league makes him a more valuable asset than someone who's had a decent season in the championship?

Targett was one of our best players last season, will only be better this season and still relatively young. I've also heard a few pundits saying he should have been in the England squad.

Why do we never rate our own players or always look for flaws in them?

 

If we could make a significant profit on him then I don’t see why we wouldn’t let him go he’s not a stand out player and say 25m would buy a replacement at least as good.

2 hours ago, troon_villan said:

Tim Allen looks different.

13 minutes ago, Mazrim said:

Next week it will all kick off. I have a feeling. Relax. 

People said that last week 

2 hours ago, Delphinho123 said:

Read a tweet just that Leicester were in for Matt Targett. Can’t see it myself! 

It was in one of the papers tonight.

If they want him for significantly more than what we paid for him I wouldn't be against it.