Jump to content

Jack Grealish


kevangrealish
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • VT Supporter
14 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Here's my thinking from what I know with some quite bit leaps of assumption.

I know he sold his house in Barnt Green fairly recently.

At the World Cup he did look a bit not himself. A bit pensive. As though something was weighing on his mind.

A few people have said that Man City were convinced the deal was done because they reserved a box for Grealish, which is something believable because it's something mundane they would have to do and someone wouldn't think of just making that up.

So I guess that just before the WC or during, Jack met City's reps and agreed terms in principle. It would also point to there being a release clause because if not, there would be endless speculation about bids and you'd have villa saying no straight away. Perhaps £100m is the wild figure no-one ever thought was realistic but has now turned out to be.

But as time has gone on and Jack has considered his options. 

According to Preece, NSWE decided to have a real good go at it this season and have decided to show Jack our ambition by going in for some big name players and exciting him into being the main man with Buendia, Bailey and potentially others to build a top 4 challenging side.

This with City's latest FFP troubles may have given Jack enough doubt about the move to have a real good think and then with the not meaningless IG posts by Jack and McGinn yesterday makes me think he'll meet Dean later this week and they'll work out a renumeration package close enough to City's for him to stay.

That's where I am anyway.

Has he?  That's the first time I've seen that mentioned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Eastie said:

If as sam lee claimed it was all agreed on July 2 then I feel for villa fans who spent cash on tickets merchandise etc expecting Jack to be here - I really hope Sam lee is wrong on that as it would leave a sour taste . 

July 2nd Jack was in Rome, no way Southgate lets a player do a contract deal during his camp

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sidcow said:

Has he?  That's the first time I've seen that mentioned?

Brother in law lives in BG  - he hasn't mentioned this. 

With Grealishes wealth - I wouldn't think he would need to sell on house to buy another.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mat Kendrick's Dentist said:

Of course I understand people will be triggered. In my personal opinion, Jack leaving would be an absolute disaster. But people were triggered when it was reported Delph, Milner, and many others were going, and claimed it was clickbait/ITK bollocks, etc. That's what happens when a journo reports news that is unpopular with your team's fans. People need to understand that these things aren't black and white. There clearly is something in the Jack to City link, as it'd be very easy for someone from any of the 3 camps to quash it otherwise. Hopefully Villa can convince Jack to stay on for at least another year, but even if we can, it doesn't mean there was nothing in the link

personally i think that there is interest from city, but i think sources claiming to be "done" are very premature and IMO, it's being done to create drama so that they can sell the stories as a "dramatic U turn" if he signs a new deal.

if percy or romano confirmed a bid had been made we wouldn't call them clickbait bollocks. we do however have reservations based on how the athletic stories are written that they very much cover all bases and it comes across as something written by one of the rags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, birdman said:

He'll do the right thing I'm sure and if not, well we'll just have to send Meatball round in his turkey outfit to sort him out! 


That should convince him! And for some reason made me remember this:

https://tenor.com/view/peep-show-johnson-turkey-****-gif-13072856

 

Edited by It's Your Round
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • VT Supporter
7 minutes ago, StanBalaban said:

I thought this was roundly debunked as it was another house on the same street that was sold. Plus, he'd have no need to sell it as him and his father have an extensive portfolio of properties they rent. 

Yep, I'm not giving it as evidence of anything. I was just told a couple of weeks ago by a friend that his estate agent had just sold Jack's house in Barnt Green. The estate agent took it to mean he was off to City "100%" but I said it could mean anything.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Okonokos said:

Didn't @Pissflapsconfirm that it was his boss (who happens to live next door to Jack) who sold his house?

sure i saw it elsewhere on social media by someone who lives on the same road that it was the house next door

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

If we are getting into the guesswork game here's my wild shot in the dark.

I'm guessing there is a clause (for multiple reasons i wont go into) and man City have triggered it (hence the confidence from their side). 

However our owners have told grealish they won't accept the clause. This would better explain jacks seeming u turn as it would be up to him to take the club to court to fight this.....thats a fair way to ruin a relationship with the club!

I watch far too much tv

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
5 minutes ago, StanBalaban said:

Yes, but you can't just repost a still. If you repost the club's video, the whole video would be on Jack's story timeline. To get the still requires a conscious decision to post that photo, and then tag the club (as it's not their original post).

Does Jack do it himself or does his 'team'? I am sure his agency carefully controls his social media output, I am sure that like most of the top players. For example I dont for a minute think Rashfords output is all in his own words, its a narrative thought out by his management team and then scripted in a way that sounds as though he might have said it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Mat Kendrick's Dentist said:

It's the total opposite of pie in the sky. Personal terms are agreed before a fee between clubs for literally every transfer nowadays. There's no point in going through a thorough transfer process if the player doesn't even want to come

I get that... But we wouldnt be letting our star player agree personal terms with another club, especially the likes of City, before we've offered him an improved deal and discussed where his future lies face to face. City's agreed offer will undoubtedly be bigger and worth £Xm's more than ours. It would undermine Villa's position and the improved terms we offer him. The only way it happens is if we've agreed to sell him (which I doubt is likely at this point) otherwise why bother offering him a new contract? 

If his agent has already got assurances from City about the terms they would offer, without our permission, then that would be considered tapping up would it not? 

The way Sam Lee is reporting sounds totally illogical from a business perspective. 

Edited by The Other Mat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nigel said:

If we are getting into the guesswork game here's my wild shot in the dark.

I'm guessing there is a clause (for multiple reasons i wont go into) and man City have triggered it (hence the confidence from their side). 

However our owners have told grealish they won't accept the clause. This would better explain jacks seeming u turn as it would be up to him to take the club to court to fight this.....thats a fair way to ruin a relationship with the club!

I watch far too much tv

that's literally the point of a clause, you can't just "not accept it". there is no fight to be had in any court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nigel said:

If we are getting into the guesswork game here's my wild shot in the dark.

I'm guessing there is a clause (for multiple reasons i wont go into) and man City have triggered it (hence the confidence from their side). 

However our owners have told grealish they won't accept the clause. This would better explain jacks seeming u turn as it would be up to him to take the club to court to fight this.....thats a fair way to ruin a relationship with the club!

I watch far too much tv

Probably more realistic than whatever Gregg and Sam at the Athletic are saying 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tomav84 said:

that's literally the point of a clause, you can't just "not accept it". there is no fight to be had in any court.

Liverpool didn't accept Suarez bid from Arsenal. Going to guess Purslow inserted that 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Zatman said:

July 2nd Jack was in Rome, no way Southgate lets a player do a contract deal during his camp

The agent would do the negotiating and report back to Jack presumably , Southgate did an interview in the euros where he admitted players were still in touch with agents etc as  life goes on outside the bubble . 
it’s Sam lee who’s claiming his reliable contact told him it was all agreed on July 2nd , not me 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Sam Lee isn't even respected by the city fans on their forums and his tweet this morning being put down as his usual covering all bases nonsense. 

Looking at the facts:

- Not one respected publication has reported a bid. If there was a release clause, city would have just bid and been done with it.

- I've no doubt Jacks agent is speaking with City or whoever, it's his job to get the best deal for Jack(and him) but this will most likely lead to Jack signing a new deal at villa on wages matching one of the best and most sought after players in the PL.

- Jack and the clubs social media posts are no fluke either, if you've agreed a deal to move to another club, you keep quiet.

I expect Jack to be back at the club next week and a new deal announced within a week. As posted before, if the club was to respond to all newspaper rumours, it would never end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Here's my thinking from what I know with some quite bit leaps of assumption.

I know he sold his house in Barnt Green fairly recently.

At the World Cup he did look a bit not himself. A bit pensive. As though something was weighing on his mind.

A few people have said that Man City were convinced the deal was done because they reserved a box for Grealish, which is something believable because it's something mundane they would have to do and someone wouldn't think of just making that up.

So I guess that just before the WC or during, Jack met City's reps and agreed terms in principle. It would also point to there being a release clause because if not, there would be endless speculation about bids and you'd have villa saying no straight away. Perhaps £100m is the wild figure no-one ever thought was realistic but has now turned out to be.

But as time has gone on and Jack has considered his options. 

According to Preece, NSWE decided to have a real good go at it this season and have decided to show Jack our ambition by going in for some big name players and exciting him into being the main man with Buendia, Bailey and potentially others to build a top 4 challenging side.

This with City's latest FFP troubles may have given Jack enough doubt about the move to have a real good think and then with the not meaningless IG posts by Jack and McGinn yesterday makes me think he'll meet Dean later this week and they'll work out a renumeration package close enough to City's for him to stay.

That's where I am anyway.

What World Cup have I missed something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â