Jump to content

Transfer Speculation Summer 2016


Guest av1

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, omariqy said:

Question - would you spend £15m on McCormack?

No. Given his age and likely lack of re-sale value I think we could do better with £15m. I would rather see us go for Bamford for around £5m less although getting us up first time of asking is worth more than £5m to the club. Given that, if RDM wants him and the Doctor is willing to part with that much for him it would make a big statement and I would be happy enough to see the cash splashed on the striker the manager chooses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Supervillan78 said:

Yes, if it meant promotion.

That's a bit of a cop out answer.  I'd spend £60m on Alex McLeish to play every game in defence... if it meant promotion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter how much a player costs.  It only matters if he's right for Villa.  A £10m or a £15m McCormack.  Who gives a f**k?  If McCormack is what we need in order to go up then PUT HIM ON THE PITCH.  It shouldn't matter a damn to the fans.  If RDM & Dr.X are happy to pay it then that's all that matters.  "Oh but it might take away from another player".  No.  It won't.  You really think they're that short-sighted that they haven't drawn up a list and a budget and are working within that?  If you do think that then you've already no confidence in the management team and you'll see no good in anything they do regardless.  Stop looking at transfer fee and start looking at who we're trying to buy.  Because on matchday that's what ends up on the pitch.  Not the bloody receipt they got from Fulham or whoever else we end up buying from.

By the way, that's a general rant aimed at no-one in particular.  It's just my usual utter bewilderment at the utterly redundant and endless discussions about how much someone costs.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BOF said:

It doesn't matter how much a player costs.  It only matters if he's right for Villa.  A £10m or a £15m McCormack.  Who gives a f**k?  If McCormack is what we need in order to go up then PUT HIM ON THE PITCH.  It shouldn't matter a damn to the fans.  If RDM & Dr.X are happy to pay it then that's all that matters.  "Oh but it might take away from another player".  No.  It won't.  You really think they're that short-sighted that they haven't drawn up a list and a budget and are working within that?  If you do think that then you've already no confidence in the management team and you'll see no good in anything they do regardless.  Stop looking at transfer fee and start looking at who we're trying to buy.  Because on matchday that's what ends up on the pitch.  Not the bloody receipt they got from Fulham or whoever else we end up buying from.

Couldn't disagree more really - the transfer fee is massively important.  I trust that the new owner and his team won't put the club back into financial difficulties... but I also trusted that Randy Lerner wouldn't do that.  He spent big on a team that challenged for the top 4 but it basically crippled us.  Do I want to go back to that?  Do I heck!

The transfer fee is, therefore, hugely relevant in regard to who we bring in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bobzy said:

Couldn't disagree more really - the transfer fee is massively important.  I trust that the new owner and his team won't put the club back into financial difficulties... but I also trusted that Randy Lerner wouldn't do that.  He spent big on a team that challenged for the top 4 but it basically crippled us.  Do I want to go back to that?  Do I heck!

The transfer fee is, therefore, hugely relevant in regard to who we bring in.

Wages and contracts got Randy into bother.  Not transfer fees.  Completely separate issue.  Going back to my original example.  If someone would be happy with a £10m Ross McCormack but not with a £15m Ross McCormack then that person's priorities are not only wrong but utterly misguided IMHO. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new poster (can't remember name sorry) who's been 'ITK' on a few things, has said that we want to buy Bamford. Not sure if we'd want to pay £10m+ for him and then another £15m for McCormack. If their goals got us promoted, I'm sure it would be worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BOF said:

Wages and contracts got Randy into bother.  Not transfer fees.  Completely separate issue.  Going back to my original example.  If someone would be happy with a £10m Ross McCormack but not with a £15m Ross McCormack then that person's priorities are not only wrong but utterly misguided IMHO. 

I'd be happy to bring in Hal Robson-Kanu on a free transfer, but I wouldn't want the club to spend £5m on him.  Would that make my priorities wrong and utterly misguided?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bobzy said:

I'd be happy to bring in Hal Robson-Kanu on a free transfer, but I wouldn't want the club to spend £5m on him.  Would that make my priorities wrong and utterly misguided?

Yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bobzy said:

I'd be happy to bring in Hal Robson-Kanu on a free transfer, but I wouldn't want the club to spend £5m on him.  Would that make my priorities wrong and utterly misguided?

It's a straw man argument. One is a proven championship level goalscorer. The other is a potential project. A squad player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

It's a straw man argument. One is a proven championship level goalscorer. The other is a potential project. A squad player. 

But not if they're "the right player for the team", which seems to be the point.  That we shouldn't have any concerns over transfer fees as long as that player is the right player.

Robson Kanu could've been replaced by <whoever>, for the sake of discussion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

It's a straw man argument. One is a proven championship level goalscorer. The other is a potential project. A squad player. 

It's not really though.  If the club decided that they needed HRK and they decided that £5m was in the budget for him and that's what it would take to get him, then I am not going to blink an eye.  I may or may not want the player in the first place (I don't, FWIW), but I'm not going to get hung up on how much our football and money men decided to spend on getting another piece of their jigsaw in place.  The only strawman here being that HRK is a free agent and by definition won't cost £5m in a transfer fee.  Signing on fees OTOH ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need a team capable of getting promoted back to the Premier League at the first attempt, that costs money. Clubs know what our situation is and they know that we've got an ambitious Chairman with cash to spend, so the price goes up.

If we spend £50m-£60m it's worth it just to get promoted, it's a gamble yes, but it's one we simply HAVE to make! UTV 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â