TrentVilla Posted July 26, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 26, 2012 He is a decent player, probably a more than decent player but he is no way shape or form 'worth the money' they are supposed to want for him given his actual record in the Premier League. Not even close. Liverpool massively over paid for him, everyone knows that including them and now they are doing their best to save face and money and recoup as much as they can. If their reported asking price of £20m is correct then quite simply it is a massively over inflated asking price, over inflated not because of competition for his signature or because of his performances but by the fee they paid Newcastle out of their desperation to fill the hole left by Torres. With a few weeks to go of last season what would people have valued Carroll at? I'd say £8-10m at most and that is being generous then he gets a goal in the cup final and finds himself in the England team and again gets a goal and suddenly he is worth £20m! He isn't a bad player, in fact with the right service he could be a very decent player but he isn't worth £20m not even remotely close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 This ^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 what would people value gabby at? because carroll is undoubtedly a better player, so should be worth a bit more personally, id have gabby worth about £8m, with carroll at £12m but then i'm probably forgetting to add in the english tax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Gabby £8m, Carroll £10m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Folski Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 what would people value gabby at? because carroll is undoubtedly a better player, so should be worth a bit more personally, id have gabby worth about £8m, with carroll at £12m but then i'm probably forgetting to add in the english tax Its tough to say Gabby has a really poor 2 seasons in terms of goal scoring and Carroll's value is always going to be inflated due to the silly money Liverpool paid at the time. Also Gabby is at the moment on a downward slope, while Carroll pretty much hit rock bottom before a strong finish (by his liverpool standards) to the season coupled with his performances for England in the Euros. If you look at Gabby before O'Neill left I believe we could have got up to £15mil for him, had City, Liverpool etc come in for him. However, at the end of last season with AMc in charge you'd probably take something like £6mil under serious consideration. To get Carroll before he joined Liverpool you'd have thought £15mil - £20mil would be more than enough considering his lack of experience at this level and how well he would have appeared to have adapted to the league. One thing which is very interesting is Gabby has 53 goals in 214 premiership games or 25%, Carroll has 20 in 83 or 24%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 He is a decent player, probably a more than decent player but he is no way shape or form 'worth the money' they are supposed to want for him given his actual record in the Premier League. Not even close. Liverpool massively over paid for him, everyone knows that including them and now they are doing their best to save face and money and recoup as much as they can. If their reported asking price of £20m is correct then quite simply it is a massively over inflated asking price, over inflated not because of competition for his signature or because of his performances but by the fee they paid Newcastle out of their desperation to fill the hole left by Torres With a few weeks to go of last season what would people have valued Carroll at? I'd say £8-10m at most and that is being generous then he gets a goal in the cup final and finds himself in the England team and again gets a goal and suddenly he is worth £20m! He isn't a bad player, in fact with the right service he could be a very decent player but he isn't worth £20m not even remotely close. Do you think if we offered Liverpool 2m plus the revenue from the Downing sale they would accept that offer? Would be very interesting to see if we placed Bent on the transfer market, what we would value him at as opposed to what other clubs would be willing to pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolteExile Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Ive got a feeling he may have a look at Jordan Rhodes for the target man role? Dunno why - Just a hunch I'd be happier with that. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, he's young, would see this as a step up in his career and he wouldn't be chucking his toys out of the pram if he wasn't initially a first team regular. If he goes on to cement a place in the side and chips in with 15/20 goals per season - by all means pay the big wages THEN. Giving a proven knobend like Carroll (who couldn't even be arsed to look after himself properly at his hometown club) £60-80k per week from the outset sends out all the wrong signals. It says to the wider footballing world we deal in rejects and says to the younger players we have at the club that training and dedication to the sport is optional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 26, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 26, 2012 Do you think if we offered Liverpool 2m plus the revenue from the Downing sale they would accept that offer? No I don't think they would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czechlad Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Jeez only 6 goals in 42 League appearances for Liverpool. I thought it'd be higher than that. He is a good player but I wouldn't pay more than £12m for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulver Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Looks like West Ham have put in a bid as mooted a day or so ago According to BBC teletext anyway Thank **** for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanpabloangel18 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 what would people value gabby at? because carroll is undoubtedly a better player Carroll has 20 PL Goals, 83 PL apps, 4.15 apps per goal, age 23 Gabby has 53 PL Goals, 214 PL apps, 4.04 apps per goal, age 25 Gabby's definitely a more proven player at the top level, especially when you take into account that probably 50+ of Gabby's apps were on the dreaded wing. I don't think you can say Carroll is 'undoubtedly' a better player to be honest. Big seasons for both of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanpabloangel18 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 you'd probably take something like £6mil under serious consideration 6 mil?! Please tell me this is a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrim Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 So it sounds like they're offering it all next season on the basis they're still in the league. Typical cockney barra boys. Trying to buy players on tick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanpabloangel18 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Sorry to labour the point, but only these current PL strikers have scored more PL goals than Gabby (in order): Rooney -26 Defoe - 29 Bent -28 Van Persie - 28 Bellamy - 33 Adebayor - 28 Tevez - 28 Torres - 28 Crouch - 31 (Gabby) - 25 From that list we would have a slim chance of signing Defoe (who most Villa fans probably aren't desperate to sign anyway), and I doubt anyone would want Crouch back. I think that's pretty enlightening, given that Gabby's still got at least 4/5 good years in him. We're lucky to have him. Frankly, I can only hope some of you start seeing sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 West Ham have bid £15m This should flush out a bigger bid from Mike Ashley in the next few days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted July 26, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 26, 2012 Yeah but you don't just pick a striker and expect him to score goals. You pick a striker to suite the system that you play and then he will score goals. Gabby was at his best when we played counter attacking football in every game for about 4 years. If we're going to move to a more possesion based style of play, then Gabby suddenly needs to use his football brain, and i'm sorry but he doesn't have a very good football brain. Gabby is more of a reactive player than a thinking player. I think he'd really struggle when he's going to be expected to make intelligent runs. With this style of play i'd rather just play Bent on his own, playing off the shoulders of defenders. Now, if Lambert really is the real deal he will mix his tactics up depending on opposition, there will be games where we will play more direct. It's these games where I think Carroll could really do a great job for us. I really do believe that Lambert could use Carroll so effectively, I think he'd really excel at Villa Park. Selling Gabby and bringing Carroll in on similar wages sounds like good business to me, providing Randy is willing to stump up the money for him. It's not that I don't like Gabby, if think he's a good player, but just limited. For the wages he's on we could really replace him with someone better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanpabloangel18 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 See, I'd say Carroll is far more limited than Gabby. Gabby might not have the same positional instinct as e.g Bent, but he's got two good feet, is rapid (obvs), strong, can spot a pass/cross and is a good team player. Accusations of laziness etc are just flatly incorrect - he runs until he can't. Carroll is possibly the slowest striker I've ever laid eyes upon, he's woeful with the ball at his feet, and has about as much 'football intelligence' (whatever that really is) as Gabby anyway. He is obviously incredible in the air and is a formidable physical opponent. What you said about fitting into Lambert's system with Bent doesn't make sense to me. Surely, if he were to play, he would be playing alongside Bent (as would Carroll hypothetically). That would mean that you wouldn't want two strikers hanging on the shoulder (effectively goal-hanging); you'd want one involved in the build up, drifting out to the flanks, and doing a bit of pressurising when not in possession. Carroll is NOT the man to do any of these, or provide Bent with chances. Gabby meanwhile has proven that he is very much capable of creating chances, and putting them away himself when given the opportunity. Basically, I think Gabby's a more complete player, and what you say about him being limited is more applicable to Carroll than virtually any other striker in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8pints Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 I think with Lamberts' reputation as someone who likes to mix things up tactically he will like to have different strike options. So he has a Poacher in Bent A Scrapper in Weimann A Speedy striker in Agbonlahor and an useful supporting striker in Delefouneso. So there is a space open for a strong target man that, regardless of ability, Heskey and Carew have left. Agbonlahor is strong to be fair, but the strength aspect of his game has been developed as a defence against the batterings he takes and is not part of his natural game. A squad with five strikers competing for a place in the starting line-up would be fair. Especially with each offering different qualities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanpabloangel18 Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 ...And the wages thing, while I agree they are high - he's been with us since day one, he's been a crucial member of the first team since 05/06 (7 years), and he's a striker. Anyone demanding significantly less wages would probably be worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GavChahal Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Yeah but you don't just pick a striker and expect him to score goals. You pick a striker to suite the system that you play and then he will score goals. Gabby was at his best when we played counter attacking football in every game for about 4 years. If we're going to move to a more possesion based style of play, then Gabby suddenly needs to use his football brain, and i'm sorry but he doesn't have a very good football brain. Gabby is more of a reactive player than a thinking player. I think he'd really struggle when he's going to be expected to make intelligent runs. With this style of play i'd rather just play Bent on his own, playing off the shoulders of defenders. Now, if Lambert really is the real deal he will mix his tactics up depending on opposition, there will be games where we will play more direct. It's these games where I think Carroll could really do a great job for us. I really do believe that Lambert could use Carroll so effectively, I think he'd really excel at Villa Park. Selling Gabby and bringing Carroll in on similar wages sounds like good business to me, providing Randy is willing to stump up the money for him. It's not that I don't like Gabby, if think he's a good player, but just limited. For the wages he's on we could really replace him with someone better. I'd say Caroll is far more limited than Gabby, Caroll is just hyped up player, with the exception of his goal in the Euro's, his first touch and control were shocking! Gabby will do well under Lambert! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts