Jump to content

Summer Transfers Window 2020


Recommended Posts

Of the four rumoured strikers, I'm kinda here:

 

  • Edouard - any player you buy from Scotland is a risk. He could be a huge success and he could be overawed by the big step up to better leagues. For me, you want to be the Southampton taking the risk for reasonable money, it's okay spending the huge fee when he's been tested, (like Liverpool buying VVD from Southampton) but in this case we're being asked to pay the huge fee directly from Celtic - at £40m, for me he's too big a risk.

 

  • Origi - it's interesting, he seems to score goals whenever he gets the opportunity and he's definitely got something about him - he's not one that jumps out and screams at you that he's the one you need, but he could be quite effective. Would he be able to adjust from bit part player to the pressure of star man?

 

  • Iheanacho - for me, he's the one with the most talent of these four, the most ability and the biggest potential - but he's probably also the one that most under-delivers on that talent and ability. He can be a fantastic striker, but we'd need to make sure we got the best out of him to make him the best choice.

 

  • Watkins - he's quick and mobile and in comparison to the other three he's relatively cheap - he's also untested at this level and maybe lacks a little experience in the position. I like a lot about him, and if we want to spend the majority of the money elsewhere in the side then I think he's an option worth considering - but he's by no means a dead cert.

 

I'm still not sure any of these four are the right fit for us, they all have things that worry me - of the four, if pushed I'd probably go with Iheanacho. I suspect that wouldn't be the majority opinion.

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, VillaHatesMe said:

We certainly seem to have a type, don't we? This is a chart comparing Watkins this season, Tammy with us in the Championship, and Wesley's final season in Belgium

Villa Striker Preferences.jpg

what website or application is this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KevinRichardsonsMoustache said:

I just watched a YT video of Edouard: selfish, arrogant so and so. But my god, he looks good:. I hate to say it, but I fear he is out of our league. Watkins it is.

Watched a bit of Celtic ( not a load ,so won't claim to have watched them week in week out)

He looks like a real talent , probably an upgrade on Watkins

Moussa Dembele left Celtic in 2018 for less than 20 million and for me was a far better player

So with the prices being inflated in the 2 years , even so , I don't see where they can quote 40million, 

Celtic are heavily reliant on gate receipts and will probably have to sell

My fear is that with us jumping in and taking mcginn while they were playing hard ball , there might be still some I'll feelings towards us

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, OutByEaster? said:

Of the four rumoured strikers, I'm kinda here:

 

  • Edouard - any player you buy from Scotland is a risk. He could be a huge success and he could be overawed by the big step up to better leagues. For me, you want to be the Southampton taking the risk for reasonable money, it's okay spending the huge fee when he's been tested, (like Liverpool buying VVD from Southampton) but in this case we're being asked to pay the huge fee directly from Celtic - at £40m, for me he's too big a risk.

 

  • Origi - it's interesting, he seems to score goals whenever he gets the opportunity and he's definitely got something about him - he's not one that jumps out and screams at you that he's the one you need, but he could be quite effective. Would he be able to adjust from bit part player to the pressure of star man?

 

  • Iheanacho - for me, he's the one with the most talent of these four, the most ability and the biggest potential - but he's probably also the one that most under-delivers on that talent and ability. He can be a fantastic striker, but we'd need to make sure we got the best out of him to make him the best choice.

 

  • Watkins - he's quick and mobile and in comparison to the other three he's relatively cheap - he's also untested at this level and maybe lacks a little experience in the position. I like a lot about him, and if we want to spend the majority of the money elsewhere in the side then I think he's an option worth considering - but he's by no means a dead cert.

 

I'm still not sure any of these four are the right fit for us, they all have things that worry me - of the four, if pushed I'd probably go with Iheanacho. I suspect that wouldn't be the majority opinion.

 

the prob is with the market inflation these days, im not sure u could get a high potential striker, even in Scotland, for the 10-15m mark, even Championship high performers are in the 20m+ bracket these days?

personally i would go for Edouard, a risk yes, but eh......marquee signing?

(especially if we also bought Benrahma & Buendia........)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

As far as i know.......

Arsenal wanted to sign Suarez, somehow Arsenal believed that he had a release clause in his contract (mis advised maybe?), which was triggered by any offer over £40m.

I think Liverpool said something like "we wont sell him for £40m", so Arsenal, thinking they were clever and thought he had a release clause of anything over £40m, offered £40m + £1.

Unfortunately, Arsenal were wrong, and the clause apparently stipulated only that Suarez must me made aware of any offers over £40m, NOT a release clause.

Liverpool were so enraged by Arsenals arrogance that they said they wouldnt sell him to Arsenal for any amount of money.

Suarez got sold to barcelona the following season for c. 75m.

 

gotta love the "arrogance" of the "big clubs".

So it wasn't a minimum release clause at all. I remember reading about it in passing but thought it was some highly technical legal clause and left it at that. So much drama. Life imitating art.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Of the four rumoured strikers, I'm kinda here:

 

  • Edouard - any player you buy from Scotland is a risk. He could be a huge success and he could be overawed by the big step up to better leagues. For me, you want to be the Southampton taking the risk for reasonable money, it's okay spending the huge fee when he's been tested, (like Liverpool buying VVD from Southampton) but in this case we're being asked to pay the huge fee directly from Celtic - at £40m, for me he's too big a risk.

 

  • Origi - it's interesting, he seems to score goals whenever he gets the opportunity and he's definitely got something about him - he's not one that jumps out and screams at you that he's the one you need, but he could be quite effective. Would he be able to adjust from bit part player to the pressure of star man?

 

  • Iheanacho - for me, he's the one with the most talent of these four, the most ability and the biggest potential - but he's probably also the one that most under-delivers on that talent and ability. He can be a fantastic striker, but we'd need to make sure we got the best out of him to make him the best choice.

 

  • Watkins - he's quick and mobile and in comparison to the other three he's relatively cheap - he's also untested at this level and maybe lacks a little experience in the position. I like a lot about him, and if we want to spend the majority of the money elsewhere in the side then I think he's an option worth considering - but he's by no means a dead cert.

 

I'm still not sure any of these four are the right fit for us, they all have things that worry me - of the four, if pushed I'd probably go with Iheanacho. I suspect that wouldn't be the majority opinion.

 

 

This tips the balance for me though ...

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Blinkered view of villatalk transfer forum....

"That (*insert player name here) is a great player (he plays in the scottish leagues and is a steal at 40m)  may i add where scott sinclair was made to look like messi..

"i have not really  seen them play before,But i have watched them on you tube and they look top class" hogan and samatta come to mind

 "He has great stats on fifa and besides he  is in my fantasy football team"

I will grab me coat now

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, VillaHatesMe said:

We certainly seem to have a type, don't we? This is a chart comparing Watkins this season, Tammy with us in the Championship, and Wesley's final season in Belgium

Villa Striker Preferences.jpg

What am I looking at? Don't see the similarities myself 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GENTLEMAN said:

So it wasn't a minimum release clause at all. I remember reading about it in passing but thought it was some highly technical legal clause and left it at that. So much drama. Life imitating art.

I was the same as you, I never actually found out why it all happened until now.  I sometimes wonder how clubs come to find out what a player's release clause is i.e. whether they are supposed to be kept private and the agents just let everyone know anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

what website or application is this?

It's called Smarter Scout. You get five free searches per day. Any more than that and you have to start paying. So I'm just about tapped out today. 😂

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Ok I can’t take you serious now....Tammy isn’t better than Wilson....ok sure 😂😂😂

Lets just stop the discussion now before you really embarrass yourself.

Wow talking about people embarrassing themselves! I thought we were having a reasoned discourse. 

Sorry but I didn't say he was better, I said Tammy wasn't any better. I see them in terms of ability on the pitch as on the same level.

Wilson scored 8 league goals last season in a relegated team. 14 league goals and 9 assists the 2018/19 season in 30 games for a bottom half team. Tammy scored 15 goals 3 assist in 34 leagues games for the 3rd best team in the country. 

So where is the laughable difference in quality? 

You made yourself look bad!

Edited by Philosopher
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Of the four rumoured strikers, I'm kinda here:

 

  • Edouard - any player you buy from Scotland is a risk. He could be a huge success and he could be overawed by the big step up to better leagues. For me, you want to be the Southampton taking the risk for reasonable money, it's okay spending the huge fee when he's been tested, (like Liverpool buying VVD from Southampton) but in this case we're being asked to pay the huge fee directly from Celtic - at £40m, for me he's too big a risk.

 

  • Origi - it's interesting, he seems to score goals whenever he gets the opportunity and he's definitely got something about him - he's not one that jumps out and screams at you that he's the one you need, but he could be quite effective. Would he be able to adjust from bit part player to the pressure of star man?

 

  • Iheanacho - for me, he's the one with the most talent of these four, the most ability and the biggest potential - but he's probably also the one that most under-delivers on that talent and ability. He can be a fantastic striker, but we'd need to make sure we got the best out of him to make him the best choice.

 

  • Watkins - he's quick and mobile and in comparison to the other three he's relatively cheap - he's also untested at this level and maybe lacks a little experience in the position. I like a lot about him, and if we want to spend the majority of the money elsewhere in the side then I think he's an option worth considering - but he's by no means a dead cert.

 

I'm still not sure any of these four are the right fit for us, they all have things that worry me - of the four, if pushed I'd probably go with Iheanacho. I suspect that wouldn't be the majority opinion.

 

Nixon is adamant that 30 million is the fee set for Edouard. Not saying he's an authority or anything, just saying. I think Celtic have a neck even asking for that relative to the level of competition they play. Seen him score a hatrick against Hamilton at the weekend. Not been funny when i say they are the equivalent of a league one club. So, you have to take his and Morelos and anyone up there, scoring record with a pinch of salt. I'd be interested to see Edouard's record in Europe. That's of more value to me.

Edit: 11 goals in 29 European games. That's not bad. Although you do have to factor in Celtic play farmers from Moldova and Kazakhstan in the opening champions league rounds.

Edited by Johnnyp
..
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

What am I looking at? Don't see the similarities myself 

I added Tammy on my own just to see, but the similarities are a bit more obvious when Ollie and Wes are side by side. Neither are great with the ball at their feet, but they are good at aerial duels in open play and can move the ball. Decent receiving in the box. Basically, target men to distribute out to wings who then poach around the box when opportunities are there. To further drive the point, look at the goals Ollie scored in open play this season compared to the goals Wes scored in open play in Belgium last year. 

Wes and Ollie.jpg

Ollie's Goals.jpg

Wes' Goals.jpg

Edited by VillaHatesMe
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

Personally i would go for Edouard, a risk yes, but eh......marquee signing?

(especially if we also bought Benrahma & Buendia........)

For the money, it's' almost a choice between risky Edouard or risky Watkins and Buendia - for me, I'd rather have the pair than spend the money Celtic seem to want.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, jonjon said:

With all this talk about Watkins and his release clause of £18 Million, you have to bare in mind that is the MINIMUM amount this player can be sold for, I believe, if I have read the rules correctly, if other clubs are interested they can bid against each other with bids more than the stated figure, therefore it could work out with the original minimum release clause being surpassed by a few million more.

Ezri Konsa  went for his original release clause of £12.5 Million because Villa were the only bidders, but it could have turned out differently if there were other clubs interested.

No, that's not how it works, you could accept a bid below £18m if you wanted to, you could accept an offer of no money at all if it suited, the clause is quite simply if somebody bids this amount (or over) then you must accept that bid and allow the player to talk to the bidders. Nobody will bid over that amount, because it make no logical sense to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, VillaHatesMe said:

We certainly seem to have a type, don't we? This is a chart comparing Watkins this season, Tammy with us in the Championship, and Wesley's final season in Belgium

Villa Striker Preferences.jpg

Is the control panel from the Starship Enterprise?

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Teale's 'tache said:

No, that's not how it works, you could accept a bid below £18m if you wanted to, you could accept an offer of no money at all if it suited, the clause is quite simply if somebody bids this amount (or over) then you must accept that bid and allow the player to talk to the bidders. Nobody will bid over that amount, because it make no logical sense to.

Yeah the kid Man C signed from Valencia yesterday had a £92m minimum release clause. They sold him for £20m because they are desperate for money.

The clause is just that they can refuse offers below the clause. And you certainly wont get more than the release clause, unless there is something fishy happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â