Jump to content

Callum Wilson


Delphinho123

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Sulberto21 said:

I disagree, I watched nearly every game in lockdown. Wilson's touch was woeful movement non existent and passing was poor. Stanislas was much more lively. Imo of course.

Wesley was getting better and starting to settle down. His passing against Burnley was sumptuous. Grealish finally had a new play mate until Mee assaulted him.

This is a little exaggerated. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, It's Your Round said:

I wasn’t particularly thinking about rumoured transfer fees, I hadn’t read the latest on Watkins. For the same price of say £22m I’d prefer Watkins for his work rate, age, energy, durability and recent goal scoring confidence. I can’t really comment on the fees as I’m not privy to what they actually are. 

Not commentating of the fee either, just that the rumour is they are looking for 50% extra than what Bournemouth are looking for.

Thus the question.

I think most would prefer Watkins, but where is the cut off point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, villalad21 said:

It's not just about the goals but his general play. About doing the basics.

Wesley struggle with the basics. We've been through this so many times.

And we all know how much you hate to repeat your opinions on a daily basis. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, useless said:

He hasn't played 126 full games in the premier league, some of those 126 games will be where he's only been on the pitch for fifteen minutes or whatever. If you look at his goals to minutes ratio in the premier league it's more like 41 goals in 106 games and in that time he's also provided 13 assists, that's 54 times he's been directly involved with a goal in 106 games worth of football in the premier league.

I can understand the reservations about his age and past injury record, and even finding it a bit of a boring signing, but anyone saying that his record in the premier league is poor, is just wrong.

 

Those are the main/only real issues though... and many of us thought we’d be signing better, younger, higher potential forwards than him. 

20m is just way too much as well and I personally can’t see him making a massive contribution unless he hits top form and is relatively free from injuries for a season or two.

It’s not just about being better than our existing strikers (not difficult), it’s about getting players in who can take us forward by a few levels. We don’t want to be struggling at the bottom of the table.

If the fee was lower and wages reasonable then there would be hardly any objection but signing Wilson as our main striker hardly generates much excitement or optimism.

Hopefully we’re not actually interested but, judging by statements from the owners regarding our ambitions, I would’ve thought we’d be making much more shrewd, exciting & ambitious moves in the transfer market.

Obviously if he comes in, we’ll (have to) back him but many of us were hoping for better.

All we can do is wait and see, I certainly won’t be making any judgements until we actually get a few players signed and don’t want to pay too much attention to the speculation. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watch a lot of Bournemouth, really don't rate the guy.

He doesn't really get involved in build ups, doesnt take people on, he is just a finisher who doesnt score that many goals.

If we are buying a Bournemouth forward then Josh King is the far far better player

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chindie said:

£20m+ on a 28yr old who's done both ACLs and scored double figures once in his top flight career, and is almost certainly on big money wages... Yeah, no.

At less money alongside a better striker, ok, fine. But as things stand that's £20m gambled on a player that isn't going to bring a return financially and is by no means a safe bet to knock a lot in. 

If we spend the figures spoken about on Wilson, someone at Villa Park clearly has a drinking problem.

It would be a complete contradiction to Purslow’s statements about the profile of player we are pursuing (young, hungry, high potential, increase in value - similar to McGinn, as he stated).

Edouard would be a better fit, for example.

I agree, it’s more likely to be a failure of a signing & waste of funds rather than a success and we’ve had plenty of those over the years...

Even if he gives us one good season, that’s not enough. We should want to improve drastically not slightly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Sulberto21 said:

I'd rather spend £30m on someone like Origi or Ihenacho. Both are experienced in the premier League, and with a full season behind them would score enough goals to get us 12-15th comfortably. Both are also quick and can play the high press naturally. 

That's assuming that it would cost £30m initially.

Absolutely 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Junxs said:

I watch a lot of Bournemouth, really don't rate the guy.

He doesn't really get involved in build ups, doesnt take people on, he is just a finisher who doesnt score that many goals.

If we are buying a Bournemouth forward then Josh King is the far far better player

Yep I'd take King over Wilson all day. Contributes a hell of a lot more to the team. 

 

Edited by AVFCforever1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Nigel said:

Not commentating of the fee either, just that the rumour is they are looking for 50% extra than what Bournemouth are looking for.

Thus the question.

I think most would prefer Watkins, but where is the cut off point?

Not sure what the cut off point is either, but for me it’s more important to have the right player regardless off cost. It’s not my money, and I just care about having the best players we can. If that’s paying an extra whatever million for a player that Smith really wants, I’m happy for Villa to pay it. Transfer fees are all skewed at the moment so it’s not a true representation of value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, villan-scott said:

How can he be a panic signing when the window doesn’t shut for over a month?!

I think my friend's point was that it was the type of signing you make when you have been rejected from your first, second and third choices and are forced to sign anyone to be set before the season starts. Thus a panic signing.

I'm not that allergic to Wilson as others, but I can sort of see why it's a puzzling signing. 

Edited by KenjiOgiwara
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KenjiOgiwara said:

I think my friend's point was that it was the type of signing you make when you have been rejected from your first, second and third choices and are forced to sign anyone to be set before the season starts. Thus a panic signing.

I'm not that allergic to Wilson as others, but I can sort of see why it's a puzzling signing. 

I get where you’re coming from. You’re most likely right, Wilson wouldn’t have been first choice, but he would have been part of a planned list of targets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

He's not a panic signing. That's ridiculous.

I hope it is because if it’s a truly planned strategic buy then we have much more serious issues with our recruitment ambitions/team.  It’s poor by many measures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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