Jump to content

Libor Kozák


samjp26

Recommended Posts

So because we generally play 4-3-3, we should never deviate from it nor have the options in the squad to allow us to do so?

N'Zogbia, Tonev...
Doubtful whether N'Zogbia will ever play for us again and Tonev isn't a specialised AMC (though hopefully he can evolve into one).
You still haven't named one yet though, that fits our budget etc

We've just been linked with one that is well within our budget ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Lambert, given that he actually manages the team and not us, thought another striker was a higher priority?

 

Yeah I do feel that we all seem to be wondering where this other player is coming from, I'm sure Lambert understands where we need to strengthen better than any of us. He's the one who knows the tactics and the strengths of the players he has better than us of course.

 

In regards to people discussing who we should be going after I don't think it's that the funds aren't available I think it's just Lerner and Lambert clearly have a policy that if they're unproven in the league then they want to pay lower wages until they prove themselves and then they'll get a boost hence look at this season with all the contract upgrades etc. I think it's a great policy, personally. It does limit who we can potentially purchase but imo it makes the new signing more hungry to prove themselves when they do sign to earn that wage boost with the new contract. I'm only guessing folks but it seems to be the policy that we're using.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I find it funny how people moan about us not signing players, then when we do sign one they moan that they're all for cheap and then when it's rumoured that we're spending a lot they moan that it's a waste. :lol:

Wrong interpretation again Mantis.

 

Its not signing players on the cheap or for big fees that posters are questioning. its purchasing players for positions we already have ample cover when other positions need strengthening. 

 

Trent already covered this a few days ago. With the way we play we actually don't have ample cover as things stand. If Benteke got injured we'd have to throw Helenius in at the deep end.

 

So why buy Helenius in the first place then? Whats the point of wasting the limited funding we have on players who aren't yet able to do a job in the first team.  

 

 

Not the point. Helenius isn't ready to be a lone striker. He is ready to have a role in the team, but not up front by himself. Both him and Lambert have said he's more suited to the support striker role.

 

How. Many. Times.

 

And you can't really beat the 'limited funding' horse again, when Helenius cost less than a million IIRC

 

Its exactly the point. Funding is limited. Correct? Then spending around a million on Helenius, buying Bowery and then purchasing Kozak for between 4m-7m has a cumulative affect on our budget.

 

Unless we going with two upfront which seems unlikely to change our system at this stage then you have a total expenditure of  say nearly 6m on three players who will not get a game unless there is a spat of injuries.

 

To me limited funding equates to buying the players you need to enhance the first team and not to sit on the bench. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its exactly the point. Funding is limited. Correct? Then spending around a million on Helenius, buying Bowery and then purchasing Kozak for between 4m-7m has a cumulative affect on our budget.

 

 

Unless we going with two upfront which seems unlikely to change our system at this stage then you have a total expenditure of  say nearly 6m on three players who will not get a game unless there is a spat of injuries.

 

To me limited funding equates to buying the players you need to enhance the first team and not to sit on the bench. 

 

 

You need a squad, spending all the budget on 11 good players is not enough. You need two players for each position and now we have that.

 

You clearly don't agree but that's just bad luck for you I suppose. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me limited funding equates to buying the players you need to enhance the first team and not to sit on the bench.

Remember when we had half the team wearing nappies under Houllier? It wasn't pretty

We've complained often enough about squad depth, now we're finally getting there, you think its wrong but not only that you think we should buy a particular type of player, we don't currently use

That is just very odd logic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not the point. Helenius isn't ready to be a lone striker. He is ready to have a role in the team, but not up front by himself. Both him and Lambert have said he's more suited to the support striker role.

 

How. Many. Times.

 

And you can't really beat the 'limited funding' horse again, when Helenius cost less than a million IIRC

 

 

Exactly. Seriousy Morpheus, go through the transfer speculation thread and read Trent's post on this a few days ago. He summed it up perfectly.

 

I did read 'TrentVilla's' posts but it is the allocation and prioritisation of limited funding i'm having a hard time agreeing with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

"I leave it to others to speak about me but I hope I can help Aston Villa in the games and I hope to score goals as well. I will speak about Villa and the Premier League to Petr Cech and Tomas Rosicky on international duty and I'm sure they will be able to tell me really good things from the games they have played against Villa this season. Yes, I scored goals in the Europa League last season and I'm happy about this because it's not easy but I know it won't be easy either to score goals in the Premier League so all my focus will be on this now.

 

Well we beat Arsenal and Chelsea were lucky as fook so I'm sure they'll just be bitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â