Tammy Abraham

[MachoFantastico]

There was a time when I would have bit your hand off for Abraham back at Villa. But honestly I think he would be a backup to Ollie at the very best and for how much he'd cost, I don't think it's worth it. Having watched him when he as played for Chelsea, he looks half the player he was for us that Championship season. 

So no, I wouldn't really want him back at Villa at this point. Certainly not at the amount he'd probably cost the club. 

[Dave-R]

5 minutes ago, MachoFantastico said:

There was a time when I would have bit your hand off for Abraham back at Villa. But honestly I think he would be a backup to Ollie at the very best and for how much he'd cost, I don't think it's worth it. Having watched him when he as played for Chelsea, he looks half the player he was for us that Championship season. 

So no, I wouldn't really want him back at Villa at this point. Certainly not at the amount he'd probably cost the club. 

We do not know what he'd cost, part of me wished we could actually know for a start what Chelsea would be willing to sell Tammy at. I believe if by any chance we were in for him that Lange would get him somehow cheaper, what cheap price were talking though I do not know.

I agree he'd be a very good backup to Ollie but I reckon Tammy and Watkins would out do each other regular and be a good pair and strike force for Villa. I do think he's come along nicely since his time with us in the championship. I watched him here and there last season where possible when Villa wernt playing. I felt he were there alot of the times when Chelsea needed him, he contributed and had some very good games. Tammy tries and tries and he's more than just the goals I think. Tammy was one of Chelsea's top scorers also so it's not to bad for his position. He does need more football than what he's getting with Chelsea and I still see that Smith and Villa could offer him more than what he is getting at Chelsea now. I mean the way he's been treat at Chelsea I'm surprised he's not been confidence shot, shows you his character really. He also has time on his side and can improve under Smith given his age. Look how Watkins has improved under Smith, Tammy would be another who would hone his abilitys under our Coach and staff.

What if we got him in on Loan then he goes on some scoring spree and outs Watkins? It's a possibility. The naysayers would soon be behind Tammy but I also think that's one of the reasons they don't want him to rejoin us just in case that happens and he provides direct competition to Watkins.

So my question to you Macho is, wouldn't you bring Tammy in on a loan move with option to buy? It covers the club if it fails but if it works we have a second ace striker under us which we need. If it's one thing that last night highlighted is that Wesely and Davis are not good enough for what we need I think and Tammy in my eyes is much much better than those two.

[Zatman]

13 minutes ago, Dave-R said:

We do not know what he'd cost, part of me wished we could actually know for a start what Chelsea would be willing to sell Tammy at. I believe if by any chance we were in for him that Lange would get him somehow cheaper, what cheap price were talking though I do not know.

I agree he'd be a very good backup to Ollie but I reckon Tammy and Watkins would out do each other regular and be a good pair and strike force for Villa. I do think he's come along nicely since his time with us in the championship. I watched him here and there last season where possible when Villa wernt playing. I felt he were there alot of the times when Chelsea needed him, he contributed and had some very good games. Tammy tries and tries and he's more than just the goals I think. Tammy was one of Chelsea's top scorers also so it's not to bad for his position. He does need more football than what he's getting with Chelsea and I still see that Smith and Villa could offer him more than what he is getting at Chelsea now. I mean the way he's been treat at Chelsea I'm surprised he's not been confidence shot, shows you his character really. He also has time on his side and can improve under Smith given his age. Look how Watkins has improved under Smith, Tammy would be another who would hone his abilitys under our Coach and staff.

What if we got him in on Loan then he goes on some scoring spree and outs Watkins? It's a possibility. The naysayers would soon be behind Tammy but I also think that's one of the reasons they don't want him to rejoin us just in case that happens and he provides direct competition to Watkins.

So my question to you Macho is, wouldn't you bring Tammy in on a loan move with option to buy? It covers the club if it fails but if it works we have a second ace striker under us which we need. If it's one thing that last night highlighted is that Wesely and Davis are not good enough for what we need I think and Tammy in my eyes is much much better than those two.

Why or how would Lange get him cheaper? Chelsea sold Guehi for 20 million to Palace, not sure he ever got near the team. Marina would laugh at us putting in a low bid

[barry'sboots]

23 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Why or how would Lange get him cheaper? Chelsea sold Guehi for 20 million to Palace, not sure he ever got near the team. Marina would laugh at us putting in a low bid

To keep on a theme - that would be very Arsenal of us to go in with a low bid.

We paid £28m + £5m for Watkins and I can't see Tammy going for less than this.  He had a similar record in the Championship, is a similar age, has good top end PL experience and has England caps historically which is slightly countered by the fact that he is not wanted by his team/manager.

[nick76]

3 hours ago, barry'sboots said:

What I said was that I have only really seen highlights of both, since Tammy left us.  I only really watch full games of the Villa or UCL matches with the occasional big game thrown in.  If you have watched full Chelsea and Celtic games then you are in a better position than me to assess both.

From what I have seen of both, they are both decent young prospects.  Tammy was good for us in the Championship, but I wasn't as convinced as many are.  I thought we created a lot and he finished a reasonable share but still got tangled up on the ball a lot of times trying to over elaborate.  I was surprised how well he stepped up to the PL initially, although I think he played in a very good team that created a lot and he was certainly not the finished article - again from what I had seen and talking to my Chelsea supporting mate.  Tuchel obviously doesn't rate him that highly as he wasn't even in most of his matchday squads.

I'd be interested in your views if you have watched a lot more?? 

I'm sure somebody will try and pick holes in what I'm about to say but here is my view

I was a fan in the Championship of Tammy, to see a 21/22 year old playing like that for us was great, in a team that squeezed into the play offs.  I mean after 15 games we were 16th in the league and we'd just lost to QPR, fortunately we got Smith in just a couple weeks before hand to turn things around and then Tammy went on a scoring run of 16 goals in 16 games.  Then we were cooking and that was before the ten match winning run which Tammy scored 5 goals in 9 games.  His had great link up play with Jack as well and I was then very disappointed we didnt get to sign him but understood he wanted to succeed at his boyhood club.  The kid was young and for me had great potential to succeed at the highest level.

In the PL he got that chance under Lampard, at his boyhood club that had the transfer ban and thus bedding in young talent like Abraham and Mount while also having some older players and Tammy scored 15 goals in 34 league appearances scoring a goals every 148 minutes and looking like a great future and still only 22 at the start of that season...22 years old.  In the Champions League he scored  3 in 8 appearances, a goal every 189 minutes including against Lille and Bayern Munich.  He was a pest in the box, latching onto opportunities.  Obviously on 26th Jan this year his opportunities decreased dramatically as Tuchel doesnt seem a fan but before the new year he had scored 6 league goals in 13 matches (there was a 14th match but he played 1 minute at the end against Saints).  He had a ratio of a goal every 172 minutes, which obviously got diluted because of the bits of minutes Tuchel gave him was still a great achievement and just for reference Ollie league ratio last season was a goal every 238 minutes.

Ollie is a dream of a striker, I love him and will only get better.  He runs like no other, his fitness is fantastic, he sees gaps in between defenders for other players to pass to and he pressures the opposition when we dont have the ball.  He is in the build up of play all the time, just a quality striker that will get better and better.  I think Tammy will compliment him and I dont necessarily mean in terms of playing along side him on the pitch.  The only criticism of Ollie is sometimes he's not in the middle of the box when the ball comes in, he's not a fox in the box, a poacher because sometimes he's helped the play and he hasnt been able to get back in the box in time and thus sometimes we dont have anybody waiting in the box.  When Ollie is in the box he's as deadly as any of them, although he did hit the post more times than any other striker last season.  Tammy is very different, that while he does help with the build play it's in a lot smaller zone, where Ollie is all over the attacking half of the pitch, Tammy is all around the box knowing his creative players will find him.  He finds that space in the box to score, and yes he isnt a perfect chance taker yet but he's only 23 years old and still learning and getting better.  The fact that he misses chances but still has a really great goal to game ratio shows that he can still get better.

Somebody said well he scores more goals against weaker teams.  Maybe that's the case but that's not such a bad thing while also scoring against bigger teams occasionally.  We struggle against smaller teams, look at the second half of the season against Sheff Utd, Burnley, Newcastle, West Brom, Wolves etc we just couldnt score.

As for why bring Tammy in when we have Ollie as our main man.  As I say I think they will compliment each other.  I worry about injury to our only main striker (Wes and Davis for another discussion) and if something happens we have all this creative talent and nobody to score but it's more than that we need options for the team.  Ollie is incredibly fit but ran out of steam in some parts of the second half of the season and also had two long spells where he didnt score.  We also have suspensions, form, tactics or just needing a different idea in a game when it isnt working or we are chasing the game.  We have at least two fantastic creators now in Grealish and Buendia, and likely to buy more so we dont need more creators in the striker position we need somebody who can put it in the net and Tammy does that.  He wont have problem settling in like foreign players do, no issues with language, nor the environment,  or the pace and different style of the PL. He knows the players and we've seen him link with many of them and especially Jack who they link so well together and are mates.  So is a very low risk compared to many of the options out there.  It will also make Ollie better because he'll have genuine competition for his place and plus the traits from each other they can learn from each other.  Then if it doesnt work out, Tammy is only 23 so in a couple of years time has resell value.  Just even last night some of the chances created Tammy would've put away easily against Walsall, that one that Davis went in for and missed.

For me to have two quality strikers to have options and competing is a no brainer and his price is unknown from 25m to 30m to 40m....who knows!  He wouldnt be 1st striker, he wouldnt be 2nd striker, he wouldnt be pushing Ollie wide, and all the other excuses some have tried to bring up.  He is a quality striker that would come here to compete with Ollie and give Smith options.  People want to pigeon holder him to dismiss him but because he's young, shown he can scores goals, fits with the team and he's different enough from Ollie to give us that option so it's a no brainer for me we must do everything to get him.

You asked for my view...bit longer than I expected but also not as long as it could've been...

Edited July 22, 2021 by nick76

[Dave-R]

1 hour ago, nick76 said:

I'm sure somebody will try and pick holes in what I'm about to say but here is my view

I was a fan in the Championship of Tammy, to see a 21/22 year old playing like that for us was great, in a team that squeezed into the play offs.  I mean after 15 games we were 16th in the league and we'd just lost to QPR, fortunately we got Smith in just a couple weeks before hand to turn things around and then Tammy went on a scoring run of 16 goals in 16 games.  Then we were cooking and that was before the ten match winning run which Tammy scored 5 goals in 9 games.  His had great link up play with Jack as well and I was then very disappointed we didnt get to sign him but understood he wanted to succeed at his boyhood club.  The kid was young and for me had great potential to succeed at the highest level.

In the PL he got that chance under Lampard, at his boyhood club that had the transfer ban and thus bedding in young talent like Abraham and Mount while also having some older players and Tammy scored 15 goals in 34 league appearances scoring a goals every 148 minutes and looking like a great future and still only 22 at the start of that season...22 years old.  In the Champions League he scored  3 in 8 appearances, a goal every 189 minutes including against Lille and Bayern Munich.  He was a pest in the box, latching onto opportunities.  Obviously on 26th Jan this year his opportunities decreased dramatically as Tuchel doesnt seem a fan but before the new year he had scored 6 league goals in 13 matches (there was a 14th match but he played 1 minute at the end against Saints).  He had a ratio of a goal every 172 minutes, which diluted because of the bits of minutes Tuchel gave him was still a great achievement and just for reference Ollie league ratio last season was a goal every 238 minutes.

Ollie is a dream of a striker, I love him and will only get better.  He runs like no other, his fitness is fantastic, he sees gaps in between defenders for other players to pass to and he pressures the opposition when we dont have the ball.  He is in the build up of play all the time, just a quality striker that will get better and better.  I think Tammy will compliment him and I dont necessarily mean in terms of playing along side him on the pitch.  The only criticism of Ollie is sometimes he's not in the middle of the box when the box comes in, he's not a fox in the box, a poacher because sometimes he's helped the play and he hasnt been able to get back in the box in time and thus sometimes we dont have anybody waiting in the box.  When Ollie is in the box he's as deadly as any of them, although he did hit the post more times than any other striker last season.  Tammy is very different, that while he does help with the build play it's in a lot smaller zone, where Ollie is all over the attacking half of the pitch, Tammy is all around the box knowing his creative players will find him.  He finds that space in the box to score, and yes he isnt a perfect chance taker yet but he's only 23 years old and still learning and getting better.  The fact that he misses chances but still has a really great goal to game ratio shows that he can still get better.

Somebody said well he scores more goals against weaker teams.  Maybe that's the case but that's not such a bad thing plus also scoring against bigger teams.  We struggle against smaller teams, look at the second half of the season against Sheff Utd, Burnley, Newcastle, West Brom, Wolves etc we just couldnt score.

As for why bring Tammy in when we have Ollie as our main man.  As I say I think they will compliment each other.  I worry about injury to our only main striker (Wes and Davis for another discussion) and if something happens we have all this creative talent and nobody to score but it's more than that we need options for the team.  Ollie is incredibly fit but ran out of steam in some parts of the second half of the season and also had two long spells where he didnt score.  We also have suspensions, form, tactics or just needing a different idea in a game when it isnt working or we are chasing the game.  We have at least two fantastic creators now in Grealish and Buendia, and likely to buy more so we dont need more creators in the striker position we need somebody who can put it in the net and Tammy does that.  He wont have problem settling in like foreign players do, no issues with language, the pace and different style of the PL, he knows the players and we've seen him link with many of them and especially Jack who they link so well together and are mates.  So is a very low risk wot many of the options out there.  It will also make Ollie better because he'll have genuine competition for his place and plus the traits from each other they can learn from each other.  Then if it doesnt work out, Tammy is only 23 so in a couple of years time has resell value.  Just even last night some of the chances created Tammy would've put away easily against Walsall, that one that Davis went in for and missed.

For me to have two quality strikers to have options and competing is a no brainer and his price is unknown from 25m, to 30m to 40m....who knows!  He wouldnt be 1st striker, he wouldnt be 2nd striker, he wouldnt be pushing Ollie wide, and all the other excuses some have tried to bring up.  He is a quality striker that would come here to compete with Ollie and give Smith options.  People want to pigeon holder him to dismiss him but because he's young, shown he can scores goals, fits with the team and he's different enough from Ollie to give us that option it's a no brainer for me.

You asked for my view...bit longer than I expected but also not as long as it could've been...

Great post Nick, enjoyed reading it thanks mate..

I agree with it as well and it's also a no brainer for me. What I find round here is people see a Coach or manager doing one thing at one clubs and then all of a sudden they think the rest have to follow suit. For me if some teams don't have a quality second backup striker,then that's on them for any downtime they can't score in we do thave to be like that. You usually find as well that if a main striker gets put out and backups start jumping in, then some teams start going through a rough patch. It wouldn't hurt to for us as a different kind of team anyway (and we do things differently than others) to house a second quality striker and change the state of play. I find no matter what we say there are odd people that don't want to take on board what we say Nick, no matter how Logical and sound it all is, it all floats over there head. 

1: Rotation is a part of squad life, Watkins needed that before half way through last season as well as others.

2: Injury could and probably will come into play at some point and if it does let's rely on Wesley and Davis who couldn't do nothing against Wasall.

3: Exhaustion will also be a factor for a lone striker, rest will be required for Watkins to just breath again regaining full fitness.

4: options with Watkins and Tammy who can be switched at any given notice to make games feel more randomised athing talked about often last season that we couldn't do.

5:  Setting up you should not be using one player all season long, set up with Watkins and Tammy for different teams gives alot of different outcomes and offers greater chance of success.

6: Smith can alternate between Tammy and Watkins, I bet he darnt use Davis and Wesley and will without a doubt play Watkins all season.

7: being banned could be a factor and if Watkins picks up reds then Tammy is on it or visa versa.

8: Dry periods and not scoring could hit your lone main striker so changing to a quality back up gives time to Watkins to sort and regather himself. Let's not add backups that add to the no scoring situation if it starts, otherwise what's the point of a backup being there if they are a missing player.

9: competition, people seem to be fine with the thought of having all our positions having competition but our forward, let's not continue to score goals, not have a player who can give Watkins a run for his money.

10: game changing during a game which gives us alot of options to Smith and Co. Say Watkins starts but is struggling then Tammy  can be brought on. Say we move to having a second striker on during a game which Smith has been known to do, Tammy can be brought on. There are just so many options having a second quality backup at the club. Smith is reluctant to use Davis at times and would rather see out games, then everyone starts complaining when he doesn't use subs in a timely fashion. Do think Smith be straight putting Tammy to use if he had Tammy at his disposal and I've a feeling Smith will think the same with Wesley as he seems to do with Davis. It will be a similar reluctant situation to use one of them when fans start calling for subs because Smith's taking his sweet time.

What surprises me most of all with how people don't see the obvious. We have time to sort this out before the window closes. If having Grealish out last season taught us one thing is that if we're not prepared for a situation and it comes and hits us in the face,then you just slide down the league. We only get a window to put right these possible situations, the moment that window closes we have to go with what we have. let's be smart about the possibility that if Watkins for whatever reason can't be apart of the season or a large part and his game messes up, then we should be making arrangements to have a worthy replacement.

 

 

[barry'sboots]

2 hours ago, nick76 said:

I'm sure somebody will try and pick holes in what I'm about to say but here is my view

I was a fan in the Championship of Tammy, to see a 21/22 year old playing like that for us was great, in a team that squeezed into the play offs.  I mean after 15 games we were 16th in the league and we'd just lost to QPR, fortunately we got Smith in just a couple weeks before hand to turn things around and then Tammy went on a scoring run of 16 goals in 16 games.  Then we were cooking and that was before the ten match winning run which Tammy scored 5 goals in 9 games.  His had great link up play with Jack as well and I was then very disappointed we didnt get to sign him but understood he wanted to succeed at his boyhood club.  The kid was young and for me had great potential to succeed at the highest level.

In the PL he got that chance under Lampard, at his boyhood club that had the transfer ban and thus bedding in young talent like Abraham and Mount while also having some older players and Tammy scored 15 goals in 34 league appearances scoring a goals every 148 minutes and looking like a great future and still only 22 at the start of that season...22 years old.  In the Champions League he scored  3 in 8 appearances, a goal every 189 minutes including against Lille and Bayern Munich.  He was a pest in the box, latching onto opportunities.  Obviously on 26th Jan this year his opportunities decreased dramatically as Tuchel doesnt seem a fan but before the new year he had scored 6 league goals in 13 matches (there was a 14th match but he played 1 minute at the end against Saints).  He had a ratio of a goal every 172 minutes, which obviously got diluted because of the bits of minutes Tuchel gave him was still a great achievement and just for reference Ollie league ratio last season was a goal every 238 minutes.

Ollie is a dream of a striker, I love him and will only get better.  He runs like no other, his fitness is fantastic, he sees gaps in between defenders for other players to pass to and he pressures the opposition when we dont have the ball.  He is in the build up of play all the time, just a quality striker that will get better and better.  I think Tammy will compliment him and I dont necessarily mean in terms of playing along side him on the pitch.  The only criticism of Ollie is sometimes he's not in the middle of the box when the ball comes in, he's not a fox in the box, a poacher because sometimes he's helped the play and he hasnt been able to get back in the box in time and thus sometimes we dont have anybody waiting in the box.  When Ollie is in the box he's as deadly as any of them, although he did hit the post more times than any other striker last season.  Tammy is very different, that while he does help with the build play it's in a lot smaller zone, where Ollie is all over the attacking half of the pitch, Tammy is all around the box knowing his creative players will find him.  He finds that space in the box to score, and yes he isnt a perfect chance taker yet but he's only 23 years old and still learning and getting better.  The fact that he misses chances but still has a really great goal to game ratio shows that he can still get better.

Somebody said well he scores more goals against weaker teams.  Maybe that's the case but that's not such a bad thing while also scoring against bigger teams occasionally.  We struggle against smaller teams, look at the second half of the season against Sheff Utd, Burnley, Newcastle, West Brom, Wolves etc we just couldnt score.

As for why bring Tammy in when we have Ollie as our main man.  As I say I think they will compliment each other.  I worry about injury to our only main striker (Wes and Davis for another discussion) and if something happens we have all this creative talent and nobody to score but it's more than that we need options for the team.  Ollie is incredibly fit but ran out of steam in some parts of the second half of the season and also had two long spells where he didnt score.  We also have suspensions, form, tactics or just needing a different idea in a game when it isnt working or we are chasing the game.  We have at least two fantastic creators now in Grealish and Buendia, and likely to buy more so we dont need more creators in the striker position we need somebody who can put it in the net and Tammy does that.  He wont have problem settling in like foreign players do, no issues with language, nor the environment,  or the pace and different style of the PL. He knows the players and we've seen him link with many of them and especially Jack who they link so well together and are mates.  So is a very low risk compared to many of the options out there.  It will also make Ollie better because he'll have genuine competition for his place and plus the traits from each other they can learn from each other.  Then if it doesnt work out, Tammy is only 23 so in a couple of years time has resell value.  Just even last night some of the chances created Tammy would've put away easily against Walsall, that one that Davis went in for and missed.

For me to have two quality strikers to have options and competing is a no brainer and his price is unknown from 25m to 30m to 40m....who knows!  He wouldnt be 1st striker, he wouldnt be 2nd striker, he wouldnt be pushing Ollie wide, and all the other excuses some have tried to bring up.  He is a quality striker that would come here to compete with Ollie and give Smith options.  People want to pigeon holder him to dismiss him but because he's young, shown he can scores goals, fits with the team and he's different enough from Ollie to give us that option so it's a no brainer for me we must do everything to get him.

You asked for my view...bit longer than I expected but also not as long as it could've been...

I'm absolutely with you regarding a strong second striker option.

I guess many on here think that Wes could fill that gap next season.  I'm not fully convinced but we aren't seeing him in training at the minute.

You didn't answer why you thought Tammy would be better than Edouard though, who could be significantly cheaper??  Again, I get that its not my money but I am conscious of budgets and FFP and the fact that we also have other areas that need strengthening?

[nick76]

1 hour ago, barry'sboots said:

I'm absolutely with you regarding a strong second striker option.

I guess many on here think that Wes could fill that gap next season.  I'm not fully convinced but we aren't seeing him in training at the minute.

You didn't answer why you thought Tammy would be better than Edouard though, who could be significantly cheaper??  Again, I get that its not my money but I am conscious of budgets and FFP and the fact that we also have other areas that need strengthening?

Sorry forgot that part.  I guess I'm just not as wowed as some on Edouard.  I think he's a great young striker but I'm not convinced he will be significantly cheaper because I dont think Celtic will let him go that cheap.  From everything I have read about him the sell on clause is huge, that PSG get 50% of any additional fee Celtic receive over the purchase price that Celtic paid PSG.  So Celtic paid 9m for him so if they sell for 20m then PSG get 5.5m (20m less 9m equals 11m split equally between PSG and Celtic).  That means Celtic only get 14.5m in their pockets.  I heard some people say we could get for 15m but that means Celtic would only get 12m.  It just seems hard to see him being sold for 15m but again the short length left on his contract might dictate that.  We also dont know about Tammy's price from between 25m to 40m or a loan to buy scenario. 

So then we get onto Edouard the player, I'm just not as impressed as some for him to be sufficient for us having watched him play and yes he scores goals at a decent rate in Scotland.  Can he do it at the level we are now at, I'm not totally convinced.  He has all the attributes but are they good enough, maybe, maybe not.  I was never totally convinced but you can definitely see he has talent but I wasnt sure it was enough for top 10 PL level despite it looking good in the Scottish league.  What put me off more was that I was convinced he'd go to Leicester to be with his old mentor Rogers but Rogers plumped for the slightly more expensive Daka....why?  that put alert bells for me because if he was good enough then Leicester would've surely bagged him because of the relationship between him and Rogers. 

I dont know, if we brought him I'd hope for the best but if I had a choice I would go with Tammy despite likely being 15m more expensive because I think he's the better player, has experience at this level and shown he can score goals and is much lower risk and likely more impact that Edouard.  I understand the budget and FFP issue but I think the striker area you only get what you pay for.  We also dont know what the budget is so if we have money, then after a CAM/Winger which ever we buy, then for me the Striker position is the next priority for me.  So if we did buy Bailey and we had cash left over I'd be on the phone to Chelsea doing a deal for Tammy.

[picicata]

I just can't see us dropping £40m on Tammy, I feel this could safely be locked just as the Ward Prowse thread has been. 

[nick76]

4 minutes ago, picicata said:

I just can't see us dropping £40m on Tammy, I feel this could safely be locked just as the Ward Prowse thread has been. 

[AntrimBlack]

Abraham is a one trick pony, and although that trick is very good, I think and hope we will be looking for someone who can play across several offensive positions, and be good enough to be back up to Watkins.

That makes sense to me.

[nick76]

9 minutes ago, AntrimBlack said:

hope we will be looking for someone who can play across several offensive positions

Why? If we buy Bailey for example, then we have Jack, Buendia and Traore as well covering the other offensive positions plus El Ghazi and Trez…why do we need somebody who can play several positions? A jack of all trades either will be out of our league or not good enough for us.  Just feels like people want to say the current ‘in phrase’ with no substance to it.

[Kiwivillan]

Does anyone read those 100 line dissertations?

[CarryOnVilla]

1 minute ago, Kiwivillan said:

Does anyone read those 100 line dissertations?

[AntrimBlack]

11 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Why? If we buy Bailey for example, then we have Jack, Buendia and Traore as well covering the other offensive positions plus El Ghazi and Trez…why do we need somebody who can play several positions? A jack of all trades either will be out of our league or not good enough for us.  Just feels like people want to say the current ‘in phrase’ with no substance to it.

Thanks for that.

I happen to think that my opinion is just as valid as yours, and that I have a mind of my own.

The links with Alvarez and Bailey would support what I am saying, and I am not sure that a very derogatory labelling of them as `jack of all trades' does anything for your argument. There is at least as much substance to their links as to the Abraham link.

As for El ghazi and Trezeguet, neither are good enough for where I think the owners want us to be, and Traore is gloriously unpredictable, so for me there is not enough cover.

Either of those `jack of all trades' that you mention I would be very happy to have in the club.

[nick76]

1 minute ago, AntrimBlack said:

Thanks for that.

I happen to think that my opinion is just as valid as yours, and that I have a mind of my own.

The links with Alvarez and Bailey would support what I am saying, and I am not sure that a very derogatory labelling of them as `jack of all trades' does anything for your argument. There is at least as much substance to their links as to the Abraham link.

As for El ghazi and Trezeguet, neither are good enough for where I think the owners want us to be, and Traore is gloriously unpredictable, so for me there is not enough cover.

Either of those `jack of all trades' that you mention I would be very happy to have in the club.

Bailey would be in replacement to our ESR bids.  Different players but it looks like we were after a CAM or Winger, so we didn’t get ESR for CAM so Bailey links might mean we are after a winger now.  So maybe Jack or Buendia moves centrally.

As for Alvarez, I’d much rather have an Tammy than Alvarez.  So many reasons as discussed before.  Even excluding El Ghazi and Trez, having Jack, Buendia, Traore and (say) Bailey is enough forward creative options so we need somebody to put the ball in net not somebody who can play in many positions as a jack of all trades and a master of none.

[CarryOnVilla]

There hasn’t been a reported link in weeks and we still having the same debates that were on the first page 

 

 

[Keyblade]

1 minute ago, CarryOnVilla said:

There hasn’t been a reported link in weeks and we still having the same debates that were on the first page 

 

 

This is honestly one of the worst threads on VT.

[picicata]

This is like the Rashica thread minus the weak humour. 

[HalfTimePost]

I don't think we should spend £40m on Tammy to sit on our bench when we have bigger needs elsewhere.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 22, 2021 by HalfTimePost