Jesus Garcia Pitarch

[Nabby]

17 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

as villa fans we tend to get carried away with ourselves, after good results and bad.

luiz and konsa, fair doos, are both looking good, but konsa wasn't a suso signing. smith managed him at brentford. does luiz perform better in an empty stadium? is he one of the training ground players smith referred to? that remains to be seen

1 brilliant performance from guilbert does not excuse the abysmal performances at leicester and southampton (just 2 off the top of my head).

trez scoring 3 valuable goals - and they really might be valuable - doesn't change how absolutely appalling a footballer he is. a hero, he is not.

wesley played 2 good games in the first half of the season but was terrible in the others, but i'm willing to give him another chance as the system has shown since then to be ineffective when it comes to strikers.

targett is a poor signing IMO. lightweight, poor delivery, and poor defender. i'm totally in the minority i accept that but i genuinely prefer taylor.

and it hardly takes a shrewd DoF to identify a player of Reina's caliber as a viable GK option...he hardly unearthed a young, unknown talent here.

so i want suso gone. i dont want him anywhere near a penny of the jack money. god knows what dross he'll spend it on

Trez has 6 goals and cost 8 mil thats not a bad return 

Konsa ,so now he is playing well a Smith Signing but Targett also from the UK market is a Suso signing ? Engles wanted by Brentford under Smith so who takes credit for his signing ?On Targett poor delivery ...really ? I''ll except his defending can be poor but delivery wise only the 2 full backs at Liverpool have created more chances.

Guilbert has been solid most of the season he has more good performance's then poor ones 

Luiz showed he had talent before the lockdown , he just needed more fitness. Who every was responsible for him did a good job signing him

[villa89]

7 minutes ago, Nabby said:

Trez has 6 goals and cost 8 mil thats not a bad return 

How much has his terrible play cost us? Also is Engels worthless because he hasn't scored? You can't justify his signing by saying he's scored a few goals. He's clearly not up to it at this level despite his effort. I've nothing against him but he was a bad signing and not worth the money. We'll do well to get £3m for him.  

[tomav84]

1 minute ago, Nabby said:

Trez has 6 goals and cost 8 mil thats not a bad return 

Konsa ,so now he is playing well a Smith Signing but Targett also from the UK market is a Suso signing ? Engles wanted by Brentford under Smith so who takes credit for his signing ?On Targett poor delivery ...really ? I''ll except his defending can be poor but delivery wise only the 2 full backs at Liverpool have created more chances.

Guilbert has been solid most of the season he has more good performance's then poor ones 

Luiz showed he had talent before the lockdown , he just needed more fitness. Who every was responsible for him did a good job signing him

i dont fully buy into the 'smith' signings vs the 'suso' signing logic. konsa and engels are 2 that i believe would have been strongly driven by smith due to having previously worked with 1 and said had previously scouted the other. the rest, who knows, but smith has referred to 'the recruitment team' on several occasions, therefore it's believed that suso had a major role in the a large portion of the recruitment, where the success stories are few and far between. we had 2 bites at trying to sign a proven goalscorer and failed both times. going into the season without one was shocking, and then not correcting that error in jan was unforgivable. we spent 8m on marvelous, who we didn't need when the money should have been spent on the front line. we overspent for wes and targett, who regardless of the differences of opinions on them, i think most would agree have not lived up to their price tags.

the buck doesn't stop solely with suso. it's an admirable strategy by purslow not to loan players from the top teams, but it's something that i believe is necessary certainly in these first couple of years back.  harry wilson scored only 1 goal less than trez, and cost bournemouth nothing apart from his wages. he's miles better than trez/ghazi and a fraction of the overall price. i hope we swallow our pride on the loan front next season and get 1 or 2 in

[mikeyp102]

5 minutes ago, villa89 said:

How much has his terrible play cost us? Also is Engels worthless because he hasn't scored? You can't justify his signing by saying he's scored a few goals. He's clearly not up to it at this level despite his effort. I've nothing against him but he was a bad signing and not worth the money. We'll do well to get £3m for him.  

We paid £8m for him I think. Scoring 6 premier league goals will increase his value.   Anything from the premier league always does.He may not be best, but people will look at his return. Saying we’d do well to get £3m is ludicrous. On what basis has his value dropped that much? 

[tomav84]

6 minutes ago, villa89 said:

How much has his terrible play cost us? Also is Engels worthless because he hasn't scored? You can't justify his signing by saying he's scored a few goals. He's clearly not up to it at this level despite his effort. I've nothing against him but he was a bad signing and not worth the money. We'll do well to get £3m for him.  

i think that's something that people defending the recruitment need to take a step back and look at. from the signings made, who would we make profit on now?

IMO, the likely profit is FAR less than the likely losses:

wes - NO

trez - NO

guilbert - MAYBE

mings - PROBABLY

luiz - YES

targett - NO

konsa - PROBABLY

marvelous - NO

samatta - NO

el ghazi - NO

heaton - NO - but that's ok cause of his age and worth the money spent for experience

engels - NO

jota - NO

hause - YES

[mikeyp102]

2 hours ago, tomav84 said:

i disagree. before covid hit, smith was allegedly a chelsea defeat away from losing his job. the same article indicated that suso's job was under review, and would likely still be under review even if we stay up. i can see him going.

fact of the matter is that this season has been poor by and large. even if we stay up, there will be a fall guy

Let’s be honest, the media don’t have a clue whose job is at risk. It’s just their assumption. 
 

Yes the season has been poor, yes there needs to be a review of what has gone on. But that doesn’t always mean a sacking. 

[tomav84]

1 minute ago, mikeyp102 said:

Let’s be honest, the media don’t have a clue whose job is at risk. It’s just their assumption. 
 

Yes the season has been poor, yes there needs to be a review of what has gone on. But that doesn’t always mean a sacking. 

i think there will be a review. and despite staying up i don't think there are many that are safe from criticism. FWIW i think both suso and smith will both stay, but purslow + advisors will scrutinise everything much more. not saying he hasn't, but probably trusted the decisions of smith and suso a lot last summer and might be a bit more hands on this summer. i dont think they want a new manager and/or DoF search in addition to strengthening the squad

[Nabby]

17 minutes ago, villa89 said:

How much has his terrible play cost us? Also is Engels worthless because he hasn't scored? You can't justify his signing by saying he's scored a few goals. He's clearly not up to it at this level despite his effort. I've nothing against him but he was a bad signing and not worth the money. We'll do well to get £3m for him.  

Well Engles has cost us at least 4 goals due to bad play ..Engles worth is based on how many goals he has stopped as a CB.Trez is an attacker so goals and assists are how you are going to justify him. His last 3 goals have won us 2 games and given us 6 points ..you think his worth has gone down ....not a chance he is sold for something like £3mil 

[Sulberto21]

1 minute ago, Nabby said:

Well Engles has cost us at least 4 goals due to bad play ..Engles worth is based on how many goals he has stopped as a CB.Trez is an attacker so goals and assists are how you are going to justify him. His last 3 goals have won us 2 games and given us 6 points ..you think his worth has gone down ....not a chance he is sold for something like £3mil 

Someone in Turkey will pay £15m for him. At the very least we'll break even.

There's so many free agents available who could possibly do a job for us so we shouldn't need to do many if any loan deals.

[Nabby]

16 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

i dont fully buy into the 'smith' signings vs the 'suso' signing logic. konsa and engels are 2 that i believe would have been strongly driven by smith due to having previously worked with 1 and said had previously scouted the other. the rest, who knows, but smith has referred to 'the recruitment team' on several occasions, therefore it's believed that suso had a major role in the a large portion of the recruitment, where the success stories are few and far between. we had 2 bites at trying to sign a proven goalscorer and failed both times. going into the season without one was shocking, and then not correcting that error in jan was unforgivable. we spent 8m on marvelous, who we didn't need when the money should have been spent on the front line. we overspent for wes and targett, who regardless of the differences of opinions on them, i think most would agree have not lived up to their price tags.

the buck doesn't stop solely with suso. it's an admirable strategy by purslow not to loan players from the top teams, but it's something that i believe is necessary certainly in these first couple of years back.  harry wilson scored only 1 goal less than trez, and cost bournemouth nothing apart from his wages. he's miles better than trez/ghazi and a fraction of the overall price. i hope we swallow our pride on the loan front next season and get 1 or 2 in

Wilson cost Bournmouth £2.5mil to loan 

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/liverpool/liverpool-fc-harry-wilson-joins-bournemouth-on-loan-reds-bank-2m-fee-a4207101.html

 

Plus wages , plus likely conditions to how many games he played. Whilst I don't agree with no loans at all this was the type of Loan Purslow was against , paying clubs to loan young players with no purchase agreed.As for miles better than Trez/AEG he was awful for Bournmouth when he came on against Soton inc giving a way a pen.

[sharkyvilla]

15 hours ago, Xela said:

I'm not 100% sure but I think we were linked with Phillips after we signed Luiz.

Nakamba may have been 2nd choice?

 

Pretty sure Phillips was the only one on that tweet by Smith's son's mate that didn't end up signing.  I think it must have been close to happening. 

[Nigel]

3 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

 We paid half of what leeds wanted for Phillips and gor a better player

Not bothered about him

 

No we didnt, we paid half for a posh loan....big difference! Luis will be back at City soon.

If we had paid for Phillips we would be in a much better position financially.

I dont agree with all this 'overpaid' stuff, we pay the sum that the club values the player at.

Its just that values have become astronomical!

[tomav84]

5 minutes ago, Nigel said:

No we didnt, we paid half for a posh loan....big difference! Luis will be back at City soon.

If we had paid for Phillips we would be in a much better position financially.

I dont agree with all this 'overpaid' stuff, we pay the sum that the club values the player at.

Its just that values have become astronomical!

really bugs me when people refer to the luiz deal as this. it's simply not true. and how do you figure that we'd be better off financially if we paid £30m for phillips? if he'd been shite his value would've decreased

[gwi1890]

1 minute ago, tomav84 said:

really bugs me when people refer to the luiz deal as this. it's simply not true. and how do you figure that we'd be better off financially if we paid £30m for phillips? if he'd been shite his value would've decreased

His value would have decreased regardless of being poor, he was worth  30m to leeds not us,  Luiz is instant 10m profit,  it’s better to buy the player for 15m and get paid for developing him than , loaning a player worth 10m and being held ransom for a huge fee after developing him the following transfer window

[Nigel]

3 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

really bugs me when people refer to the luiz deal as this. it's simply not true. and how do you figure that we'd be better off financially if we paid £30m for phillips? if he'd been shite his value would've decreased

The Luis deal is a buy back contract, its very much a loan but with the advantage given more to the seller.

I cant see how you can see it otherwise?

I agree if Phillips had been shite we would have lost money, however there are some players who are worth more of a gamble than others, he is one.

He will be worth far more once he settles his feet in this division.

Thus this deal would have represented the better deal financially as it would be in our hands!

Its all opinion, but I just hate not being in control as it is with Luis.

[tomav84]

9 minutes ago, Nigel said:

The Luis deal is a buy back contract, its very much a loan but with the advantage given more to the seller.

I cant see how you can see it otherwise?

I agree if Phillips had been shite we would have lost money, however there are some players who are worth more of a gamble than others, he is one.

He will be worth far more once he settles his feet in this division.

Thus this deal would have represented the better deal financially as it would be in our hands!

Its all opinion, but I just hate not being in control as it is with Luis.

it's not a buy back 'contract'. he is an AVFC player, and no less an AVFC player than jack, wesley, heaton etc. that's what i struggle with, that people see this as different.

the advantage is with us, the buyer. the jack saga will rumble on all summer. poxy bids involving players, add ons etc will be knocked back all whilst jack is getting more and more unsettled. with luiz, the buy back is £25m...cash. no add ons, no installments, it's £25m or we dont have to accept shit. £10m cash profit for 1 season of contract payments. and even then, luiz doesn't HAVE to accept the contract to city. it's not an automatic movement like a loan, where the player returns to his parent club whether he wants to or not. he may prefer to stay here and have the team built around him rather than sitting in the stands at city or being loaned to another shite la liga team. and recent interviews have indicated that this is not an unlikely scenario

Edited July 23, 2020 by tomav84

[Nigel]

9 minutes ago, tomav84 said:

it's not a buy back 'contract'. he is an AVFC player, and no less an AVFC player than jack, wesley, heaton etc. that's what i struggle with, that people see this as different.

the advantage is with us, the buyer. the jack saga will rumble on all summer. poxy bids involving players, add ons etc will be knocked back all whilst jack is getting more and more unsettled. with luiz, the buy back is £25m...cash. no add ons, no installments, it's £25m or we dont have to accept shit. £10m cash profit for 1 season of contract payments. and even then, luiz doesn't HAVE to accept the contract to city. it's not an automatic movement like a loan, where the player returns to his parent club whether he wants to or not. he may prefer to stay here and have the team built around him rather than sitting in the stands at city or being loaned to another shite la liga team. and recent interviews have indicated that this is not an unlikely scenario

I think you may be remembering this one wrong.

Quote

A buy-back clause was inserted into the transfer, enabling City to repurchase the young Brazilian for a predetermined fee in the future.

Clicky

According to reports they can buy him this summer or next for just a bit more than we paid. Think it was 5 million extra  this season and 10 million the next, the player (or us) has no say in the matter.

Even if he wont be good enough to play for them he will be bought back to re-sell for a bigger profit, they have done this before.

Its as automatic as it gets!

Edited July 23, 2020 by Nigel

[GENTLEMAN]

30 minutes ago, Nigel said:

No we didnt, we paid half for a posh loan....big difference! Luis will be back at City soon.

If we had paid for Phillips we would be in a much better position financially.

I dont agree with all this 'overpaid' stuff, we pay the sum that the club values the player at.

Its just that values have become astronomical!

Liverpool put in a buy-back clause in for Jordan Ibe, who leaves Bournemouth on a free this summer. I believe Barca did for Adama. Iheanacho, Depay reportedly have them. I think they are far more common than 1st perceived. It’s common practice for ‘big’ clubs to insert such conditions. 
 

Besides from my understanding, I still struggle to see how city would gain WP for him just yet. Villa won appeal due to his importance to our team.

[useless]

Pretty sure that Purslow said at one of his meetings with fans that the buy-back clause was for substantially more than we paid for him. And that's the only way that the deal would make sense,  we were limited by the amount of money that we were allowed to spend, so weren't going to spend £15m of our FFP allowance on a deal that's just a glorified loan, if that was the case we could have just loaned him, and spent that £15m elsewhere.

[tomav84]

7 minutes ago, Nigel said:

I think you may be remembering this one wrong.

Clicky

According to reports they can buy him this summer or next for just a bit more than we paid. Think it was 5 million extra  this season and 10 million the next, the player (or us) has no say in the matter.

Even if he wont be good enough to play for them he will be bought back to re-sell for a bigger profit, they have done this before.

Its as automatic as it gets!

If you actually read the article that you yourself provided a link for, you'd see that only £5m extra is a load of tosh:

Quote

Details of this clause have not been released - although typically the fee is significantly higher than the one paid by the buying club, and grows over time.

Therefore, if reports of the £15million to be paid by Villa are true, it may be that City's buy-back clause is set at £25million this summer and £30million the season after.