Big_John_10 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Cuellar was a decent footballer with a great attitude but let's not over hype him. Just pointing out he was highly rated by the club and we needed to pay a release clause, which is usually going to be a high amount, in order to sign him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 but he wasnt worth it, one of worst defenders ive seen at Villa and a head like a 50 pence piece. I think Jagielka and KOmpany went same summer for less price and better value Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 But if you cannot agree that paying almost 27 million for Dunne, Collins, Cuellar and Davies all of which had long term 40k plus contracts with davies also having the option in his contract of always earning the same as the highest earner at the club and a bit extra then you are just being stubborn. Haven't heard about that clause before. I'll admit in hindsight Davies was a waste of money but MoN won't be the first manager to over pay for a very promising highly rated youngster. The rest I just can't agree with. 09/10 only 3 teams let in less goal than us for the entire season. In 38 games we conceded 39 goals and 7 came in 1 game. So i don't really see your point. He paid a fair amount of money for his defence and they were one of the best in the league. Is that not whats meant to happen? You're not happy with having the 4th best defensive record in the league? What happened after he left can hardly be blamed on him. Like I said to mantis. Under two different manager for two years running bent has looked nothing like a £20 million striker. But blaming houllier for that would be ridiculous. It's got nothing to do with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Bent was probably worth £20m given that he helped keep us up two seasons in a row. Cuellar, Collins and Dunne were never worth what we paid for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 If you want to make out that Bent performed like a £20 million striker under Mcleish so you can continue to hold this hypocritical view then carry on. It's a pointless discussion now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Cuellar, Collins and Dunne were never worth what we paid for them. 39 goals in 38 games. 4th best defensive record in the league. Dunne named in PFA team of the year. Seriously what did you want from them that year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 (edited) Cuellar, Collins and Dunne were never worth what we paid for them. 39 goals in 38 games. 4th best defensive record in the league. Dunne named in PFA team of the year. Seriously what did you want from them that year? I'm not critcising their performance in that season. As I said earlier, people need to remember that there were seasons after 09/10. If you want to make out that Bent performed like a £20 million striker under Mcleish so you can continue to hold this hypocritical view then carry on. It's a pointless discussion now. Bent was worth the money because he kept us up two seasons ago and greatly contributed to keeping us up last season. I don't think you need telling how much money we'd lose if we went down. How is this a hypocritical view? Edited March 14, 2013 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Cuellar, Collins and Dunne were never worth what we paid for them. 39 goals in 38 games. 4th best defensive record in the league. Dunne named in PFA team of the year. Seriously what did you want from them that year? it was 1 season. they didnt offer anything after that. also leaked 7 goals at Chelsea which was worse than the 8 that we conceded this season considering the level of squad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 I'm not critcising their performance in that season. As I said earlier, people need to remember that there were seasons after 09/10 And round and round we go. You're talking about when he wasn't here. How is he to blame? Are we going to give him credit for Guzan's performances this season? No because that would be stupid. How is it he's fault that houllier and Mcleish were unable to get them to perform at a similar level? Cuellar, Collins and Dunne were never worth what we paid for them. 39 goals in 38 games. 4th best defensive record in the league. Dunne named in PFA team of the year. Seriously what did you want from them that year? it was 1 season. they didnt offer anything after that. also leaked 7 goals at Chelsea which was worse than the 8 that we conceded this season considering the level of squad Yes when Mon had left they became shit. Like i just said how is Mon to blame for houlliers poor performance as manager? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 (edited) so why is MON to blame for the defenders good level of performance in that season then Edited March 14, 2013 by Zatman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 I'm not critcising their performance in that season. As I said earlier, people need to remember that there were seasons after 09/10 And round and round we go. You're talking about when he wasn't here. How is he to blame? Are we going to give him credit for Guzan's performances this season? No because that would be stupid. How is it he's fault that houllier and Mcleish were unable to get them to perform at a similar level? He still signed those players. Yes he deserves some credit for originally signing Guzan, although I think the a lot of the credit should also go to Lambert for re-signing him and then playing him regularly. Clearly they were performing well above their level in 09/10. He's at fault for buying players who aren't really that good. This is one of O'Neill's biggest problems: because motivation is such a big part of his management style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papillon Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Every single club and manager make bad signings, and hindsight is incredibly pointless. Look at Arsenal, they have spent tons of money on Mertesacker, Park, Gervinho, Andre Santos, Chamakh, Squillaci and even Arshavin. All of which had some promise to them when they arrived. Man Utd have signed bad players for years, but that is the name of the game. For every player that don't make it there is a gem like Evra, Vidic, Kagawa, Young, Valencia et al. So what if Veron, Kleberson and all those keepers didn't make it, if the game was that predictable then the sport would be horrendous for teams like Villa. Sure MON got in a few duds, but almost every single one of them had something to them when they arrived, except for freebies like Agathe and Sutton. Warnock was a solid signing, everyone here was happy and he had a good reputation, so what was wrong with that signing? Players fade away, even the best ones like Fernando Torres. When Chelsea got him nobody could imagine what happened ever since, turning from a 50M player to a 8M player. Very few managers have a clean record when it comes to signings, especially those who have to operate on a limited budget and wages, as well as competition from the best clubs. Benteke came here and many were reluctant with expectations at first (myself included) - but he turned very good. Same with Sylla, who knows what he will be like in a year or two. Might be great, might be playing for Toulouse or Bolton. MON in the end had a bad streak with some players, but I remember being pretty happy with most of those signings except for Heskey and Knight. Cuellar, Delph et al were exciting enough in my book, and I sure as hell don't look back and say told you so. What's the point? Look at Tottenham and Liverpool, the two clubs who must fail the most when it comes to signing players and shipping them off later on... to use a Lambertesque quote; you go again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 I don't think anyone is claiming that no manager makes dud signings, just that O'Neill made a lot of them and many of those were quite costly. At least Lambert's poor signings (Bennett springs to mind) weren't that expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Sure MON got in a few duds, but almost every single one of them had something to them when they arrived, except for freebies like Agathe and Sutton. Warnock was a solid signing, everyone here was happy and he had a good reputation, so what was wrong with that signing? I disagree. Harewood and Heskey had nothing going for them, and never did (apart from 2 or 3 'important' goals in their years here). The players that did have potential or promise were either given ridiculous contracts or stupid transfer fees: Davies £10m, NRC £8.5m, Cuellar £7.5m etc etc Regardng your point about other teams paying for players (Park/ Mertesacker/ Gervinho etc etc), I would actually be interested to see the difference between the bigger clubs' signings and their transfer fees, compared to ours over the years. Obviously the bigger clubs have much more 'pull' so they can offer better quality players lower wages than we would have to, because they have the lure of European football. But, inspite of that, I've seen players like Vermaelen (sp?) and Kompany go for similar prices to Cuellar and NRC. Like you say, no managers get it right every time, but I feel that MONs success rate was rather low, when you consider transfer fee, wages & contract offered, sell on value and potential to improve or decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 But, inspite of that, I've seen players like Vermaelen (sp?) and Kompany go for similar prices to Cuellar and NRC. Yes and Liverpool signed Andy Carroll for £35 million while MON swapped Baros for Carew. This is football. There are plenty of examples of managers making bad deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 There aren't many more examples of ridiculous transfer fees for average players, other than Carroll and Torres. It's a bit of an anomaly. So I don't think mentioning Carroll's transfer has any relevance in the 'All managers make mistakes, therefore MON would' argument. How many more managers of teams our size, have paid large amounts (upwards of £7m) for players that were then given a good wage on a 3+ year contract, and then were either played in the wrong position (Cuellar) or not played at all at times(NRC & Davies)? We did have many players who were signed for reasonable amounts, but they then made very few appearances, and ended up staying until they left for next to nothing: Beye (£2m), L Young (£4m), Harewood (£4m), Shorey (£2m), Sidwell (£4m) etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 There aren't many more examples of ridiculous transfer fees for average players, other than Carroll and Torres. It's a bit of an anomaly. So I don't think mentioning Carroll's transfer has any relevance in the 'All managers make mistakes, therefore MON would' argument. It was an extreme example. But you don't think there are strikers that were signed for big money that were poor that we can compare to us signing Carew? You don't think there are examples of wingers signed for big money that were poor that we can compare to young? Same thing for Milner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Every single club and manager make bad signings none so many as aston villa under martin o'neill though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smetrov Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Oneil signed a few duds - Unfortunatley these few duds have shaped the future direction of the club. We have based our whole club philosophy on the fact the curtis davies and Marlon harewood were crap - we should look at what went right in that period - and perhaps base our decision more on that. For a club the size of Aston Villa to be blown off course because some big fee players didn't make the grade is stupidity - and will lead us to ruin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P3te Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Oneil signed a few duds sadly it was a majority not just a handful. imo you'd have to class anyone who left on a free transfer as nobody would pay for them as a dud, and that was the majority of players o'neill signed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts