Czarnikjak

It's not negativity against Ings. The point people are trying to make is that when everyone is fit, one of Buendia Bailey or Ings would need to be benched (unless we play some sort of 4-4-2 formation which I believe is not best for our midfield). Out of these 3 i would bench Ings and play 4-3-3

We can’t, not until January.

Not really, our xG was only about 1.5 We lost as they have £100m striker and we made silly mistakes at the back.

An apology would suffice, no need to sack anybody.

True that. Even better example is Harry Kane. He was loaned out 4 times before making break through at Spurs. You really can't make a judgement about players future at this age. One thing is guaranteed, there will be some players from our academy that will never make it, even though big things are expected of them ( and the opposite, some will make it even though we don't expect them to).

Purslow said they needed to make a marquee signing for the academy to show young players and their parents that Villa are serious about youth development. Barry was perfect for that. Coming from Barcelona, with big reputation. I think he already played his role for us, helping us to kick start the academy and sign dozens of talented players from all over the country, even if he doesn’t make it himself not a big loss. As to why it’s not happening for him right now? Who knows, bad attitude, bad luck, bad manager, could by any combination of reasons.

That is true. But if you follow your logic, in this system we played yesterday there's no place for Buendia and Bailey. So did we sign THEM to be bench warmers? When everyone is fit, one of new signings will need to be benched unless we play some sort of 4-4-2 formation. And I see us stronger with 3 in midfield. For me, personally, Ings would be the one to bench.

Yes, that's true, and we haven't paid £30m for him to seat on the bench. In hypothetical scenario, where 2 up front doesn't work for us and Ings doesn't perform, it might make it difficult for Smith to drop him to the bench. We saw that last season with Barkley. He was crap for many games, yet Smith was persevering with him and kept playing him. There's big pressure on to keep your "big" players playing.

Sadly he had a really bad game against Chelsea. You can see how much a forward like Watkins brings to our general play, Ings just can’t Give you that. Although he is the more clinical finisher. tbh, in those 4 games I don’t think Ings contributed enough to our play. He scored a pen and THAT scissor kick, not much else. If we have to bench someone to fit Bailey, Watkins and Buendia in the team, I would bench him.

It is not straight forward. Last year we had 3 different teams broadly speaking : 1. U18 league team ( without best under 18 players who were part of U23 league team) 2. U23 league team ( over 18 players and the best of under 18) 3. FA Youth Cup team ( all best under 18 players)

Will find out more about Chelsea today, when they come against top opposition But I have been very impressed with them so far. They mauled Crystal Palace, not letting them have a single shot on target. Brushed aside Arsenal like they were not even there. Got a draw at Liverpool playing most of the game with 10 men. What's not to be impressed with?

I was thinking the same. 4-3-3 with Ghazi dropping to the bench. But watching smith's press conference yesterday i have no idea anymore. He was adamant that he has no intention of playing Watkins or Ings out wide...only through the middle together. If this is the case, ghazi might start LW and Bailey RW. Leaving only 2 in midfield.

Interesting proposal for a reform of English football pyramid by Fair Game organisation : https://www.fairgameuk.org/about Part of their Manifesto : THE FAIR GAME SOLUTION • Abolition of parachute and solidarity payments. • 25% of The Premier League TV rights both domestic and international - and new income streams such as streaming - goes to the rest of the pyramid and independent football organisations such as the FSA, PFA, LMA (up from 14% currently - note to properly tackle the cliff edge between Premier League and the Championship this proportion would have to be significantly higher). • The Introduction of the Sustainability Index as a measure to distribute funds fairly. This total pot is then split two ways: • 20% is given as baseline funding to clubs to spend in whatever way they see fit. • 80% split dependent on a club’s sustainability category rating (30% unrestricted; 70% on capex and community projects that can be either rolled over or backdated five years and should explicitly include investment in women’s football). To ensure cliff edges rise consistently, each division’s split of this money needs to be: • 46% Championship • 24% League One • 13% League Two • 7% National League • 3.5% National League North and South • 2% Women’s Super League • 1% Women’s Super League 2 (note: WSL divisions only have 12 clubs) Assuming every club reaches the highest standards on the Sustainability Index, this would give: • A category 1 Championship club not in receipt of parachute payments £13.91m an uplift of £8.81m • A category 1 League One club £7.26m an uplift of £6.65m • A category 1 League Two club £3.93m an uplift of £3.33m • A category 1 National League £2.12m – when they previous received nothing • A category 1 National League N & S club £1.06m • A category 1 WSL club £724,000; and • A category 1 WSL2 club £362,000

My previous post might have come accross defeatist, but I am trying to stay realistic. Not only is the system rigged against us, but we also started from very low level after Lerners and Dr Tony's exploits. In last 11 years, 43 out of 44 CL spots went to Sky6 teams...this is a sobering start if you hoping on us breaking the top 4 anytime soon.

I don't read it as breaking the top 4. It's all about sustainable success. They will hope of course to occasionally make the top 4, but to stay in it year in year out is nigh on impossible in next 10 years, unless some seismic change happens in European football

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall Purslow or NSWE at any point saying that the objective is to break into the top 4. The only quotes i can find are that the objective is to bring "sustainable success" and to "regularly challenge for europe" Very diffent to breaking into top 4.

We have "net spend" cash this transfer window, contrary to popular belief. See my summary post few pages back (in ffp thread). Part of it might be to cover this transfer window cash outflow and the rest to cover operational expenses until next big pay check from Premier League arrives.

Novelty wears of very quickly. We don't know, if after 10 years of success and participation in CL every season, Villa would fill 50k stadium in some meaningless CL group game. Tickets are not cheap mind you. £70 quid or so.

Definitely not a Def Con 1 situation, but it might indicate that the point where the club is expected to be self sufficient is coming. Purslow always said that the objective was for the club to be sustainable, but the date was never put on it. NSWE could have provided the club with interest free loan or capital injection but decided not to. Which is fair enough, their money their decision. I’m still optimistic for the future under NSWE.

It won’t be quite that much, I think. Merit payments, paid in May are £20m for 11th position ( £2m more or less for each position up or down). Domestic equal share paid in August 2022 is £34.4m Is it secured against any other income? I skimped quickly through the loan notice and only these two stood out.

I am not sure of the significance of registering it against AVFC and not NSWE, I wouldn’t think it makes big difference. What’s interesting is that the loan seems to be secured not only against 21/22 merit payments ( which are paid in May) but also against 22/23 Equal share payments. Am I getting it right? this would suggest, larger, longer term loan.

Barkley was an expensive disaster. No harm no foul? His "loan trial" cost us £11m that season. For comparison grealish cost us £6.5m in 20/21 and Watkins £10m Barkley was by far our most expensive player on the books last season.

Great, so now we have PSG president, who is also a president of ECA ( European clubs association), crafting with uefa new set of FFP rules to replace the existing ones... What could possibly go wrong?

Good job we have Christian Purslow in charge who once, whilst in charge of Liverpool, described himself as "Fernando Torres of finance"

Such a random signing…