Libor Kozák

[CrackpotForeigner]

 

 

 

Stating an opinion that the money spent on another striker when we already had two in the squad as backup and farmed out another two on loan would have been better spent on, let me see, either the DM or AM identified by all on here as needed to strengthen our midfield.

 

 

 

That is unless you have stated otherwise?

 

 

It's possible that we could have got an AM for 4.5 million good enough to walk into the side, but pretty unlikely. Seemingly Paul Lambert and his network of professional scouts felt the same way. It's possible that they were wrong and you're right. Can you think of any really good AM's who moved to clubs the size of Villa in the summer for that sort of fee? I can't.

 

If you had sourced my previous posts correctly you would have noted that i made reference to two players. One at 7m and another at 1.5m one of whom hasn't played much. If the fee for Kozak was less than 7m fair enough but it doesn't excuse the fact that we did have cover in the forward positions and Kozak isn't a Benteke replacement meaning that we are not as reliant on playing one system as many had though and we could have used those other available forwards.

 

I also don't pertain to know more than the scouting network at the club but i do find it difficult to understand when on a limited budget we spent anything from 4.5m-7m on another forward having already sent two out on loan and had two others to choose from.

 

If it's the opinion of the manager that Helenius isn't yet good enough to start then why buy him in the first place when he already had purchased Bowery to develop?

 

Thats why i have criticised the allocation of limited funding and will continue to do so whether it upsets your blinkered view of the present manager or not. 

 

 

So "No", but 182 words long.

[Oaks]

Where has this 4.5m fee appeared from ?

Everywhere i read said 7m. Not that he looks worth either fee as yet of course

Who would you have signed as cover then?

Cover wasn't needed at the expense of a hole in the starting eleven. The fact is that you concentrate on building as good a team as possible before you start spending big amounts of squad players.

Secondly, the only reason that we needed cover is because Lambert clearly can only play with a target man up front. Weimann, Gabby and Helenius could have occupied the main forward role in Benteke's absence but obviously that would've meant Lambert deploying tactics where hoofing it to the big man isn't an option.

I'd say the start of the season and the 7 points out of nine since Benteke was injured suggests otherwise. We also had great form since January, which also suggests there isn't necessarily a pressing hole in the starting 11.

No we've been in mid-table form since January. If that is 'great' in your opinion then good for you. However our home form has remained very poor and as has been argued to death, this is mainly because we cannot break teams down. Also, your argument about our last three games doesn't really prove anything as we don't know what results we would've got had we played with one of the aforementioned players as the main striker instead of Kozak.

I would say our home form has been poor since January manly because we've played Liverpool and Man City twice and Chelsea once and still managed 4 wins, 1 draw and 5 loses in the 10 games since.

[Dodgyknees]

We bought Helenius because he has great potential and better to get him now for £1m than in two years for 6/7m.

[AVTuco]

If it's the opinion of the manager that Helenius isn't yet good enough to start then why buy him in the first place when he already had purchased Bowery to develop?

Because they're different types of players filling different roles. They are forwards but that's about all they have in common. It's like asking "Why bring in Benteke when we already have Agbonlahor?" Different attributes to fill different holes in the squad. There's very little that's similar about Bowery and Helenius. Bowery is a big powerful guy, good at holding up the ball and battling with big defenders, handy for taking the ball down to the corner flag when trying to hold on to a lead. Helenius is tall but better with the ball at his feet than in the air, can play in the hole to lay off balls to the main man or run onto rebounds. They will develop differently and into different types of players.

I think Kozak was brought in to be a long term replacement for Benteke and I think he will play in a similar role to Benteke. He is still getting used to his teammates and the league and isn't ready to be that guy just yet, but we all know Benteke will be off next year (much as we'd all like him to stay). Kozak has a year to bed in with the squad and grow into that role. He stepped into the shoes a bit early due to the injury and he isn't the finished article yet, but it took Benteke several games to find his feet in the league too. My expectation is that Kozak spends this year bedding in, getting used to the league, getting game time up top with Benteke or off the bench, occasional starts for when Benteke's tired or injured or suspended (the way he throws elbows around he'll be bound to miss a match or two), and he'll be ready to lead the line next season.

Helenius and Bowery will probably take a little longer to break into the first team. Bowery might never get there, to be honest, he may never be anything more than a squad player, but the money we spent on these two players, around 1.3m, would not have gotten us too far in the market -- even if you combined that with the Kozak money, for a combined total of about 6m. We would not have been able to bring in the AM we all crave for that kind of money, at least not one ready to go straight into the first team. In Helenius, I think we have a guy who has a very bright future, but that future might be a couple of seasons off still.

I thought it was smart to bring Kozak in this year and give him a whole season to bed in, and I think it will pay off in the long run.

This is well put Heid3ster, probably the plan is something like this.

I wish I was as sure about Kozak's abilities as you. So far, I'm not. But will give him much more time. When Benteke is back, we'll forget about this guy for a while, which may be good for his development. Sitting on the bench for a year probably isn't though.

Edited October 13, 2013 by AVTuco

[Butterfingers]

We bought Helenius because he has great potential and better to get him now for £1m than in two years for 6/7m.

Agree

& to those who claim we didn't need Kozac as a replacement for Benteke, he actually came in as a replacement for Bent.

[AntrimBlack]

 

We bought Helenius because he has great potential and better to get him now for £1m than in two years for 6/7m.

Agree

& to those who claim we didn't need Kozac as a replacement for Benteke, he actually came in as a replacement for Bent.

 

 

Not sure about this at all.

I think he was brought in as a back up for Benteke, as evidenced by recent events.

I think Benteke's replacement has still to arrive.

No reason for Lambert to bring in a replacement for Bent, as he did not fit the system any way, unless you mean he was brought in to make up the numbers.

[Butterfingers]

We bought Helenius because he has great potential and better to get him now for £1m than in two years for 6/7m.

Agree

& to those who claim we didn't need Kozac as a replacement for Benteke, he actually came in as a replacement for Bent.

 

Not sure about this at all.

I think he was brought in as a back up for Benteke, as evidenced by recent events.

I think Benteke's replacement has still to arrive.

No reason for Lambert to bring in a replacement for Bent, as he did not fit the system any way, unless you mean he was brought in to make up the numbers.

We're saying the same thing more or less.

If Bent hadn't struck a deal with Fulham, Kozac wouldn't be here.

When Benteke was suspended at Wigan, Bent was bought in.

When Benteke has been injured, Kozac has been bought in.

You need that cover & there will be times when the two play together as well.

With regards Bentekes replacement, who knows? There's a long way to go yet & Benteke needs to remain consistant (remember the doom & gloom merchants amongst us frown upon people who are presumptuous) Also if Kozac reproduces his Europa league form & hits another 12-15 goals for us, there's a good chance that he will be Bentekes replacement. It's a case of seeing what happens on that one as it could go any one of several ways.

[Morpheus]

 

If it's the opinion of the manager that Helenius isn't yet good enough to start then why buy him in the first place when he already had purchased Bowery to develop?

 

Because they're different types of players filling different roles. They are forwards but that's about all they have in common. It's like asking "Why bring in Benteke when we already have Agbonlahor?" Different attributes to fill different holes in the squad. There's very little that's similar about Bowery and Helenius. Bowery is a big powerful guy, good at holding up the ball and battling with big defenders, handy for taking the ball down to the corner flag when trying to hold on to a lead. Helenius is tall but better with the ball at his feet than in the air, can play in the hole to lay off balls to the main man or run onto rebounds. They will develop differently and into different types of players.

 

I think Kozak was brought in to be a long term replacement for Benteke and I think he will play in a similar role to Benteke. He is still getting used to his teammates and the league and isn't ready to be that guy just yet, but we all know Benteke will be off next year (much as we'd all like him to stay). Kozak has a year to bed in with the squad and grow into that role. He stepped into the shoes a bit early due to the injury and he isn't the finished article yet, but it took Benteke several games to find his feet in the league too. My expectation is that Kozak spends this year bedding in, getting used to the league, getting game time up top with Benteke or off the bench, occasional starts for when Benteke's tired or injured or suspended (the way he throws elbows around he'll be bound to miss a match or two), and he'll be ready to lead the line next season.

 

Helenius and Bowery will probably take a little longer to break into the first team. Bowery might never get there, to be honest, he may never be anything more than a squad player, but the money we spent on these two players, around 1.3m, would not have gotten us too far in the market -- even if you combined that with the Kozak money, for a combined total of about 6m. We would not have been able to bring in the AM we all crave for that kind of money, at least not one ready to go straight into the first team. In Helenius, I think we have a guy who has a very bright future, but that future might be a couple of seasons off still.

 

I thought it was smart to bring Kozak in this year and give him a whole season to bed in, and I think it will pay off in the long run.

 

Highlighted the above part of your excellent post because i found it to be the most interesting.

 

We all know about the present financial cutbacks at our club and how the manager has been restricted in the amount of funding he has been given.

 

Before Bent and Fonz were loaned out we had those two plus Gabby, Benteke and Bowery. 'Different types of players filling different roles who were already at the club and ready for to play in the Premiership.

 

You say that we have generally purchased Helenius to develop and Kozak is being blooded in the team in preparation for Benteke leaving. Fonz had already been developed to the extent that he could have come in to the team due to injuries yet we spent 1m on Helenius who simply isn't ready to come into the first team. We also had Bowery who has already been in the first team albeit not in his best position.

 

You state that Kozak is currently in preparation to be Benteke's replacement yet Kozak hasn't got any of Benteke's attributes which makes Benteke great. I see another poster has referred to Kozak as being Bent's replacement which if you consider the attributes of both players that description is much nearer the mark. In Bent we had a player on high wages but he was used to the rigours of the Premiership and could be relied upon to score goals on a regular basis. The consensus of opinion for Bent's alienation and subsequent loan was that Bent was limited in the type of movement that would benefit our system yet we have just spent 4m-7m on a forward who also doesn't have the type of movement to benefit our system.

 

Considering the purchase of Helenius and Kozak and those shipped out on loan have we actually improved our options up front to play in the Premiership this season and i say this season because as Lambert has been given a limited budget i do not think we at this moment in time have the financial luxury to keep spending our limited budget on players not immediately improving the first team when we're just off the back of several flirtations with relegation.

Edited October 13, 2013 by Morpheus

[villan_007]

How you feel the fonz would have improved us in any shape or form I find baffling. Kozak has scored one and bent 2 so far this season, and Bent's new manager has just come out to say that he must get used to playing a bit part role this season because his game is scoring tap ins and that's all he offers.

I know your argument is based on how funds were spent, and we all wanted that AM, but for whatever reason we couldn't get the right guy, but this constant obsession with bent and fonz being the answer.....I just can't see where you are coming from at all.

I mean I know you watch football, but what are you seeing? what don't you get about stripping it back and starting again? You just can't move on from this bent thing!?

[Mantis]

Bent is a good player and he was just the player we needed when he signed for us but that isn't the case anymore. His main replacement Benteke is far better in pretty much every way and with the system and style we play there isn't any room for Bent. It's better that he's on loan so that we can use his wages on other areas of the team rather than having yet another benchwarmer on massive wages. It's not even like he's been pulling up trees at Fulham either.

[praisedmambo]

 

Considering the purchase of Helenius and Kozak and those shipped out on loan have we actually improved our options up front to play in the Premiership this season and i say this season because as Lambert has been given a limited budget i do not think we at this moment in time have the financial luxury to keep spending our limited budget on players not immediately improving the first team when we're just off the back of several flirtations with relegation.

 

I'd put our flirtations with relegation 100% down to having a weak squad Morpheus. Look at last season: look at the team in the 8-0 chelsea result and say that isn't a squad pushed to its limits. It was like that for our entire doom period. For a big period before our resurgence in Jan we were missing Gabby, Weimann, Vlaar, and we hadn't yet signed Sylla. 

 

I think you like to argue. Our good form since January shows this team is making progress. We've continued that progress now even when Benteke was injured thanks to Kozak. That good form last season happened when we had our injured players return. They needed backing up. Look at the Fulham game and the Wigan game where we were without Gabby and then Benteke: we drew them both and looked like we were lacking. Helenius looks decent and once he's up to speed he will likely have a role to play this season. 

 

Delfouneso has never been good enough for the first team. It was relying on people like that: Bannan, Lichaj, Herd last season that cost us. 

 

As I said before, buying Helenius had no effect on us buying an AM. You'd think it was because the AM's we were after were valued too high, as that makes sense. It's way too early to judge how often Helenius will be played this season. 

 

Seriously, do you not understand we need a squad? 

Edited October 13, 2013 by praisedmambo

[praisedmambo]

 

Considering the purchase of Helenius and Kozak and those shipped out on loan have we actually improved our options up front to play in the Premiership this season 

 

We have already missed Benteke and Gabby for a few games this season and still got results, so yes, I think we have improved our options over the entire squad and team this season. 

[Big_John_10]

We've continued that progress now even when Benteke was injured thanks to Kozak

Really?

I think I'd give others credit for our recent results over Kozak.

[Rovers13]

Morpheus, I don't know how many times people have to point this out, but keeping Bent on the bench on his wages wasn't an option. The difference in wages between Kozak and Bent more than makes up for the 4.5 million fee. Wages matter more than fee, so it's not like this crazy amount was spent on Kozak when Villa could've kept Bent and spent that fee on someone else. There would've been no room in the wage budget.

[praisedmambo]

 

We've continued that progress now even when Benteke was injured thanks to Kozak

Really?

I think I'd give others credit for our recent results over Kozak.

 

I wasn't saying he was the sole reason, but I think he has done more of a job than people appreciate. It's hard to do anything stunning when the ball is being launched at you every two minutes. But Kozak has been a physical presence up front, and that has been important these last few games, and it's something we've maintained because of Kozak.

 

I don't think we've played as nice football as last year, but we have played some big teams. All I know is we're more solid and doing better points-wise, we're scoring goals, and we're better defensively. And, critically, we have coped with an injury to the man who basically kept us up last year. Benteke got injured, and we got 7 points out of 9. I very much doubt we would have been capable of that last year. We can cope better now, because this summer Lambert addressed problems in the weakness of our squad. 

 

Besides Kozak scored one winner and got an assist against Man City, so he has definitely been integral to these results. 

Edited October 13, 2013 by praisedmambo

[Isa]

An average of 29% aerial success-rate over the last three league games. Benteke Mark II right there.

Also he didn't get an assist for the Weimann goal as he didn't touch it.

[praisedmambo]

An average of 29% aerial success-rate over the last three league games. Benteke Mark II right there.

Also he didn't get an assist for the Weimann goal as he didn't touch it.

Even if he didn't get the assist his physical presence has been important in covering for Benteke's injury. That's all I'm saying. Physical presence is different to aerial success. I'm not sure where you got that stat from anyway. 

[Isa]

An average of 29% aerial success-rate over the last three league games. Benteke Mark II right there.

Also he didn't get an assist for the Weimann goal as he didn't touch it.

Even if he didn't get the assist his physical presence has been important in covering for Benteke's injury. That's all I'm saying. Physical presence is different to aerial success. I'm not sure where you got that stat from anyway.

Your aerial success is connected to your physical prowess. Benteke's aerial ability is one of his defining features. Kozak, according to all those that defend the decision to buy him, is supposed to be a player in the same mould as Benteke.

Those stats were taken from whoscored.com by the way.

[Morpheus]

How you feel the fonz would have improved us in any shape or form I find baffling. Kozak has scored one and bent 2 so far this season, and Bent's new manager has just come out to say that he must get used to playing a bit part role this season because his game is scoring tap ins and that's all he offers.

I know your argument is based on how funds were spent, and we all wanted that AM, but for whatever reason we couldn't get the right guy, but this constant obsession with bent and fonz being the answer.....I just can't see where you are coming from at all.

I mean I know you watch football, but what are you seeing? what don't you get about stripping it back and starting again? You just can't move on from this bent thing!?

Where have i said Fonz 'would have improved us or that Bent and Fonz being the answer.' You have completely missed the point.

 

What i'm saying is that we spent fees on players in one position when we already had similar quality at the club who were Premiership ready. 

Edited October 13, 2013 by Morpheus

[Morpheus]

 

 

Considering the purchase of Helenius and Kozak and those shipped out on loan have we actually improved our options up front to play in the Premiership this season 

 

We have already missed Benteke and Gabby for a few games this season and still got results, so yes, I think we have improved our options over the entire squad and team this season. 

 

I'm not so sure thats definitive when you consider that Bent has already proven that he was good enough to keep us up and you've made a judgement on Helenius implying that he would have been a better option than Fonz without seeing him play in the Premiership.