collapse collapse

Please donate to help keep this site going.

The Fanzine

Heroes & Villains Fanzine

Get your fix of all things Claret & Blue by subscribing to the online version!

* H&V Best Of

Follow us on...

Author Topic: Gary Gardner - Retired  (Read 116173 times)

Online brian green

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 14431
  • Age: 81
  • Location: Nice France
  • GM : 19.06.2020
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #645 on: January 26, 2017, 07:39:08 AM »
Exactly SH.  The reason for giving young journeyman players long contracts is sound business, a skill long missing at Villa Park.
You get two bites at the cherry.  The young player might mature into a better, first team regular..  If he does not he retains sell on value.  Deduct the wages paid from the fee received and a modest profit probably accrues.  The alternative is the RHM scenario where we put all the time and money into a young player only to see him walk on a free.  Gary Gardner is a perfectly adequate player for a lower league club, why give him away?

Offline oswald funkletrumpet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2157
  • Location: Hayley Green
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #646 on: January 26, 2017, 07:41:22 AM »
The length of the new contract was bizarre

Time will tell but im betting that gardner doesnt make the bench

Why bizarre?

Because he is not up to the job and gets 4 years, why not 2?

Probably helps us get a better fee when we sell him.

And if we dont we are left with another player on too long a deal as we are with westwood, bacuna, gabby

Online brian green

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 14431
  • Age: 81
  • Location: Nice France
  • GM : 19.06.2020
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #647 on: January 26, 2017, 07:46:38 AM »
The difference is that we already know other clubs rate Gary Gardner.  Forest would bite our hand off for him.  Preston fans in the Barton's last Saturday could not believe we let Callum Robinson go.

Offline oswald funkletrumpet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2157
  • Location: Hayley Green
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #648 on: January 26, 2017, 07:48:27 AM »
Exactly SH.  The reason for giving young journeyman players long contracts is sound business, a skill long missing at Villa Park.
You get two bites at the cherry.  The young player might mature into a better, first team regular..  If he does not he retains sell on value.  Deduct the wages paid from the fee received and a modest profit probably accrues.  The alternative is the RHM scenario where we put all the time and money into a young player only to see him walk on a free.  Gary Gardner is a perfectly adequate player for a lower league club, why give him away?

Perish the thought that he may think ill never play for a club as big as us (which he wont), i wont get the same wages anywhere else so ill sit on my four year deal thanks very much

Offline oswald funkletrumpet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2157
  • Location: Hayley Green
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #649 on: January 26, 2017, 07:49:55 AM »
The difference is that we already know other clubs rate Gary Gardner.  Forest would bite our hand off for him.  Preston fans in the Barton's last Saturday could not believe we let Callum Robinson go.

Do you honestly think forest could match what we are paying him?

Offline ClaretAndBlueBlood

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #650 on: January 26, 2017, 10:13:00 AM »
The difference is that we already know other clubs rate Gary Gardner.  Forest would bite our hand off for him.  Preston fans in the Barton's last Saturday could not believe we let Callum Robinson go.

Do you honestly think forest could match what we are paying him?

that is a different problem. We need to stop overpaying average players. If players are replaceable, then give them average wages, if players are crucial, such as Benteke, then by all means give then top dollar. I wouldn't say any of the current squad are crucial so players on 40k+ per week just seems crazy for a division 2 team

Offline mr underhill

  • Member
  • Posts: 7567
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #651 on: January 26, 2017, 10:23:07 AM »
I think we've seen exactly how crucial kodjia is to us since he's been away.

Offline Clampy

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 23061
  • Location: warley
  • GM : PCM
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #652 on: January 26, 2017, 11:07:18 AM »
I think we've seen exactly how crucial kodjia is to us since he's been away.

We've missed him more than I thought we would. I thought McCormack would come in and do a good job but we know what happened there.

Offline ClaretAndBlueBlood

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #653 on: January 26, 2017, 11:25:00 AM »
I think we've seen exactly how crucial kodjia is to us since he's been away.

I agree that we have missed him, and I really like him. And yes, he is very important to us at this level, as I think Lansbury could well be based upon Saturdays performance. But the wages need to reflect the level that we are at. Giving these players 40k + per week is just madness. If we get promoted, then we will end up with another bunch of players not good enough on big wages, long contracts. I know its hypothetical on us getting promoted but crikey, we are still being a gravy train if the reported wages being dished out are correct

Offline old man villa fan

  • Member
  • Posts: 3302
  • Location: Birmingham
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #654 on: January 26, 2017, 11:30:54 AM »
I'll be interested to see how GG does with better and different types of midfield players around him, rather than alongside Westwood. Over the last couple of seasons, has any midfield player not struggled when played alongside Westwood.

Offline ClaretAndBlueBlood

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #655 on: January 26, 2017, 11:32:56 AM »
I'll be interested to see how GG does with better and different types of midfield players around him, rather than alongside Westwood. Over the last couple of seasons, has any midfield player not struggled when played alongside Westwood.

I actually thought Westwood did ok first half on Saturday with the more mobile than what we are used to  Lansbury alongside him. Its all about balance I guess

Offline oswald funkletrumpet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2157
  • Location: Hayley Green
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #656 on: January 26, 2017, 11:59:31 AM »
The difference is that we already know other clubs rate Gary Gardner.  Forest would bite our hand off for him.  Preston fans in the Barton's last Saturday could not believe we let Callum Robinson go.

Do you honestly think forest could match what we are paying him?

that is a different problem. We need to stop overpaying average players. If players are replaceable, then give them average wages, if players are crucial, such as Benteke, then by all means give then top dollar. I wouldn't say any of the current squad are crucial so players on 40k+ per week just seems crazy for a division 2 team

It is linked though, if gardner is on 20k a week then he isnt going to leave for 15

Yes a long contract means we get a fee but if the weekly wage is decent there is no incentive for him to leave and why should he as we have agreed to pay him x amount for 4 years

the reason gabby hasnt moved is because no one will pay him anything like what he will get here

Offline ClaretAndBlueBlood

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #657 on: January 26, 2017, 01:22:36 PM »
The difference is that we already know other clubs rate Gary Gardner.  Forest would bite our hand off for him.  Preston fans in the Barton's last Saturday could not believe we let Callum Robinson go.

Do you honestly think forest could match what we are paying him?

that is a different problem. We need to stop overpaying average players. If players are replaceable, then give them average wages, if players are crucial, such as Benteke, then by all means give then top dollar. I wouldn't say any of the current squad are crucial so players on 40k+ per week just seems crazy for a division 2 team

It is linked though, if gardner is on 20k a week then he isnt going to leave for 15

Yes a long contract means we get a fee but if the weekly wage is decent there is no incentive for him to leave and why should he as we have agreed to pay him x amount for 4 years

the reason gabby hasnt moved is because no one will pay him anything like what he will get here

I think we are saying the same thing but coming from different sides. A 4 year contract on a reasonable wages is ok, a 4 year contract on an inflated wage is a problem

Offline oswald funkletrumpet

  • Member
  • Posts: 2157
  • Location: Hayley Green
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #658 on: January 26, 2017, 01:39:26 PM »
The difference is that we already know other clubs rate Gary Gardner.  Forest would bite our hand off for him.  Preston fans in the Barton's last Saturday could not believe we let Callum Robinson go.

Do you honestly think forest could match what we are paying him?

that is a different problem. We need to stop overpaying average players. If players are replaceable, then give them average wages, if players are crucial, such as Benteke, then by all means give then top dollar. I wouldn't say any of the current squad are crucial so players on 40k+ per week just seems crazy for a division 2 team

It is linked though, if gardner is on 20k a week then he isnt going to leave for 15

Yes a long contract means we get a fee but if the weekly wage is decent there is no incentive for him to leave and why should he as we have agreed to pay him x amount for 4 years

the reason gabby hasnt moved is because no one will pay him anything like what he will get here

I think we are saying the same thing but coming from different sides. A 4 year contract on a reasonable wages is ok, a 4 year contract on an inflated wage is a problem

Definately

Forest due to ffp could only offer him 10k a week and i would think we are paying him double that

Offline Mister E

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11462
  • Location: Mostly the Republic of Yorkshire (N)
  • GM : 10.02.2020
Re: Gary Gardner
« Reply #659 on: January 26, 2017, 04:23:11 PM »
I cannot imagine either the club would have paid or GG expected over the odds for his recent contract - 15-20k pw max (sounds alot until you compare it with others).