MrBlack

Some similarities to how good and bad C. Ronaldo was when he first started playing in the PL from a performance perspective. Sadly, AEG is 6 years older than Cristiano was at the same performance level. The mentality that AEG has shown suggests he will not overcome the bad parts of his game, and is rapidly runnning out of time to deliver on his potential. Hopefully he proves me wrong as there's definitely a PL player hiding in their if he puts his mind to it. Would keep as a backup fpr next season and if no sign of improvement its time to move on.

It is... so.... maybe Marv wanted to get his pic in before we signed him for the likes. Which means... Wednesday is the day! In other news, 1+1 = 3

That second tweet, assuming its true, makes 90% of that daily mail article complete bollocks. Shocking "news"paper, basically on a par with twitter gossip for its reliability. Aside from this non scandal, great to see the women's team expanding with international players. Definitely a sign that our owners are looking at the whole picture to make this club great again (excuse the trumpism) and not just using villa as a quick profit maker.

He played DM in front of a back 4 for Girona mostly. This includes the game he starred in against Real Madrid. As such, this just backs up your comments. Edit: that video shows his Girona role ^ Think he's capable of playing most anywhere across the midfield, but feel like the deep lying playmaker is made for him. A robust tackling DM to break up play and lay it off to him if playing 4-2-3-1 ideally, but totally capable of being the sole DM when playing 4-1-4-1. He'll end up being one of those DMs that scores the odd worldy, and gets a lot of key contributions but maybe not so many assists.

Arguably not luck at all, and exactly what financial fair play was intending to achieve. Effectively, any club should be able to survive an unexpected downturn in fortunes. It doesn't in general, but may have helped us significantly due to our specific circumstances. Because we were starting from such a small base, the FFP restrictions prevented us from spending that much on proven players, primarily due to wages rather than signing fees. The result is the unexpected (massive) downturn impacts us less severely than it would have if FFP hadn't stopped us blowing our load. Also, our owners seem loaded to the hilt. Quite possible Arsenal's owners other businesses may have been more severely impacted by covid and Arsenal as a club a make a lot more money from match days than the average.

You're right, i think. It's the current year ending 2020, and next year ending 2021 that will combine, however, I dont know if the year ending 21 is Dec 21 calendar year, April 21 tax year, or Aug 21 end of season?

Definitely not happening now, jinxed it. Also, lock incoming

Really like that! Would be very pleased if that was the away kit.

Tempted to buy one if the sponsor peels off, always look better without a sponsor

Quite spectacular. You can take some of those stats in isolation and say they're a result of the fact we were a team playing counter attacking low possession football, but put them all together and it's truly astounding how good he was this season in a well below average team.

Up to 40m I'd buy, over I'd pass. Sadly, I think Chelsea would want more, probably 45m+

Grealish is sh*t, sell him. Edit: not sure i have the reputation to carry the sarcasm so I'll clarify, joking aside, those stats and jonjon's commentary on his attitude have pretty much sold me on Watkins. Hope it happens! (And we dont sell Grealish)

Yes, would welcome some nostalgia, if only because we were a decent team back in those days. Although, Wimbledon, Ipswich and Oldham would do well to get to the PL next season, given they're not in the Championship. I think Sheff Wed have a point deduction hanging over them too so can't see them making the playoffs next season.

Some interesting info there... Also can't believe only 7 teams have currently been in the top flight for 10 or more consecutive years. Wouldn't mind seeing blackburn, sheff wed and derby returning next season, replacing palace, brighton and Fulham. Would have a nice old school feel to the league

I do hate sky so effing much. Assuming their other report about Watkins having an £18m release clause is correct, why even bother putting them in a single post with a combined fee. No way they value Benrahma at £32m. This is clearly made up bollox to appear sensationalist and get clikbait. If they can offer a bet that they both go to the same club at the same time via sky bet, ooooo, lets watch the money roll in. Scum bags

I love the idea of Guilbert sitting there bored out of his brains, liking tweets left right and centre knowing it will have people in a spin. Strikes me as the kind of guy that's a bit of a wind up merchant (in a good way) so not sure if I'll read much into what he does.

I agree to an extent, but given the intensity and short timeframe of next season, having a bulky squad will be a necessity. And if we have to do that by keeping players we ideally want rid of long term, so we can minimise the number of incoming, then that is the way forward for me. My minimum incoming is 4, if we lose the 5 I suggested. Lose any more and we will need to replace them =more turnover.

We can only register 25 anyway, although Davis, Vassilev and Luiz wouldn't count in that 25 as they were 21 or under at the start of the year. I'd also remove Lansbury and Jota, leaving you with 19 registered, plus 3 that can play unregistered. Sign 6 and you have your 25 with the only turnover being to players that played less than 3 matches between them. Edit: I'd be happy with 4 if they are all proven quality, but given 1 is looking like Watkins, I think we still need those 4 capital Q players you mention.

That's the biggest worry for me. Only have to look how well Sinclair did there to know that a player can be a god North of the border and terrible below it. That said, it's not a given and there are examples where players have transferred well. I'm unsure and definitely not convinced at £40m. For the £25m that has been rumoured I think we'll struggle to get any better and would take it, but with us looking like we're going for Watkins, I would not be happy with just those two as our striking options until Wes returns. Its basically like having two Wesley's next year, instead of the one we had this year. Two rolls of the dice instead of 1. Which is not good value for what could be over £50m.

Brentford fan on this very forum has explained how different he is to Hogan. Not only are their playing styles very different, but the buying circumstances are very different also. If he fails it won't be because he is Hogan mk2. Similarities end at them both having played for Brentford

Missed that, but if that's the case, then having him as a rotational striker and an option across the front 3, for £18m, is ridiculously good business. If we plan to use him as the main striker we need to pray he makes the step up and quickly. That would be a big concern for me.

I wouldn't sell Trez, Sama or Nakamba. Way too much change and we repeat the mistake that was forced on us last season by choice. But if we do , then you replace them with like for like equivalents that cost the same as we sell them for. The £100m+ (I expect it to be more like 120-140) of net spend goes on the players we need.

Thinking about this, I reckon Dean would be buying him as a winger. That's where he played under Dean, and would make sense that we're stkill looking for an out and out striker at the higher end of the market.

The point is that those 4 signings push 4 of our first teamers on to the bench. Yes, our first team is only just good enough for this league as it stands but improving nearly half of the outfield players and having the existing first teamers that were just about good enough on the bench means we are in a better position. The current first team crop that get replaced can come on in the 70th minute to do a job when our new signings have us 3-0 up. Wasting money on squad players is a terrible choice this season.

I agree, it doesn't in the short term. But when you're a multi billionaire and the opportunity cost of doing something you might consider in the future is as low as its ever going to be, you might consider it. Not like there is much money to be made elsewhere in the world at the moment either.... its not as wild a suggestion as it may first appear.