SPECULATION : Milner to City/Utd/Chelsea/Spurs

[TrentVilla]

Though I agree that loyalty is rare in football. It's true that Ash signing a new contract would reduce the chance of someone putting an offer in for him.

Not really it would just give us a stronger position from which to deal with any approach. Heads get turned regardless of the length of contracts, all the contract does is enable you to demand a higher fee. If a player wants to go then 9 out 10 times they go.

If Milner had signed an extension before the season ended then I doubt Man City would have made an offer. Yes, they have the money to spend what ever they want, but they seem reluctant to offer more than £20m for Milner and if he'd signed an extension then his value would be higher and they'd probably move onto a different target.

You are making a rather sizable assumption there, that Man City weren't interested in Milner before the end of the season. I doubt very much a club with the resources like they have waited until the end of the season and then thought "mmm how about Milner?"

I would imagine they were looking at him throughout the season from when he first moved in the middle.

In fact I know for certain that there was an interest from them in Milner that predated us playing them at their place in the final weeks of the season so who knows how long it had been there or what conversations had taken place.

I think its clear the club tried to talk to Milner towards the end of the season and that there was little or no interest from Milner or his agent in talking about an extension. Should the club have tried earlier? Perhaps but if they had done it at Christmas he would still have had 2 1/2 years on his existing deal. So I can understand why they didn't.

[Rob182]

Though I agree that loyalty is rare in football. It's true that Ash signing a new contract would reduce the chance of someone putting an offer in for him.

Not really it would just give us a stronger position from which to deal with any approach. Heads get turned regardless of the length of contracts, all the contract does is enable you to demand a higher fee. If a player wants to go then 9 out 10 times they go.

[BOF]

Not really it would just give us a stronger position from which to deal with any approach. Heads get turned regardless of the length of contracts, all the contract does is enable you to demand a higher fee. If a player wants to go then 9 out 10 times they go.

While you are right, him signing a contract would at least show that there is no imminent move for him. He wouldn't do anything to jeopardise things that may or may not be in the pipeline, so from a fan's point of view it would be a clear statement that he's not thinking about, or in the process of, leaving. Future bids would be just that. And you're right that it would only give us a bigger transfer fee.

[John]

But if you take silly money out of the equation, can you seriously say that Milner's worth to a team would be more than the combined value of Ireland and Barry. In my opinion, Milners ability is fairly similar to the 2 players mentioned, so to get them both in exchange for him would represent a good deal

A good point Shillzz, but they are willing for Ireland to move on and Barry faces a potential season on the bench with the midfield players they now have available. Given this, I think they would be happy to lose both of these players to get the one player they want and as we are not willing sellers I would expect them to need to top up such a deal with say another £5m or to give Martin the choice of another of their players to that value.

But, I suspect they are looking to play hard ball on this in the way we are and will be happy to drag this out to the last day of the window which would not suit us. As has been said, we should offer him a new deal on his return from holiday (it sure has been a long one) and give him a week to make his mind up (if he has not already had it made up for him).

[Richard]

apparently citeh have "hit a brick wall" in reports today and will look elsewhere

i dont know about everyone else but imd elighted, we are hsowing signs that we wont be pushed around. first liverpool, now citeh

Mixed feelings for me.

Happy that we kept our best player but sad that we would have drastically reduced our transfer budget

[DelboyVilla]

apparently citeh have "hit a brick wall" in reports today and will look elsewhere

i dont know about everyone else but imd elighted, we are hsowing signs that we wont be pushed around. first liverpool, now citeh

Mixed feelings for me.

Happy that we kept our best player but sad that we would have drastically reduced our transfer budget

I know what you mean.

I just get the feeling that we could get 2 or 3 real gems of players with this money? (Other trouble is can we trust MON to unearth them?)

[BOF]

Mixed feelings for me.

Happy that we kept our best player but sad that we would have drastically reduced our transfer budget

Same. I was kind of looking forward to having Ireland in our central midfield and £15m extra to play with.

[barry'sboots]

apparently citeh have "hit a brick wall" in reports today and will look elsewhere

i dont know about everyone else but imd elighted, we are hsowing signs that we wont be pushed around. first liverpool, now citeh

Mixed feelings for me.

Happy that we kept our best player but sad that we would have drastically reduced our transfer budget

But we will have kept our best player who we should be building a team around?

Bring in Bentley (8), Keane (6), Prince Boateng (5) and Flamini (5) and sell Heskey (2), Shorey (2), Davies (6 or swap for Keane/Bentley), Sidwell (2), NRC (2), Beye (1) and we have a net spend of 9m (and probably little change in wage bill) which is less than normal and less than the speculated sponsorship deal and I think we would have a much stronger side than last year with options out wide, up front and in the CM?

[villabromsgrove]

I have to chuckle when I see a wee bit of disappointment at the realisation that we just might keep our best player at the club!

[Stevo985]

Agree with BOF.

If certain people's assumptions that we have no transfer budget are true, then I think at this stage I'd rather sell him, especially if it was 15m plus Ireland.

That said, if we've got 20m to spend anyway, I'm ok with it. We keep one of our best players and still have money to make additions.

[carew_villa]

I've heard we've agreed a deal for Milner, it's just that Villa and Citeh are negotiating a deal for Ireland. That sounds believable.

[Zatman]

I have to chuckle when I see a wee bit of disappointment at the realisation that we just might keep our best player at the club!

Where was Richard Dunne linked to?

[Shillzz]

The idea of being able to replace Milner with Ireland, Keane and Flamini with a net spend of at most £0, if not less, sounds like fantastic business.

[DelboyVilla]

The idea of being able to replace Milner with Ireland, Keane and Flamini with a net spend of at most £0, if not less, sounds like fantastic business.

I would have to agree on that, but we will probably end up with, Bramble, Benjani and Bullard??? :shock:

[villabromsgrove]

I have to chuckle when I see a wee bit of disappointment at the realisation that we just might keep our best player at the club!

Where was Richard Dunne linked to?

Dunney was only the best up until february then he was playing with sore achilles and less effective, typical Villa! Mind you, that's just reminded me that Milly looked knackered and below his best in the last few weeks of the season as well.

[TrentVilla]

Two pages of off topic stuff removed, please keep this on topic.

Please also stop quoting entire conversations in massive quotes.

[Chindie]

Mixed feelings for me.

Happy that we kept our best player but sad that we would have drastically reduced our transfer budget

Same. I was kind of looking forward to having Ireland in our central midfield and £15m extra to play with.

Similar. I think the money could do a lot for this side. I'm also one of those that doesn't believe Milner is quite as good as he's cracked up to be (not saying he's a bad player, by any means, probably our best one way or another). I think if we were to get £25-£30m for him we'd be laughing, he's not worth that in any realm bar one where Citeh come knocking.

Not necessarily desperate for Ireland mind .

[Richard]

But we will have kept our best player who we should be building a team around?

and with little money to build that team? The rest of your post is just FM stuff really

[sir_gary_cahill]

apparently citeh have "hit a brick wall" in reports today and will look elsewhere

i dont know about everyone else but imd elighted, we are hsowing signs that we wont be pushed around. first liverpool, now citeh

Mixed feelings for me.

Happy that we kept our best player but sad that we would have drastically reduced our transfer budget

But we will have kept our best player who we should be building a team around?

Bring in Bentley (8), Keane (6), Prince Boateng (5) and Flamini (5) and sell Heskey (2), Shorey (2), Davies (6 or swap for Keane/Bentley), Sidwell (2), NRC (2), Beye (1) and we have a net spend of 9m (and probably little change in wage bill) which is less than normal and less than the speculated sponsorship deal and I think we would have a much stronger side than last year with options out wide, up front and in the CM?

No Dorrans? Is he not flavour of the month anymore?

[PompeyVillan]

Nobody actually knows what our transfer budget is to be fair.

All this 'sell to buy' business is born out of an interview with Randy whereby he refused to be drawn into giving away what our transfer budget is.

I think the transfer policy at Villa is as it seems to always have been. If MON wants a player then he'll ask the owner, and if it's reasonable and realistic it'll be sanctioned. I don't think there are any hard fast budget constraints, but a good understanding between the owner and manager.