Summer transfer window 2021

[LondonLax]

Does VillaTalk support FFP or not?

I thought we were generally against it as it’s a way for the bigger clubs to stop new money clubs breaking the hegemony?

In that regard aren’t we supportive of another new money club like Man City bypassing these restrictions and showing our owners what is possible?

[alreadyexists]

2 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Does VillaTalk support FFP or not?

I thought we were generally against it as it’s a way for the bigger clubs to stop new money clubs breaking the hegemony?

In that regard aren’t we supportive of another new money club like Man City bypassing these restrictions and showing our owners what is possible?

But everyone else has to comply or they get docked points and fined, but Man City do what they like, so the system doesn’t work as the richest biggest clubs (PSG are taking the piss with it) just do what they want, so if anything it’s made things more uneven

[Adam2003]

2 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Does VillaTalk support FFP or not?

I thought we were generally against it as it’s a way for the bigger clubs to stop new money clubs breaking the hegemony?

In that regard aren’t we supportive of another new money club like Man City bypassing these restrictions and showing our owners what is possible?

I suspect showing what is possible _when you are backed by a state_ is a bit different to what is possible if we just did it sadly.

[Keyblade]

5 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Does VillaTalk support FFP or not?

I thought we were generally against it as it’s a way for the bigger clubs to stop new money clubs breaking the hegemony?

In that regard aren’t we supportive of another new money club like Man City bypassing these restrictions and showing our owners what is possible?

It's not possible for our owners though, not least because our owners aren't interested in bypassing FFP in the first place. But even if they did, they're just 2 guys and not an entire oil state.

[thunderball]

We could do with a left sided midfielder/winger/forward; and we could do with a better DM (and back up keeper and CB), but that’s it really. We would then be meaningfully improved.

I reckon they will buy these players before the window closes.

[villa4europe]

8 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Does VillaTalk support FFP or not?

I thought we were generally against it as it’s a way for the bigger clubs to stop new money clubs breaking the hegemony?

In that regard aren’t we supportive of another new money club like Man City bypassing these restrictions and showing our owners what is possible?

Absolutely **** not 

And yes I am, I hope city get taken to court, win and the whole corrupt thing comes crashing down 

I don't want villa to need an official pillow partner in the name of competing, if your owners aren't as rich as someone else's or don't want to pump as much money in as someone else's that is what it is but maybe one day that will change, the value of man utds shirt deal being more than Aston Villas will not change 

Its a man utd wet dream 

Its my biggest disappointment with Lerner, he should have gone on the warpath over this but his media silence thing bit him on the ass big time 

Edited August 8, 2021 by villa4europe

[KevinRichardsonsMoustache]

54 minutes ago, alreadyexists said:

… but Man City have spend £1 billion in the past five years… how can that be ffp compliant?

I saw Pep’s comments about raising £60m in outgoing transfers to fund the Grealish transfer. Fine, plus £40m. Then, the next reporter asked about £160m for Kane. 

Hilariously, nobody called out where that additional money would come from: who would be sold to find that particular deal. 

It’s another example of Pep trying to appear smart - loves the image does our Pep - but actually having no substance behind it. Meanwhile, journos watch on and lap it up like it’s the nectar of the gods.

[Laughable Chimp]

17 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Does VillaTalk support FFP or not?

I thought we were generally against it as it’s a way for the bigger clubs to stop new money clubs breaking the hegemony?

In that regard aren’t we supportive of another new money club like Man City bypassing these restrictions and showing our owners what is possible?

I mean, if we can copy them in bypassing these restrictions I wouldn't mind. But we probably can't, at least no where near to the extent of City.

So what we end up is with a system that already disadvantageous clubs like us, but certain other clubs are allowed to completely cheat the system which makes it even worse.

[Awol]

21 minutes ago, Adam2003 said:

I suspect showing what is possible _when you are backed by a state_ is a bit different to what is possible if we just did it sadly.

Cons: A state that kidnaps and chops up people that criticise it. 

Pros: Regular turnover in TalkSport presenters. 

[Kiwivillan]

23 minutes ago, thunderball said:

We could do with a left sided midfielder/winger/forward; and we could do with a better DM (and back up keeper and CB), but that’s it really. We would then be meaningfully improved.

I reckon they will buy these players before the window closes.

I don't. I think we'll go mostly with what we've got. People wanting to go with 5 new players basically is as potentially more calamitous than good. We have Sanson back from injury who had great pressing stats and he's been given #8 so expect to see him in midfield this season. McGinn isn't getting dropped. Nakamba AEG Traore have all earned the right to game time regardless what some VT posters think of them

[Herman22]

30 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Does VillaTalk support FFP or not?

I thought we were generally against it as it’s a way for the bigger clubs to stop new money clubs breaking the hegemony?

In that regard aren’t we supportive of another new money club like Man City bypassing these restrictions and showing our owners what is possible?

This is really two questions.
1. Do we agree with FFP? I don’t, I think it’s anti competitive and has been specifically designed to keep the top clubs on top. It was dreamt up by the same clubs that pushed the European super league as a way of closing shop and ensuring the same 10-12 clubs complete for European success every year.
2. Do I agree that every club signed up to the same rules and there should be consequences to breaking those rules? I think this is the more simple question. All clubs agreed to abide by the rules and City have flouted the rules time after time. They should be punished accordingly.  

[Tommo_b]

20 minutes ago, Herman22 said:

This is really two questions.
1. Do we agree with FFP? I don’t, I think it’s anti competitive and has been specifically designed to keep the top clubs on top. It was dreamt up by the same clubs that pushed the European super league as a way of closing shop and ensuring the same 10-12 clubs complete for European success every year.
2. Do I agree that every club signed up to the same rules and there should be consequences to breaking those rules? I think this is the more simple question. All clubs agreed to abide by the rules and City have flouted the rules time after time. They should be punished accordingly.  

They should be punished hard, they are making a complete mockery of the sport and the rules and regulations… and then have the audacity to try form a super league… fecking Man City!!

It’s almost the equivalent of Scunthorpe getting bought out by billionaires and suddenly claiming they are a super club. 

[El-Reacho]

36 minutes ago, KevinRichardsonsMoustache said:

I saw Pep’s comments about raising £60m in outgoing transfers to fund the Grealish transfer. Fine, plus £40m. Then, the next reporter asked about £160m for Kane. 

Hilariously, nobody called out where that additional money would come from: who would be sold to find that particular deal. 

It’s another example of Pep trying to appear smart - loves the image does our Pep - but actually having no substance behind it. Meanwhile, journos watch on and lap it up like it’s the nectar of the gods.

See also his vocal support of the Catalan Independence Movement and their jailed members on the one hand and his lucrative ambassador deal with Qatar to front their World Cup and the slavery used to make it happen.

[StanBalaban]

The whole Jack situation could very well work in our favour in more ways than one. For Aston Villa to sell the most expensive British player ever to Man City, with reports that we were looking to offer a comparable contract, can only assist us in player recruitment. We're a very attractive proposition for exciting talent.

By reducing our over-reliance on any one player means that we should be less fearful if / when players leave. Leon Bailey's dad mentioned that Leon will either perform well enough to get a move to the top 4, or he's getting there with Aston Villa. Either way is a win / win.

If every subsequent player recruited sees the carrot that playing well for Villa can get you into your international squad, get you a bumper pay rise or get you a record move to the Top 4, it means we're doing well as a team.  If the team does well, then we climb the table. Should a player leave, we sell for a healthy profit and reinvest.

Whilst everyone would've preferred Jack to have stayed, this is a welcome by-product of him leaving. 

[TheMelvillan]

Any news on signing Barkley on a permanent after last year's loan spell ?

[Tayls]

Is there not a better place to discuss Man City, Pep and FFP? It’s really boring.

Anyway, I reckon we need two more, a CM of some description, and a back up CB. 
I’m undecided on what type of CM we need, whether we go defensive, attacking or box to box. I’m hoping Sanson shows us what he can do but haven’t a seen or heard anything of him over the summer? Is he homesick and struggling to adjust? 

Edited August 8, 2021 by Tayls

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 hours ago, alreadyexists said:

… but Man City have spend £1 billion in the past five years… how can that be ffp compliant?

What’s net spend though ?

Agree with others we need a dominate defensive midfielder but we seem to have a lot of midfielders at the moment. Who needs to make way? Nakamba?

Edited August 8, 2021 by Vive_La_Villa

[alreadyexists]

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

What’s net spend though ?

Looks like it varies on a few different sites I looked at, but around £500m net spend over five years. 

[Strog]

9 minutes ago, TheMelvillan said:

Any news on signing Barkley on a permanent after last year's loan spell ?

I like someone with a sense of humour 

[MWARLEY2]

5 minutes ago, alreadyexists said:

Looks like it varies on a few different sites I looked at, but around £500m net spend over five years. 

Be interesting to see our net spend over the same period.

Edit .. just looked and its circa £300 million!!!!!!!!

£460 Mill paid

£160 mill received

Edited August 8, 2021 by MWARLEY2