Transfer Speculation Summer 2017

[PieFacE]

Every time i've seen Montero play he's always looked decent. Seen him tear us to shreds at VP a few times. 

Not sure why he doesn't play more often at Swansea tho. Think it would be a good signing. 

[pacbuddies]

2 hours ago, Killeen30 said:

FFP

£4.5 million is peanuts. Probably wouldn't even cover Neymar's bar bill at PSG!

[Stevo985]

39 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Words defy me. I honestly think DI Matteo has to be one of not the worst managers  we have ever had, he flopped on the pitch and wasted 20m on these three flops 

 

35 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Someone still sanctioned those transfers.

As with most clubs these days, I imagine our transfers are still researched and decided by committee, of which the manager is a large part.

We give too much credit/blame to managers on their transfer dealings imo.

I'd guess largely the same people are helping Bruce with his transfers as were helping Di Matteo. How the manager influences those transfers is of course a factor. 

[bannedfromHandV]

18 minutes ago, ViewFromT2 said:

You need to calm down....points deductions etc...will never happen! Can you imagine the legal wrangling through the courts!

The big clubs get around FFP easily enough, it really isn't worth jack shit in reality. If Xia is as minted as (only) Villa fans seem to think, then why isn't RECON Group the clubs main sponsor? Why isn't it (or any of his other massively unknown entities) on the front of our shirts and paying a ridiculous amount of money to do so? 

Why hasn't he sponsored the stadium to generate funds?

 

What are you talking about?

Have you not been following football for the past 10 years? I've seen plenty of teams given points deductions, it's not as though there's no precedent for it.

[omariqy]

10 minutes ago, ViewFromT2 said:

I've seen that report.....but tell me how that correlates with the official statement released by the club?

Wyness says we have lost £83.3m over the last 3 years and are in effect in breach of FFP already. FFP allows our losses to be £83m (2 x £35m premier league season + 1 x £13m Championship). Next year the 3 year tally will need to be below £61m and if we don't go up, £39m the year after.

The Wyness statement again contradicts the Guardian article...how can we have lost £81m 2 seasons ago, but only show a 3 year loss of £83.3m?

If that's true then surely we have enough in the bank to spend £4.5m on Montero? As an example.

[ViewFromT2]

1 minute ago, bannedfromHandV said:

What are you talking about?

Have you not been following football for the past 10 years? I've seen plenty of teams given points deductions, it's not as though there's no precedent for it.

Points deduction for FFP?...who? when?

The option was only made available to the EFL last year FFS!

Clubs have been penalised for going into administration....are you getting confused?

[dukes]

5 minutes ago, ViewFromT2 said:

I've seen that report.....but tell me how that correlates with the official statement released by the club?

Wyness says we have lost £83.3m over the last 3 years and are in effect in breach of FFP already. FFP allows our losses to be £83m (2 x £35m premier league season + 1 x £13m Championship). Next year the 3 year tally will need to be below £61m and if we don't go up, £39m the year after.

The Wyness statement again contradicts the Guardian article...how can we have lost £81m 2 seasons ago, but only show a 3 year loss of £83.3m?

It's something to do with the link to Reform Acquisitions which I assume is what the reference regarding turnover refers to. The report states turnover as being  "in the main determined by a trading agreement with another group company " mentioned in the strategic report and was used as the vehicle for Lerner to manage the loans and payments he made to and took out of the company etc (someone with better knowledge of this could I am sure explain to you better then I can).

[Stockport_Villain]

49 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Someone still sanctioned those transfers.

Are you suggesting people other than the manager should  decide who to buy or not to buy?

[ViewFromT2]

2 minutes ago, dukes said:

It's something to do with the link to Reform Acquisitions which I assume is what the reference regarding turnover refers to. The report states turnover as being  "in the main determined by a trading agreement with another group company " mentioned in the strategic report and was used as the vehicle for Lerner to manage the loans and payments he made to and took out of the company etc (someone with better knowledge of this could I am sure explain to you better then I can).

One thing is for certain...FFP is bloody mind-blowingly confusing!

Do they base the assessment on playing staff alone (ie. transfer fees and wages)?...surely that is a must. So if we are still having to pay out money to a previous owner for instance...surely that figure doesn't impact on FFP?

[bobzy]

Just now, Stockport_Villain said:

Are you suggesting people other than the manager should  decide who to buy or not to buy?

Not who, but how much they're willing to spend.

If the manager wants to sign Ross McCormack, absolutely fine.  If the owners then sanction a £40m transfer because that's what the selling club were asking for, absolutely not fine.

I imagine (potentially naively) that managers tend to say who they want to get, leaving other members of the football club to then sort out the actual transfer.

[bobzy]

32 minutes ago, ViewFromT2 said:

You need to calm down....points deductions etc...will never happen! Can you imagine the legal wrangling through the courts!

The big clubs get around FFP easily enough, it really isn't worth jack shit in reality. If Xia is as minted as (only) Villa fans seem to think, then why isn't RECON Group the clubs main sponsor? Why isn't it (or any of his other massively unknown entities) on the front of our shirts and paying a ridiculous amount of money to do so? 

Why hasn't he sponsored the stadium to generate funds?

 

In part, because we're a Championship club.  Xia seems to (perhaps?) want to run the football club fairly efficiently.  He doesn't mind putting money in, but he's not going to dump £200m on us for no reason.  There's very little exposure to his other (massively unknown) entities to gain by sponsoring a Championship team.

 

(As an aside, I think points deductions will absolutely happen and especially in the Championship.  Teams can afford (with TV money from Premier League) any fines that would be imposed in they got promoted and the EFL won't want to be seen as a mockery again in this regard (as with Leicester, Bournemouth, Q.P.R).  I can see a scenario where they'll punish a teams' overspending by docking them points and denying promotion.)

[Demitri_C]

34 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

 

As with most clubs these days, I imagine our transfers are still researched and decided by committee, of which the manager is a large part.

We give too much credit/blame to managers on their transfer dealings imo.

I'd guess largely the same people are helping Bruce with his transfers as were helping Di Matteo. How the manager influences those transfers is of course a factor. 

Possibly, as it was implied Steve Round had a lot of involvement with transfers when he was appointed in September last year.  But surely RDM if he did not want the player he would ahve said. Also the Tishbola link with Clarke suggests to me RDm had a major part in who we brought in. 

But fundamentally Di Matteo could not get the bets out of the players he signed. That for me is what makes him a major failure an done of our worst. lambert was shit but he at least managed to get the best out of his own signing Benteke. RDM failed miserably with McCormack and Tishbola 

[dn1982]

1 hour ago, ViewFromT2 said:

We did spend bucket loads yes....from transfer monies recieved and premier league parachute payments. No extra investment from the owner really was there?

FFP allows a £13m loss per season (EFL now in line with Premier League)...this is reviewed over a 3 year period. We are using the FFP line as a get out in my opinion. I highly doubt the owner has the kind of funds he makes out, or at least if he does have them, he damn well ain't gonna be pumping into Villa!

edit:

I found this statement online. Clearly the clubs losses over the last 2 seasons are way short of the FFP limit....yet Wyness is saying we are close to breaching? 

We've been cutting costs and wage bills since Lambert joined. 

Since XIa Has been here we've spent loads. We've also lost a massive revenue stream when we were relegated. Our losses for 15/16 were £80m but it included exceptional circumstances. I'm sure wyness knows more than us but just looking at it from fan view. Last summer we were one of the biggest spenders in the country. In January one of the biggest in the Championship. This summer we've improved the team for little out lay. If we improve the team every window I will be happy and that as a fan is the most important thing. 

[omariqy]

I wonder if that £80m includes the debt written off?

[jacketspuds]

It's pretty disappointing how terrible we are at playing the loan market, yet we have been more than happy to chuck money about on permanent transfers, some of which have been a complete gamble.

[dn1982]

1 hour ago, bobzy said:

Someone still sanctioned those transfers.

Hindsights a wonderful thing but all seemed decent signings at the time. Appointing RDM was the biggest mistake. 

[Dr_Pangloss]

24 minutes ago, jacketspuds said:

It's pretty disappointing how terrible we are at playing the loan market, yet we have been more than happy to chuck money about on permanent transfers, some of which have been a complete gamble.

Yes, many 'top' teams in this league tend to exploit the loan market very well and bring in one or two key players. It's absolutely essential that we do the same. 

[GREAT_BEARD_OF_ZEUS]

Thing with the loan market is that unless it's a player who is solely going out for experience i.e. the club don't want to sell him (Tammy Abraham for example), a lot of players will be held onto until late on in the window, in the hope of a cash sale first.  Case in point being our own Ross McCormack - pretty sure we've got a few loan offers in for him already, but we're hanging on to see if anyone will take him permanently first.

Given that we've tried and failed for some of those afore mentioned 'development players' already, I think we'll now need to wait until the end of the window until we see any loans incoming.

It's a good thing for me, gives time for us to have a few games, see if there's any glaring needs without jumping the gun.  I mean right now i think we could do with a replacement no.10 for Jack more than anything... but Hourihane might start in the no.10 role and start bagging goals and assists for fun, meaning we can adjust our targets and go for a left winger or another striker perhaps.

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, Demitri_C said:

But surely RDM if he did not want the player he would ahve said. Also the Tishbola link with Clarke suggests to me RDm had a major part in who we brought in. 

yes, you'd think so, which is why I say the manager still plays a major part. I just don't think RDM deserves all the blame for the poor signings.

Similarly, Bruce doesn't deserve all the credit for his good signings (assuming they end up being good signings!)

I think most football clubs operate in this way these days. The structures are different, but rarely will you find a manager solely in charge of transfers. 

[Killeen30]

3 hours ago, pacbuddies said:

£4.5 million is peanuts. Probably wouldn't even cover Neymar's bar bill at PSG!

You could be right there, but Aston Villa's situation has nothing to do with Neymar, nor PSG.