Jump to content

The RJW63 Official Jack Grealish Appreciation Thread


kevangrealish

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Makes no difference. He’s a footballer with negotiating power. 

People need to stop thinking with emotion. Any player worth their salt would ask for a release clause and if they’re good enough to be in a strong negotiating position they’ll get it. 
 

It’s not like it was a tiny release clause. It was £100m. Last summer we’d have all agreed nobody would pay that

It's the 6th most expensive transfer of all time, and some people are still unhappy thinking we got short changed.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, villa4europe said:

English transfer record and 2m€ off the 5th highest transfer of all time and people are questioning the sanity of the £100m as if it was like what we did with gueye 

£100m is mad money 

And last season plenty of people were saying “I hope we’ve put a release clause in” (even though that makes no sense as the selling club) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, sne said:

Noticed that all Villa players used the word brother in their farewell tweets to him. Gotta wonder if this was a passive aggressive little poke at him for abandoning ship?

I wouldn’t give footballers the intelligence for that and even if so, it’d be lost on Jack anyway! 😅

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

telling is the video didn't have anything from last season, it's almost like it's been in cold storage since last summer.😉

Very good point!

Edit: there was a little bit - a few slides after scoring (Liverpool at home etc). Could have been edited at a later date I guess. 

Edited by Xela
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t disbelieve that Buendia, Young, and Bailey were all signed to show that ambition. City are honestly so toxic and bad for football. I’m surprised there aren’t legal ramifications for the journalists who leaked info about the clause. It’s still curious that Purslow referred to it as a so-called release clause. I think Purslow did his best in the circumstances and put the club first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

English transfer record and 2m€ off the 5th highest transfer of all time and people are questioning the sanity of the £100m as if it was like what we did with gueye 

£100m is mad money 

Especially for a player unable to finish an entire season, hadn’t really played any internationals or European football. The club honestly didn’t think it would happen. That much I’m sure. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, VillaAlex said:

Probably because Neil actually wrote his and Grealish probably went through a PR company rather than writing it himself.

I think Grealish wrote his own statement - that's why it's so poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tomav84 said:

the athletic article just goes to show how much he wanted out. looks like purslow et al tried to make it difficult for him by stalling on accepting the bid and trying to do a deal with someone other than city. i think purslow didn't like the idea of him leaving on good terms with the fans when he's wanted out for a while...made him go onto the training pitch to watch the rest of the lads train etc.

 

He was gutted when the Spurs deal didn't go through in 2018.

We should have seen it coming.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

I absolutely can believe that De Bruyne tapped him up too 

Nobody tapped him up. Southgate didn’t ‘have a word’.

He wanted CL football simple as that. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people are being extremely harsh on Jack here. Obviously I'm not expecting people to be delighted that we've lost our captain and it hurts to see him happy elsewhere, but I think people are taking it all way too personally.

Yes, he asked for a release clause. But it wasn't a small clause like £40m or £50m, it was £100m and by the sounds of it only valid if a CL club came in and we weren't in the CL. I think that's understandable rather than disloyal personally.

Frankly it's not often a club wants to make you the most expensive English player ever, and there's a real argument it's now or never for a big move. A big injury or a bad season and his chance of playing in the CL is gone, possibly for good (it'd be hard for us to break into the CL even with continued investment and Jack).

There's some jobs I'd really like in my own industry, and I sure as hell wouldn't pass on them if offered to give Villa a better chance of finishing higher in the league table. It's always easy to say someone else should give up their dreams so you can get what you want, but the other person might not be so keen.

I don't think him leaving for City precludes him being a Villa fan. He's just chosen to be selfish in this instance, and you won't get very far in life if you never do that.

At the end of the day, he's passed up the chance to be a Villa legend but he should still be recognised and appreciated for doing a lot for the club. I'm not going to cheer him in a City shirt but he's certainly not dead to me.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

I don’t disbelieve that Buendia, Young, and Bailey were all signed to show that ambition. City are honestly so toxic and bad for football. I’m surprised there aren’t legal ramifications for the journalists who leaked info about the clause. It’s still curious that Purslow referred to it as a so-called release clause. I think Purslow did his best in the circumstances and put the club first. 

If the ESL would have just been city, the Pl wouldn't have blinked, they're very much the biggest threat to the Pl in modern times. The PL are desperate to bring them to heal but City are tying them up in legality because they take the view that it's better to carry on and spend £30m in legal fees making themselves so difficult to tackle than the Pl will eventually give up.  PSG are the same behind the scenes in the game it's a huge problem, Collymore despite his various faults called it last week saying they fear talking about, he's right City have a gang of lawyers that aggressively pursue anyone challenging them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jjaacckk91 said:

I was speaking to an arsenal friend of mine about this transfer and it just makes me bitter.

There's no way we accept 100m unless there's a clause, I basically said this to him, he argued, so I said if he played for arsenal and man city offered 100m would you accept it, and they said "with all respect to villa, that's a bit different though" I obviously disagree it's any different with where arsenal are right now, but...

This is the problem both with this sale and with this clause, I feel mugged off that it makes us look unambitious yet again, villa is a **** big club, both historically and the infrastructure, yet all other teams(and no doubt players) see is not much different than Burnley, Southampton, Brighton, Newcastle, palace in terms of current ambition.

I honestly believe in this board and backroom we have we seem to be doing all the right things in building up a young and talented squad, but this clause just hurts man, it wasn't enough for a release clause, especially not our captain and talisman.

If we refused the buy out release clause he wouldn't have signed the contract in the first place and would run his contract down.

Instead we got 100 M out of it. Guy wanted out. There is nothing we could have done.

And again if we put 150-200M on that release clause he also probably wouldn't have signed it.

Edited by villalad21
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will he be playing in the charity shield today? I heard that they have a few players out for the start of the season. 

I'll not be watching it regardless of if he's playing or not, it's been about 3 years since I watched a top flight or European game that didn't include the Villa. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

If we refused the buy out release clause he wouldn't have signed the contract in the first place and would run his contract down.

Instead we got 100 M out of it. Guy wanted out. There is nothing we could have done.

And again if we put 150-200M on that release clause he also probably wouldn't have signed it.

He would have because it's guaranteed money, a contract to a footballer is not sold as £10k or £20k p/w. it's sold as guaranteed £100m over 5 years, so Jacks new contract with us (should he have signed) would have been £60m over 5 years or stay as you are and have £26m over 4 years. There's absolutely no way as a footballer you wouldn't take that,  it could all end tomorrow with a bad challenge. 

He can talk about trophies but the reality is he's getting an extra £40m guaranteed on top of our offer this is the difference, even with our owners wealth and the possibility that we can generate £500m pounds a year as a club down the line, you can not compete with Oil clubs.  That's why it's a massive problem not just for us but the game. If you think the halls of power at Old Trafford, Anfield aren't alarmed by this deal your wrong. That is why they went for the ESL, they face financial ruin to try and compete and the average fan expects them to compete, and gary Silly **** Neville starts talking about communities. This is ruthless business now, from that point of view I can see why Grealish's family and jack have done this, but they've been underhand in it and used villa to get it, that's what i can't forgive it's against my morals especially when it comes to the Villa.

Edited by Fairy In Boots
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, leemond2008 said:

Will he be playing in the charity shield today? I heard that they have a few players out for the start of the season. 

I'll not be watching it regardless of if he's playing or not, it's been about 3 years since I watched a top flight or European game that didn't include the Villa. 

Bench.

Guardiola confirmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fairy In Boots said:

He would have because it's guaranteed money, a contract to a footballer is not sold as £10k or £20k p/w. it's sold as guaranteed £100m over 5 years, so Jacks new contract with us (should he have signed) would have been £60m over 5 years or stay as you are and have £26m over 4 years. There's absolutely no way as a footballer you wouldn't take that it could end tomorrow with a bad challenge. 

He can talk about trophies but the reality is he's getting an extra £40m guaranteed on top of our offer this is the difference, even with our owners wealth and the possibility that we can generate £500m pounds a year as a club down the line, you can not compete with Oil clubs.  That's why it's a massive problem not just for us but the game. If you think the halls of power at Old Trafford, Anfield aren't alarmed by this deal your wrong. That is why they went for the ESL, they face financial ruin to try and compete and the average fan expects them to compete, and gary Silly **** Neville starts talking about communities. This is ruthless business now, from that point of view i can see why Grealish's family and jack have done this, but they've been underhand in it and used villa to get it, that's what i can't forgive it's against my morals especially when it comes to the Villa.

We offered him more money than City.

Still wanted to leave.

I don't think he would have accepted the deal if we put a 150-200 M on the release clause.

Edited by villalad21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â