Czarnikjak

I don't think it's that. Sky just simply won't to maximise their return on the investment. They will simply look at the viewing figures. More people are interested in watching Arsenal then Villa. More viewers equals more advertising revenue for Sky.

After few good performances we are probably due a bad one, also Spurs will be fired up to react to the manner of their derby loss. With that in mind, I would take a draw. 1:1 would keep us in top ten and keep the momentum going.

We have an option of another year on him, so it's in our hands.

Only once in his premier league career spanning 7 seasons he scored more than 12 goals. History tells you he is unlikely to stay fit all season and score more than 12 goals.

The "greedy owners" as you call them, don't overspend atm anyway. Glazers and Kronkes don't put their own money into their clubs. Man Utd spend big cause they have big revenue and can legitimately spend big without any help of their owners. Two types of clubs overspend( now or in the past), clubs owned by vanity driven owners (City, Chelsea) and smaller clubs owned by ambitious owners trying to better themselves (Everton, Villa). Salary Cap like you proposing ( salary capped at let's say 70% of revenue with Luxury Tax on top) would have no effect on the likes of ManU as they are already ran in sustainable way. It would also be unlikely to deter the likes of City from overspending as they can afford it. It would only negatively affect teams like us and Everton and make it even more difficult to break up the established elite.

They dominate in terms of possession, passing accuracy and number of shots. Maybe that's what he means.

What this graph doesn't show is the percentage of successful pressures. Ings's is very low at about 12%, Watkins is at over 30%. So yes, Ings runs a lot chasing the ball, but is not very effective at it.

It would hold them back for now, while its still in place. Potential switch to Salary Cap with Luxury Tax would open the door for them to spend though. Let's hope we can keep the Saudis out of them game from selfish Villa's perspective

Oh well, that was dire. I don't think we had a single shot in the 2nd half.

Poor Swinkels at LB again….strong lineup overall.

Can you make the survey more granular? There's big difference between finishing 11th and 17th, it's in one bucket current

You are nailing every point here. Massive effort required to keep the income evenly distributed. It might even be a loosing battle, you are essentially fighting against capitalist instincts. At the end of the day most people in charge of big clubs are here to make money, they will do everything possible to safeguard more revenue for themselves, including making selfish and short-sighted decisions. Let's not pretend Villa are above that. If we were one of the Big 6 clubs at the moment, I am sure Purslow would try the same, push for changes benefiting us and stopping anybody else from breaking into the establishment.

500

He is not eligible. As per Wikipedia entry: The Football Association Youth Challenge Cup is an English football competition run by The Football Association for under-18 sides. Only those players between the age of 15 and 18 on 31 August of the current season are eligible to take part. It is dominated by the youth sides of professional teams, mostly from the Premier League, but attracts over 400 entrants from throughout the country.

I agree, he is, but what's the use of his finishing abilities if he's not getting any chances to score?

Sure, but that would mean that all the money they injected so far was badly spent, project was not going well and we were being mismanaged. If that was the case, I would probably want them out of the club They're private investors, not Qatari state, they won't keep injecting money forever not expecting return. Might as well be run in sustainable way now, just in case they need to get out for whatever reason.

We cannot be certain, but it's a strong hint in my mind: Overdraft/Loan instead of cash injection together with Purslows publicly stated objective of being self sustainable. Personally I would be very happy if we don't take a dollar more from NSWE and are run in sustainable manner from now on. Even if it means less expensive signings in the future and more reliance on academy.

Revenue we bring in plus proceeds from player sales. Our revenue this season should be around £175-180m, not far off the likes of West ham, Everton and Leicester. Leicester showed it's possible to compete for European places and be sustainable. Looking at the developments of last couple of months it looks like NSWE are done injecting more of their own cash and we switching to self sustainable model. You might not be aware, but NSWE not injected any more cash this season and club taken a loan from Barclays instead to help with cashflow.

I second that. Looks like NSWE are done spending their own money at the club and expect it to be sustainable from now on, which both fair and sensible. I would expect any future transfers to be funded by money generated by the club itself, both from commercial/broadcast revenue and player sales. Aka what Leicester have been doing successfuly for last few years.

It's funny actually, he used "trust the process" phrase few times during this interview. I thought that phrase was patented by Arteta and Arsenal.

Fines and points deductions are some of the forms of punishment available to Premier League. The thing is, nobody in the history of Premier League was officially found to break their Profit and Sustainability rules, so it's hard to judge how hard they would go after us. City are currently under investigation for possible historical breaches, will see if they are found guilty. Everton almost certainly went over the limit last season and looks like they were told off. They couldn't sign anybody of value this summer and had to offload players due to FFP. Bigger problem is, if you said f to ffp, you wouldn't be allowed into European Competitions by UEFA, which defeats the whole purpose of spending big in the first place.

We clearly needed more cash to operate. Otherwise why take the Barclays loan? You are right to point out that our owners could have injected the cash themselves, but for whatever reason decided not to (my guess is they want the club to be self sustainable from now on). I was only responding to one poster who claimed that we were "loaded with cash" for January spending, when we are not.

Ok, it's clearly down to the quality of opposition and the amount of ball they have. Everton game was after Chelsea game BTW. I think comparing his pressures with JJ and our other players in those matches would be a good assessment of how hard he works/runs

This stats you linking are for last 365 days, not this season.

I would have Ndombele over JJ or Dougie -100% Moura is a tricky one, you are correct. If we play Son on the left, and it's between Moura and Bailey on the right, it's 50/50. I haven't seen enough of Bailey yet to say he will be definetly better than Moura.