Speculation Transfer Speculation (Winter 2014)

[terrytini]

When MON left I was one of the few that totally blamed Lerner.  I even called the Radio about it for the 1st and only time.  To me Randy had pulled the plug at the worst time, just as the trad top 4 was breaking up, and when we had a good Manager (dont all jump in I know thats not the universal view).  I thought Randy was also going back onj his word  - via the General - to us about his ambition.

 

Als oI couldn't see the point of a billionaire owner if he didn't spend like one.

 

But now it seems pretty clear to me that give or take a few million here and there - I am not an accountant - Rl is doing what HE considers sustainable.

 

Who am I to say he shouldn't ?

Edited January 27, 2014 by terrytini

[foreveryoung]

Bent wasn't a good signing. For that price multiple quality players could've been brought in that would've both helped the club stay up and helped in the long term. He was a waste of money.

Bull! He kept us in the Premierhsip that season. As I remember he was quality when he first joined us, maybe because Houllier knew how to use a poacher. 18 Million was nothing compared to us falling out of the Premiership, which would have cost us more than 18 million over time, cause we would probably still be there!!

[bobzy]

Darren Bent was a panic buy that could've killed us.  He scored goals, and his movement off the line is/was superb, but he contributed almost entirely nothing to the team as a whole.

 

We stayed up, which was the most important outcome I suppose (somehow Q.P.R. managed to avoid getting messed up over bringing in Samba in the most dodgy deal of forever), but to hail him as some sort of great signing is ridiculous.  As LondonLax says, no resale value, monster wages and a vastly overinflated price tag in the first place.  We're still seeing the downsides of this sort of spending - 3 years on.  Crazy.

Edited January 27, 2014 by bobzy

[LondonLax]

 

Bent wasn't a good signing. For that price multiple quality players could've been brought in that would've both helped the club stay up and helped in the long term. He was a waste of money.

Bull! He kept us in the Premierhsip that season. As I remember he was quality when he first joined us, maybe because Houllier knew how to use a poacher. 18 Million was nothing compared to us falling out of the Premiership, which would have cost us more than 18 million over time, cause we would probably still be there!!

 

 

You can't know that we would have been relegated if we had signed different players with that money so you can't claim it is a truism and then justify the Bent signing because of that false premise. 

[The Fun Factory]

Yeah but you could say the Bent money was from the Milner sale 6 months previous.  Had Milner still been at Villa to give Bent  the ammo to score goals it could have been a different story. What was even worse was having Ireland as a makeweight in the deal, we could have squeezed city at least another 8 mil out of that and not wasted all those wages on him. 8 million each on Curtis Davies and Nige Reo-Coker are worst crimes I think.

[samjp26]

I think what people are miffed about (and rightly so), isn't that we haven't signed the kind of players they themselves want, but that we haven't signed the player(s) Lambert wants himself. He said he has been targeting players for the number 10 role yet deals for the targets can't happen because of finances.

That is what is annoying, that our manager isn't being backed to sign the player(s) he wants to improve our team.

Edited January 27, 2014 by samjp26

[bobzy]

People seeing it that way is fine.  If this was the summer, I'd be much more concerned as well.

 

Not paying over the odds for a gamble in January though?  Not too fussed.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I think we need to take a bit of a gamble, or at least bring someone in to offer something different. Our home form is atrocious and we really, really can't rely on everyone else being completely shit.

[Rovers13]

Bent wasn't a good signing. For that price multiple quality players could've been brought in that would've both helped the club stay up and helped in the long term. He was a waste of money.

Bull! He kept us in the Premierhsip that season. As I remember he was quality when he first joined us, maybe because Houllier knew how to use a poacher. 18 Million was nothing compared to us falling out of the Premiership, which would have cost us more than 18 million over time, cause we would probably still be there!!

I hate this argument " we would've been relegated." It should've been spent better, better players would've kept Villa up as well and easily could've been found at that price.

[Foxy1]

Darren Bent was a panic buy that could've killed us.  He scored goals, and his movement off the line is/was superb, but he contributed almost entirely nothing to the team as a whole.

 

We stayed up, which was the most important outcome I suppose (somehow Q.P.R. managed to avoid getting messed up over bringing in Samba in the most dodgy deal of forever), but to hail him as some sort of great signing is ridiculous.  As LondonLax says, no resale value, monster wages and a vastly overinflated price tag in the first place.  We're still seeing the downsides of this sort of spending - 3 years on.  Crazy.

You're talking about 2 different seasons there.

[Tezvilla]

10 new pages. No new speculation. Well done

[VillanousOne]

Saying that Lambert hasn't been backed to sign the players he wants is a fair assumption but still an assumption

 

Surely had he wanted a number 10 in the summer, then not signing Kozak, Tonev, Luna, Helenius and Bacuna (Okore we needed) surely would have left easily enough fees and wages to sign a significant creative midfielder.

 

Now I can vaguely see that Kozak was striker cover we needed if we lost Benteke but surely that signing could have waited?

Bacuna - fair enough he has provided much needed cover for RB and midfield.

Luna - no better than Bennett so a waste of money and wages (so far, not saying he won't get better). Now we have Betrand on loan on what must be pretty high wages and two young but very questionable left backs who seem to be not good enough, one suffering an injury that defies explanation also.

Tonev - what is he? A winger a midfielder a striker - or just a terrible player we didn't need? 

Helenius - again so far a pointless signing, he's not a target man and we don't have a system that accommodates deep lying/creative/technical strikers.
 

I'm not saying these players can't and won't get better or won't play they're part, but honestly if Lambert had wanted to spend 5-8 mil on an AM in the summer on 30-40K wages, he could have and had money left over for Okore and Bacuna.

 

[bobzy]

I think we need to take a bit of a gamble, or at least bring someone in to offer something different. Our home form is atrocious and we really, really can't rely on everyone else being completely shit.

 

I'd like us to as well, but I'd rather we spent wisely in the summer than pay, let's say for example, £12m for Kiyotake now.  Hoolahan would be a cheap, short term "something different" and I think that would be a wise type of transfer.  I don't want us to blow any sort of budget in January rather than the summer.

[Mantis]

 

 

Bent wasn't a good signing. For that price multiple quality players could've been brought in that would've both helped the club stay up and helped in the long term. He was a waste of money.

Bull! He kept us in the Premierhsip that season. As I remember he was quality when he first joined us, maybe because Houllier knew how to use a poacher. 18 Million was nothing compared to us falling out of the Premiership, which would have cost us more than 18 million over time, cause we would probably still be there!!

 

 

You can't know that we would have been relegated if we had signed different players with that money so you can't claim it is a truism and then justify the Bent signing because of that false premise. 

 

The ends justify the means in this case though. We did what we had to do to survive.

 

Bent's career at Villa was a funny one. He was a massive signing for us at the time (can't remember being that excited about a transfer before or since) and did produce the goals in 2011. He kept us up and then scored a fair few goals in the next season where we came even closer to relegation. Since his first big injury with us though (which is nigh on 2 years ago now) he's been a bit part player and an obvious drain on the wage bill. But still, he kept us up in one season and greatly contributed to us staying up in the next season. We'd have lost a lot more than £18m had we gone down in either season so in that respect it was worth it. Extreme, but still worth it nonetheless.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Mantis

[Wes]

I couldn't come up with anything clearly obvious for a target this window, going along the lines of Villa's previous strategies, which is i nline with all of the genereal trends of it's hard to buy in January.

 

I still think the powers that be would prefer spending a larger wad of cash (£6m+) on an attacking midfielder in the summer than overpaying with already limited funds in the winter.

 

However I did read that Sergio Canales has been targeted on loan by Fulham. I would think Valencia may even prefer to sell him if an offer was to come in. They may ask for more money than he is currently worth though.

[troon_villan]

I couldn't come up with anything clearly obvious for a target this window, going along the lines of Villa's previous strategies, which is i nline with all of the genereal trends of it's hard to buy in January.

 

I still think the powers that be would prefer spending a larger wad of cash (£6m+) on an attacking midfielder in the summer than overpaying with already limited funds in the winter.

 

However I did read that Sergio Canales has been targeted on loan by Fulham. I would think Valencia may even prefer to sell him if an offer was to come in. They may ask for more money than he is currently worth though.

 

So?

[Rovers13]

Bent wasn't a good signing. For that price multiple quality players could've been brought in that would've both helped the club stay up and helped in the long term. He was a waste of money.

Bull! He kept us in the Premierhsip that season. As I remember he was quality when he first joined us, maybe because Houllier knew how to use a poacher. 18 Million was nothing compared to us falling out of the Premiership, which would have cost us more than 18 million over time, cause we would probably still be there!!

You can't know that we would have been relegated if we had signed different players with that money so you can't claim it is a truism and then justify the Bent signing because of that false premise.

The ends justify the means in this case though. We did what we had to do to survive.

Bent's career at Villa was a funny one. He was a massive signing for us at the time (can't remember being that excited about a transfer before or since) and did produce the goals in 2011. He kept us up and then scored a fair few goals in the next season where we came even closer to relegation. Since his first big injury with us though (which is nigh on 2 years ago now) he's been a bit part player and an obvious drain on the wage bill. But still, he kept us up in one season and greatly contributed to us staying up in the next season. We'd have lost a lot more than £18m had we gone down in either season so in that respect it was worth it. Extreme, but still worth it nonetheless.

Not worth it as I've said. That £18m easily could've been better spent on players that kept Villa up. It was a poor use of the money.

[dn1982]

Darren Bent was a panic buy that could've killed us.  He scored goals, and his movement off the line is/was superb, but he contributed almost entirely nothing to the team as a whole.

 

We stayed up, which was the most important outcome I suppose (somehow Q.P.R. managed to avoid getting messed up over bringing in Samba in the most dodgy deal of forever), but to hail him as some sort of great signing is ridiculous.  As LondonLax says, no resale value, monster wages and a vastly overinflated price tag in the first place.  We're still seeing the downsides of this sort of spending - 3 years on.  Crazy.

But at the time we played with wingers and he was an out and out goal scorer that kept us up by that alone he repaid his fee. IMO if we would have kept Houllier we would of played to his strengths and he'd have scored loads but thing change. We will still get £6m for him if he goes to Fulham so not exactly pittance.

[Mantis]

Not worth it as I've said. That £18m easily could've been better spent on players that kept Villa up. It was a poor use of the money.

And how do you know that? All we know is that we spent £18m on Bent and we stayed up.

[Rovers13]

Not worth it as I've said. That £18m easily could've been better spent on players that kept Villa up. It was a poor use of the money.

And how do you know that? All we know is that we spent £18m on Bent and we stayed up.

That's a bad justification. "We could've made even worse signings that would've sent us down, so making a poor signing that kept us up was smart."