Popular Post sne Posted October 22, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted October 22, 2021 I'd rather we'd gone for him than for Ings if I'm honest, and I felt the same way in the summer. Not that Ings isn't currently a better attacker but for squad dynamics and looking long term I think Alvarez would have been the better and smarter signing. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TrentVilla Posted October 22, 2021 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted October 22, 2021 2 minutes ago, sne said: I'd rather we'd gone for him than for Ings if I'm honest, and I felt the same way in the summer. Not that Ings isn't currently a better attacker but for squad dynamics and looking long term I think Alvarez would have been the better and smarter signing. Ings is a very good player but I said at the time it was a signing that didn’t really make sense and I still feel that. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 Just now, TrentVilla said: Ings is a very good player but I said at the time it was a signing that didn’t really make sense and I still feel that. Yup, same here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 8 minutes ago, TrentVilla said: I think I’ve posted this before, I’ve a friend who is Argentinian and a former professional player turned agent. Spoke to him a lot about Buendia who he doesn’t particularly rate which concerns me, but he reckons this lad is a superstar of tomorrow and will be the Argentinian number 9. If your friend doesn't rate Buendia and thinks Alvarez is a much better player then we could be in for a real treat if we managed to sign him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 Just now, TrentVilla said: Ings is a very good player but I said at the time it was a signing that didn’t really make sense and I still feel that. At the time it seemed questionable but I assumed they had a plan for him, but the more I see us play, it seems an awful lot like they just signed the biggest name they could secure on a conditional basis to ease the blow of Grealish going. We still haven't played our best 11 this season, but I don't see how the return of Bailey is going to make the Ings signing make sense. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAZZAM Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 This felt like a Mackenzie signing and it was a relative gamble for 15 mill. But still felt it would get done. But we just seem to shut up shop after the Bailey/Ings deals. Like it was a blunt refusal to get fleeced by any means after receiving the 100mill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 1 hour ago, sne said: I'd rather we'd gone for him than for Ings if I'm honest, and I felt the same way in the summer. Not that Ings isn't currently a better attacker but for squad dynamics and looking long term I think Alvarez would have been the better and smarter signing. Bearing in mind the money Ings will be costing us, I'm with you yes. Zero issue with Ings as a player. A real luxury to be signing someone like that, ready to go. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 I know Dean is struggling to get Ings and Ollie to play together but surly we need Ings as a backup. If Ollie gets injured who do we play up front? Davis? We need to have backup for Ollie but Dean appears hellbent on forcing both of them into the same starting 11 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjaacckk91 Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 33 minutes ago, Peter Griffin said: I know Dean is struggling to get Ings and Ollie to play together but surly we need Ings as a backup. If Ollie gets injured who do we play up front? Davis? We need to have backup for Ollie but Dean appears hellbent on forcing both of them into the same starting 11 Without putting words in the posters above mouths though, this is exactly what they mean. He is clearly a very good player, and a goalscorer. But he did not come here to sit on the bench, he will want to play every week, and so will Oli. So it leaves us in a position where we shoehorn both in, at the cost of unbalancing the squad. We heavily invested in wingers this summer, and now we don't play with them, because of the above, I think buendia especially is suffering from this despite seeming having everything a no10 needs he just isn't comfortable there yet. Qualify for Europe and it all makes a lot more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 2 minutes ago, jjaacckk91 said: Without putting words in the posters above mouths though, this is exactly what they mean. He is clearly a very good player, and a goalscorer. But he did not come here to sit on the bench, he will want to play every week, and so will Oli. So it leaves us in a position where we shoehorn both in, at the cost of unbalancing the squad. We heavily invested in wingers this summer, and now we don't play with them, because of the above, I think buendia especially is suffering from this despite seeming having everything a no10 needs he just isn't comfortable there yet. Qualify for Europe and it all makes a lot more sense. I agree with that but if we don't play the best system for Villa and if we shoehorn players into the wrong system then we won't qualify for Europe and then it won't make sense. A bit of a catch 22 for Dean and a tough one for him to get right. Fingers crossed he finds the solution to playing our best players in a system that gets us wins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steero113 Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 1 hour ago, Peter Griffin said: I know Dean is struggling to get Ings and Ollie to play together but surly we need Ings as a backup. If Ollie gets injured who do we play up front? Davis? We need to have backup for Ollie but Dean appears hellbent on forcing both of them into the same starting 11 Archer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 34 minutes ago, Steero113 said: Archer. Not enough experience yet but he is getting there. Before this season started do you think having Ollie as our only striker with Archer as backup would be acceptable for a club with aspirations of a top half finish? I certainly don't 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a-k Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 55 minutes ago, Steero113 said: Archer. Archer was barely on the first team radar when we signed Ings. Imagine Ings went to Spurs a few weeks later for 15mil and we're lining up against Newcastle with Big Wes in the middle. This place would have been in meltdown wondering why we didn't go in for Ings to have another striker. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWARLEY2 Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 2 hours ago, jjaacckk91 said: He is clearly a very good player, and a goalscorer. But he did not come here to sit on the bench, he will want to play every week, and so will Oli. So it leaves us in a position where we shoehorn both in, at the cost of unbalancing the squad. We heavily invested in wingers this summer, and now we don't play with them, because of the above, I think buendia especially is suffering from this despite seeming having everything a no10 needs he just isn't comfortable there yet. This is the problem that you get when you have a squad full of players who deserve to start. I have said it before and i will say it again. The 2 most productive players in our squad last season were Bailey and Buendia with something like 30 goals and 26 assists between them. Dean needs those 2 in the team and then work the system round them . 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjaacckk91 Posted October 22, 2021 Share Posted October 22, 2021 8 minutes ago, MWARLEY2 said: This is the problem that you get when you have a squad full of players who deserve to start. I have said it before and i will say it again. The 2 most productive players in our squad last season were Bailey and Buendia with something like 30 goals and 26 assists between them. Dean needs those 2 in the team and then work the system round them . Couldn't agree with that more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted October 22, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted October 22, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, a-k said: Archer was barely on the first team radar when we signed Ings. Imagine Ings went to Spurs a few weeks later for 15mil and we're lining up against Newcastle with Big Wes in the middle. This place would have been in meltdown wondering why we didn't go in for Ings to have another striker. We needed to sign someone who can play striker for this reason, but we didn't necessarily have to sign someone who would expect to start up front every game. We could have signed a solid young prospect to play backup (a gamble that could easily go wrong like it did for Wolves last season) or we could have signed a starting winger who could play up top as a back up (I actually think we did with Bailey). Not taking anything away from Ings as he is a fantastic player. I was very happy that we signed him and I still am. It just didn't make complete sense to me from a squad building point of view, but then it didn't have to. Edited October 22, 2021 by Rds1983 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Follyfoot Posted October 28, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted October 28, 2021 We are leading the race to sign this fella next year on a free according to the current bun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted October 28, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted October 28, 2021 6 minutes ago, Follyfoot said: We are leading the race to sign this fella next year on a free according to the current bun Sounds good but assuming they didn't define next year, is that January, summer or next Christmas? Shame it's the Sun as that's most likely nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 On 22/10/2021 at 14:39, TrentVilla said: Ings is a very good player but I said at the time it was a signing that didn’t really make sense and I still feel that. I think it was a badly needed signing, we basically had 1 striker at the club. What would happen if we didn't sign him and Watkins got injured. Davis, Wesley or Archer? We'd be relegated. What doesn't make sense is trying to play 3-5-2 to shoehorn watkins and ings into the same team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted October 28, 2021 Share Posted October 28, 2021 I doubted the links to this player in the summer as there was no reliable sources reporting our interest, and I seriously doubt we're interested now as we already have an abundance of wide players and forwards. The only reason that his name has been coming up in the last week or so is because the birmingham mail keep using his name for clickbait articles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts