Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Aston Manor on December 27, 2011, 06:22:56 PM
-
Now I know this is likely to be a seemingly strange one especially seeing how well he has been playing, but what about selling Guzan to raise funds? His stock will have risen following his performances since he has come back into the team. the one question mark over him has been his ability under the high ball as Blackburn showed up in the Carling Cup semis two seasons ago. but last night he looked as assured as any keeper I've seen under Stokes bombardment, and against Arsenal and their endless corners last week.
So why sell? I think its clear that Given will come back into the team and overall I would say Given is still the better keeper. Its not often the understudy comes in and its rarer to see one coming in that stays there. After a while they either have one or two poor games and then get shipped out. I think Harper at Newcastle is the most recent exception. Another exception from 30 years ago of course needs no introduction. But apart from that the number 2 gets changed more regularly than the number 1.
So, may as well sell. I know Given has had injury problems but I'm not sure that's a big a problem as may be made out. He's more likely to play than not. So, to me, it makes no difference if its Marshall or Guzan who is on the bench as you're very unlikely to see them. Then, if you don't fancy Marshall you can buy a cheaper number 2.
So, in January, when Given's back, why not move him on to free up some wages and get a transfer fee and put it towards a midfielder or another forward that we need?
-
Doesn't make any sense. The risk involved far outweighs any potential monetary benefit.
-
What risk? When Given is back - in a week or so - how long do you realistically think it'll be before we see Guzan again? maybe not sell him in January but in the summer. But, I think we need players now - as Mcleish has alluded to - so Guzan is a risky sale perhaps, but I don't think it that risky.
We've heard about us selling bent and I think that is infinitely more risky than selling our number 2 keeper.
-
How much would we get for a keeper who's started about four league games - £2 million tops?
-
Yes, we wouldn't get a lot but we'd get something which we could use. If the manager could get a few (2 or 3 million) from Lerner then we can realistically look at players. Also, if we could get someone on loan from January then that 2m could be used towards towards the fee/wages for the incoming player.
-
Sell Guzan? My head hurts!
-
If we sold Guzan we'd have to spend at least as much on a replacement second choice keeper. Marshall is just about acceptable as a third choice keeper, and I don't think we have a young keeper ready to step up yet.
So unless it's for £4 million + and we can get someone as good for less, then it's a false economy to sell him.
-
If we sold Guzan we'd have to spend at least as much on a replacement second choice keeper. Marshall is just about acceptable as a third choice keeper, and I don't think we have a young keeper ready to step up yet.
So unless it's for £4 million + and we can get someone as good for less, then it's a false economy to sell him.
we have a Bloke that has been given a chance and obviously is doing all he can to be first choice keeper, so we talk about how much we can sell him for? madness. let him compete with Given for the Jersey, the fact that Given has a long standing shoulder problem tells you that we shoulkd be grateful that we have another decent goalkeeper.
-
No sell heskey not brad
-
If there was a 'like' button, I'd like Hawkeye's post above. Selling Guzan would make no sense.
-
I'm not sure the thread starter realises Guzan is actually out of contract in June! He can start talking to foreign clubs in Jauary and agree a free deal in the summer.
I'd offer him a new contract without hesitation tbh, he's shown he can challenge Given properly.
-
I'm not sure the thread starter realises Guzan is actually out of contract in June! He can start talking to foreign clubs in Jauary and agree a free deal in the summer.
I'd offer him a new contract without hesitation tbh, he's shown he can challenge Given properly.
Like
-
Given has been quite injury prone the last few seasons so I'd give Brad a new contract too.
-
Given has been quite injury prone the last few seasons so I'd give Brad a new contract too.
100% agree.
-
I do think with this taste of games, Guzan will want to be a number one starter every week now.
I can't see him being that here with Given at the club so think he'll move on in the summer.
-
Is this thread a wind up?
-
No, Aston Manor. Given is our first choice and now Guzan has proved himself to be a more than adequate back-up. Offer him a new contract. Marshall is unproven. Sell Heskey. Sell Beye.
-
I'm not sure the thread starter realises Guzan is actually out of contract in June! He can start talking to foreign clubs in Jauary and agree a free deal in the summer.
I'd offer him a new contract without hesitation tbh, he's shown he can challenge Given properly.
Like
Love!
-
Fantastic idea to sell Guzan. Loyal servant, never moans and has more than adequately stepped in for one of the best keepers around. Having said that we could save on his huge wages (he must be one of the highest earners at the club) and get about ten million quid for him. That's about the going rate for relatively inexperienced scond choice keepers who's contract is up at the end of the season isn't it?
-
I heard rumours (can't find any links to back them up mind!) in the past 12/18 months that Guzan wasn't happy at the Villa. I thought that was what the Hull loan was all about. He's also stalled on signing a new contract so I think he'll be off on a free in the summer.
Shame really as he arrived with a good CV but never really lived up to it and three different managers have all thought he wasn't good enough to be No.1.
-
I didn't realise his contract was up soon, I would offer him a new one pronto, but if I were him I'd be of to play first team football somewhere else,
Guzans a lot netter keeper than he's been given credit for, I wouldn't be disappointed if he was out first choice goalie, although I have no probs with shay
-
I didn't realise his contract was up soon, I would offer him a new one pronto,
He's been offered one and chose not to sign it.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/3996977/Brad-Guzan-stalls-on-new-Aston-Villa-deal.html
-
Sign or go.
-
If he's angling for a better deal then fair play to him. He deserves it. He's been loyal, never complained and always steps up to the mark when called upon.
-
If we sold Guzan we'd have to spend at least as much on a replacement second choice keeper. Marshall is just about acceptable as a third choice keeper, and I don't think we have a young keeper ready to step up yet.
So unless it's for £4 million + and we can get someone as good for less, then it's a false economy to sell him.
we have a Bloke that has been given a chance and obviously is doing all he can to be first choice keeper, so we talk about how much we can sell him for? madness. let him compete with Given for the Jersey, the fact that Given has a long standing shoulder problem tells you that we shoulkd be grateful that we have another decent goalkeeper.
If AMcL had hinted at this everyone would be up in arms and yet here we are with Villa supporters saying to sell, increadible!!
It's the same with Bent, it's Villa supporters saying "we're going to sell"
My head hurts too Hawkeye.
-
I'm curious how a bloke who has played 5 or 6 league games in three and a half years is regarded as loyal, whereas a player who has played about 10 league games in two and a half years is regarded as a money grabbing twat (Beye).
I'd be happy if Brad stayed as we need a decent #2 keeper as my worry when we signed Given was how many games he would miss through injury. Having said that a part of me wonder why a 27 year old international isn't after regular first team football.
-
The photograph of him in the Sun article looks nothing like him in my opinion. Not an earth shattering post, but there you go.
-
the bloke would be mad to stay,
he's good enough to play every week for another prem side and probably earn the same sort of money.
-
It looks like Guzan has took a while to settle down in the English game the same as Big Brad. I would be sad to see him go but I can't see the club giving him a deal to match his demands as Given is first choice, although unlike with Big Brad, Guzan will get games as Given rarely stays fit for the season.
-
As per usual we are in a position where the player has the upper hand.
It's not a matter of whether we offer him a deal, it's whether he wants to sign, isn't his contract up in the summer?
I have to say I have been very very impressed with him recently.
-
he's been unlucky i guess with big brad. Most people thought he was a bit iffy, but until they get a proper chance you never know. He'd probably get far more chances now with Given's injury record but i wouldn't blame him if he wanted to try his luck elsewhere.
-
As per usual we are in a position where the player has the upper hand.
You can't really do a lot about that. If he doesn't want to sign his contract, if he wants to keep his options open, it's up to him, and to be honest, you can't really blame him.
-
As per usual we are in a position where the player has the upper hand.
You can't really do a lot about that. If he doesn't want to sign his contract, if he wants to keep his options open, it's up to him, and to be honest, you can't really blame him.
But it's how often it's happening, Cuellar, NRC, Guzan, Ash were/are all in the driving seat when discussing contracts.
-
As per usual we are in a position where the player has the upper hand.
You can't really do a lot about that. If he doesn't want to sign his contract, if he wants to keep his options open, it's up to him, and to be honest, you can't really blame him.
But it's how often it's happening, Cuellar, NRC, Guzan, Ash were/are all in the driving seat when discussing contracts.
That's football. It happens everywhere.
-
As per usual we are in a position where the player has the upper hand.
You can't really do a lot about that. If he doesn't want to sign his contract, if he wants to keep his options open, it's up to him, and to be honest, you can't really blame him.
But it's how often it's happening, Cuellar, NRC, Guzan, Ash were/are all in the driving seat when discussing contracts.
Young was never, ever going to stay once Man U showed interest.
Cuellar has barely played of late.
NRC chose to reject the contract he was offered.
It's not just a case of "offer a contract, everything will be fine" - once you offer the deal, you're stuck with it. That means you sometimes end up paying the likes of Habib Beye 40k a week till the age of 35 to do fuck all.
Guzan has played a handful of first team games in a few years, and has just put together two decent performances. I hope the chap does well, but it's not like we've stumbled upon the new Peter Shilton and we've got to throw him a deal quickly.
-
As per usual we are in a position where the player has the upper hand.
You can't really do a lot about that. If he doesn't want to sign his contract, if he wants to keep his options open, it's up to him, and to be honest, you can't really blame him.
But it's how often it's happening, Cuellar, NRC, Guzan, Ash were/are all in the driving seat when discussing contracts.
Young was never, ever going to stay once Man U showed interest.
Cuellar has barely played of late.
NRC chose to reject the contract he was offered.
It's not just a case of "offer a contract, everything will be fine" - once you offer the deal, you're stuck with it. That means you sometimes end up paying the likes of Habib Beye 40k a week till the age of 35 to do fuck all.
Guzan has played a handful of first team games in a few years, and has just put together two decent performances. I hope the chap does well, but it's not like we've stumbled upon the new Peter Shilton and we've got to throw him a deal quickly.
And equally, had the club offered him improved terms prior to his recent run in the team I bet there would have been a fair few fans saying it was a waste of money offering a better contract to a reserve that never plays and doesn't appear to have what it takes to cut it at first team level.
-
Another thing to remember is that once you've offered a big contract to one current player you've raised the bar for the rest. "If he's worth 20k I'm worth 25," and so on.
-
As per usual we are in a position where the player has the upper hand.
You can't really do a lot about that. If he doesn't want to sign his contract, if he wants to keep his options open, it's up to him, and to be honest, you can't really blame him.
But it's how often it's happening, Cuellar, NRC, Guzan, Ash were/are all in the driving seat when discussing contracts.
Young was never, ever going to stay once Man U showed interest.
Cuellar has barely played of late.
NRC chose to reject the contract he was offered.
It's not just a case of "offer a contract, everything will be fine" - once you offer the deal, you're stuck with it. That means you sometimes end up paying the likes of Habib Beye 40k a week till the age of 35 to do fuck all.
Guzan has played a handful of first team games in a few years, and has just put together two decent performances. I hope the chap does well, but it's not like we've stumbled upon the new Peter Shilton and we've got to throw him a deal quickly.
And equally, had the club offered him improved terms prior to his recent run in the team I bet there would have been a fair few fans saying it was a waste of money offering a better contract to a reserve that never plays and doesn't appear to have what it takes to cut it at first team level.
Indeed.
-
I would keep him he has come in and done a good job while Given's been out.
-
I prefer him to Given.
Comes for the high ball (misses a few) commands the area and takes pressure of the centre halves (is it a coincidence that they have played better in front of Guzan)
-
My point is, we have the likes of Cuellar who haven't been given a look in, even when Collins has been utter shite.
I understand how it works with contracts but we seem to discard players then suddenly realise, actually they are useful when their contracts are about to run out.
I just hope AM can sell Collins and persuade Cuellar to extend his contract.
Regarding Guzan it's catch 22, he behind Given but a lot younger so what do we do? We have played our best games without Bent or Given, coincidence?
-
When is Given expected back?
-
Whatever happens we need a good second keeper as it is obvious that he will get a fair few games each season, something that is only likely to increase as Given gets older and even more injury prone.
As it is I think Guzan has done very well since he has come in and that he clearly communicates with his defenders far more effectively than Given does.
-
Sorry to the poster who mentioned it earlier (too green to remember names...) but yes I wasn't aware that he was out of contract at the end of the season and I thought he had signed a new one. Which makes it even more certain to me that we should cash in if we get the chance. If he is holding out for a better deal I'm not sure it is just about an extra few quid - although that will help. He probably realises that he needs to be playing regularly especially as his main contenders for the US jersey are all getting older.
If he hasn't signed a contract now I think he wants a move and explains why he's playing better than any other time he's come in. He's always had the quality but his weaknesses were always shown up eventually. Which is why he's sitting on the bench more often than not.
This isn't an anti-Guzan thing because if we still had the squad of a few seasons back I think he'd be happy to bide his time and we would be quite happy to get him an extra 5 k a week to warm the bench. Things have moved on now though and I think we need to cut our cloth accordingly. Offer him to someone now, see if they'll bite, if not he'll sit on the bench until the summer with us paying dead money for a reserve. That's the situation that got us to where we are now (albeit in a totally different way I guess).
-
there's no point. We won't get squat for him in January AND have to find a replacement who will probably cost us what we make on Guzan or more. Brad's wages till the end of the season are dead money, already budgeted for, and we'd probably have to pay up the rest of his contract to persuade him to leave so its best to let him see out his contract. At least we know we have a reliable reserve 'keeper till the summer if Given gets crocked again.
-
Although I'd agree mostly the point is that as soon as Given is back he'll be playing. Guzan would then be spending the remainder of the season on the bench which Marshall could do. There's no point keeping someone on the bench just in case your number 1 player gets injured. You'd just be stock piling rubbish on decent money as the Sunderland manager tended to do.
-
so don't replace Guzan and rely on a 37 year old who hasn't played for 3 years if Given breaks down? Well its an interesting suggestion........
-
He's 35 but why split hairs. he hadn't played since April 2010 for Man City because of a dislocated shoulder. At the start of the next season Joe Hart - England's number 1 - replaced him. So, yes I don't think it needs too much of a leap of faith in the current Rep Of Ireland number 1 being able to keep himself fit and free of injury between now and the end of the season. I also seem to recall that for all our poor performances up to now Given comes out of it with his reputation still firmly intact.
-
We should be trying to sign Guzan up to a new contract.
-
Why? He'd want more money and would just be sitting there warming the bench. He's a number 2 no better no worse unless he wants to try his luck at someone like Reading and become their number 2 eventually also.
-
erm...I was talking about Marshall being 37. and while i have no fears about Given's ability he is injury prone and frankly i don't think Marshall is good enough as cover or was ever intended to be our no.2
-
Why? He'd want more money and would just be sitting there warming the bench. He's a number 2 no better no worse unless he wants to try his luck at someone like Reading and become their number 2 eventually also.
Why? Because replacing him would cost a transfer fee and signing on bonus, plus similar wages, with the likely result we wouldn't get someone as good.
-
I'm sure we've all seen plenty of reserve keepers have a couple of good games then fade away. Postma comes to mind.
-
He seems to command the area well and has good reflexes.
A very good 2nd string keeper.
-
I'm sure we've all seen plenty of reserve keepers have a couple of good games then fade away. Postma comes to mind.
As do Michael Oakes and Peter Enckelman. Solid reserves, but not up to the regular number one jersey when push came to shove.
-
I'm sure we've all seen plenty of reserve keepers have a couple of good games then fade away. Postma comes to mind.
Time will tell if that's the case or if he's matured well and is fulfilling the potential we heard about when he signed, but while he's in and playing well, I think we should be at least exploring the finances of giving him an extension.
-
I'm sure we've all seen plenty of reserve keepers have a couple of good games then fade away. Postma comes to mind.
Time will tell if that's the case or if he's matured well and is fulfilling the potential we heard about when he signed, but while he's in and playing well, I think we should be at least exploring the finances of giving him an extension.
Without a doubt - at the moment he's a good number two. But at the moment that's all he is and all we should be offering him.
-
With Brad's contact up I expect he will be offered a new one at "Number 2" rates. It'll then be up to him if he wants to stay as Given's backup or start for some team in the lower part of the Prem, the Championship or on the continent
-
Without a doubt - at the moment he's a good number two. But at the moment that's all he is and all we should be offering him.
Agreed. My feelings about number 2s are that they should have the potential to eventually dispalce the current number one. Without getting carried away, Guzan has done that these last few games, or at least shown enough that we're not missing Given as we thought we would, so that alone says to me "Keep him and see if he can get any better!"
-
The problem is that every team needs that good number two goalie. It's why Stuart Taylor is probably an exceptionally wealthy man in spite of playing something like 10 games in 5 seasons for us and Man City. Sell Guzan, or not renew his contract and we'll still probably need to find a replacement (especially with Given's injuries) who will command a fee and probably big wages. If Brad fancies trying his hand somewhere else then fair fucks to him. If he's content to sign a new deal then we should give it him.
-
I'm not sure that we need to worry too much about the money that he would or wouldn't be earning.
When he joined us from Chivas he was probably earning £50,000 per year, if that. He would probably have seen his salary increase twenty times over and still be one of our lowest earners.
I don't think he's going to be worried too much about the contract from a financial perspective, it's just whether he wants to go and play for say, Leicester or Blackpool and be their number one or stay here.
-
I think he has great potential, and is 2 seasons away from our number 1 role. It is then to weigh up maybe 10 games a season for us or number 1 somewhere else and hope to catch the eye of a top club to become their number 1. I am not convinced many clubs in the top division need a keeper, so we might be the best option for him long term.
-
Sorry to the poster who mentioned it earlier (too green to remember names...) but yes I wasn't aware that he was out of contract at the end of the season and I thought he had signed a new one. Which makes it even more certain to me that we should cash in if we get the chance. If he is holding out for a better deal I'm not sure it is just about an extra few quid - although that will help. He probably realises that he needs to be playing regularly especially as his main contenders for the US jersey are all getting older.
If he hasn't signed a contract now I think he wants a move and explains why he's playing better than any other time he's come in. He's always had the quality but his weaknesses were always shown up eventually. Which is why he's sitting on the bench more often than not.
This isn't an anti-Guzan thing because if we still had the squad of a few seasons back I think he'd be happy to bide his time and we would be quite happy to get him an extra 5 k a week to warm the bench. Things have moved on now though and I think we need to cut our cloth accordingly. Offer him to someone now, see if they'll bite, if not he'll sit on the bench until the summer with us paying dead money for a reserve. That's the situation that got us to where we are now (albeit in a totally different way I guess).
Your point though was to sell him to raise funds for other areas of the team. Now given he's on a free in the summer, no club (other than maybe Sunderland) will be spending 2-3m on him when they get him for free in the summer.
Obviously I now realise you thought he was on a longer contract here but still a strange post and thread I thought.
-
The problem is that every team needs that good number two goalie. It's why Stuart Taylor is probably an exceptionally wealthy man in spite of playing something like 10 games in 5 seasons for us and Man City. Sell Guzan, or not renew his contract and we'll still probably need to find a replacement (especially with Given's injuries) who will command a fee and probably big wages. If Brad fancies trying his hand somewhere else then fair fucks to him. If he's content to sign a new deal then we should give it him.
Taylor isn't even number two at City, they signed some other keeper to be sub to Joe Hart at the start of the season.
The trend for most clubs nowadays is to have three senior keepers in the squad which I always find pretty strange as surely having two main keepers and then a youth learning as number three is better and cheaper as keepers don't tend to get injured that much.
Quite surprised how many prem clubs do this:
Manure have De Gea, Lindegarrd and Kuzczak (who's completely disappared off the face of the earth)
Spurs have Friedel, Cudinici and Gomes.
Arsenal have Sczeseney, Fabianski and Almunia.
Stoke have Sorensen, Nash and Begovic.
Chelsea have Cech, Hilario and Turrnbull
Liverpool have Reina, Doni and Brad Jones.
Sunderland have Mignolet, Westwood and Craig Gordon.
Spurs are the most interesting one there, probably the strongest set of keepers in the league there and all on decent wages you'd imagine but Brad never gets injured so why do they need Cudicini and Gomes?
-
Another thing I've just noticed from that list is how many keepers who could play week in week out actually seem comfortable with not playing that much.
Turnbull/Jones both played regularly for Boro in the prem, both seem happy being reserves at big clubs. Someone like Kuzczak and Cudicini could be regulars for a lot of prem clubs but again both seem happy to be number 2/3 where they are now.
Strange breed goalkeeping.
-
This is a bit of a non-issue for me.
Every team has a number 2 goalie who doesn't play much, I'm pretty sure most youngish keepers accept it as part of the job. In fact, some make it the basis of their entire career.