So what have we learnt from this transfer window?

[Dave Cooper please]

  It is a concern to me that most of the players we've bought in are at the lower end of the scale vis a vis wages.   I hope that wasn't the primary motivation when signing them.

Signings like Hutton, Warnock and co prove that paying a player £40k per week plus isn't a guarantee of quality, true.  But there is a direct correlation more often than not between overall wage bill and final league placing. I'm not hugely bothered about the financial aspect of things, truth be told, If player x earns more than player y.  But that last part -as a football fan- concerns me. 

It's fine to have a squad with a number of promising young players looking to prove themselves, but we are big enough to have a core of players closer to the finished article, and I would have liked to have seen more of that type arrive this summer, particularly for the key spots in defence. 

But this is Lambert's philosophy. Good and very thorough scouting for young, hungry players who will see Villa as a big step-up and challenge. This will always see some players unable to make the step-up of course, but with relatively low price fees and initial wages it's never a massive gamble when it doesn't work out.
 And we have shown with recent contract extensions that we are willing to reward those who do make the grade, so there's another incentive as well as being able to make their name in the Premier League.

 You can either buy into this philosophy or not, but Plumbutt isn't going to change so constantly hoping for a "marquee" signing or some proven experience at a high initial wage cost is pointless, it just isn't going to happen, Lambert didn't panic buy when it looked like it was going to shit last season so I doubt he's going to change his ways now it looks like were on track.

[sirlordbaltimore]

I can well understand that. We shouldn't be in relegation trouble this year so no improvements to the side needed are particularly desperate ones, so we can take our time. I wouldn't be surprised if we're doing what Spurs have done and what Lyon did for years and waiting to spend next year's Benteke money - which, let's face it, should be considerable.

This is what bugs me most though. Imagine us with a top creative playmaker with Benteke in the side. It could have brought us untold joy this season. Now we'll only likely get one by selling the best striker we've had in decades

Same old story. Never complete the jigsaw, just keep moving the pieces around

The money was there, it must have been. We just don't want to spend it

[eamonn]

Agree more or less with what Gagey says.

[Dante Lavelli]

I generally agree with Plumbutt Cooper (young hingry players) except that the "scatter gun" approach used so far (albeit with seemingly excellent scouting) will only get us so far as the squad is now pretty full, whereas at the start of his reign the quality and size of the squad allowed Lambert to give lots of players a go. 

Now we have a complete squad (give or take) I predict that we'll sign fewer players but they'll have a higher likelihood of being good (i.e. bigger price tag).  I'd be surprised if we saw 7 signings again in a window.  My guess is any signings will still be young and eager to improve but more along the lines of Ashley Young/Milner/Foreign Equivalent.

That's my hunch and I think Lambert's dilemma, as it's a different category to scout for compared to what he's done so far at Villa and previously at Norwich.  We were heavily linked with Pierre-Emerrick Aubameyang last summer (he moved to dortmund this season) and Coutinho (now at Liverpool) so it suggests he has an eye for a player but possibly/arguably we were not good enough to tempt them at the time.

[paul_e]

I generally agree with Plumbutt Cooper (young hingry players) except that the "scatter gun" approach used so far (albeit with seemingly excellent scouting) will only get us so far as the squad is now pretty full, whereas at the start of his reign the quality and size of the squad allowed Lambert to give lots of players a go. 

Now we have a complete squad (give or take) I predict that we'll sign fewer players but they'll have a higher likelihood of being good (i.e. bigger price tag).  I'd be surprised if we saw 7 signings again in a window.  My guess is any signings will still be young and eager to improve but more along the lines of Ashley Young/Milner/Foreign Equivalent.

That's my hunch and I think Lambert's dilemma, as it's a different category to scout for compared to what he's done so far at Villa and previously at Norwich.  We were heavily linked with Pierre-Emerrick Aubameyang last summer (he moved to dortmund this season) and Coutinho (now at Liverpool) so it suggests he has an eye for a player but possibly/arguably we were not good enough to tempt them at the time.

I think the only signings you could call 'scatter gun' were KEA and Vlaar, both cheap and reasonably experienced and signed to fill immediate gaps (and probably both plucked from the scouting reports at the club already given we had a dutch scout under TSM).  Every other player fits the same mould and plays in a position where we needed competition.  Yes he's signed big numbers but I think he had to but the choice of signings is quite clinical, he has a very clear picture of the skill set he wants and it's evident in every signing (except possibly Kozak but I'll withhold commenting on his abilities until I've seen him play).

That said I think windows from now will be more 'surgical' in that it will be 1 in 1 out (with some of the ins coming through the ranks) and they'll fill thge same role.  The only addition is that Im positive we'll see an attacking midfielder, we've been linked with far too many for it not to be a role PL wants to fill.

[KevinGage]

  It is a concern to me that most of the players we've bought in are at the lower end of the scale vis a vis wages.   I hope that wasn't the primary motivation when signing them.

Signings like Hutton, Warnock and co prove that paying a player £40k per week plus isn't a guarantee of quality, true.  But there is a direct correlation more often than not between overall wage bill and final league placing. I'm not hugely bothered about the financial aspect of things, truth be told, If player x earns more than player y.  But that last part -as a football fan- concerns me. 

It's fine to have a squad with a number of promising young players looking to prove themselves, but we are big enough to have a core of players closer to the finished article, and I would have liked to have seen more of that type arrive this summer, particularly for the key spots in defence. 

But this is Lambert's philosophy. Good and very thorough scouting for young, hungry players who will see Villa as a big step-up and challenge. This will always see some players unable to make the step-up of course, but with relatively low price fees and initial wages it's never a massive gamble when it doesn't work out.
 And we have shown with recent contract extensions that we are willing to reward those who do make the grade, so there's another incentive as well as being able to make their name in the Premier League.

 You can either buy into this philosophy or not, but Plumbutt isn't going to change so constantly hoping for a "marquee" signing or some proven experience at a high initial wage cost is pointless, it just isn't going to happen, Lambert didn't panic buy when it looked like it was going to shit last season so I doubt he's going to change his ways now it looks like were on track.

Maybe it is purely his philosophy, his choice alone.   He's purposely buying young, hungry players who want to play for the club, and the lower wages are merely a by product of that.  Rather than the main criteria. 

The bid for Dempsey and the interest in Lescott last Jan would be at odds with that, but who knows. 

The concern would be if we are prioritising the wage bill above all else.  Are the club realistically aiming for European qualification anytime soon, or is the target to have one of the lowest wages to turnover ratios in the top flight?  We must easily be outside the top 10 in that particular category now. 

Of course it's never as simple as 6th highest wage bill in the league =  6 place guaranteed.    Newcastle went down in 2009 with a wage bill far in excess of at least 10 clubs above them, we struggled in in 2011 and 2012 with a wage bill far higher than most clubs around us.  That's the beauty of sport, it can't always be condensed to a numbers game.  There is scope for good coaching, team dynamic and team chemistry to upset the balance. 

But if -as a club- we are specifically aiming to have a wage bill at the lower end of the scale compared to the rest of the league, we can't then be surprised if our league position reflects that. 

[Toronto Villa]

I don't agree that their lower wages are in any way an indication of policy. I think we have identified players that are talented and are looking for the opportunity to prove themselves and earn that next contract. Something that club has not messed about on when said players have earned them. It's one thing buying a player that is worth x amount per a week and another paying a player that has done something with you to actually deserve it.

[Jarpie]

  It is a concern to me that most of the players we've bought in are at the lower end of the scale vis a vis wages.   I hope that wasn't the primary motivation when signing them.

Signings like Hutton, Warnock and co prove that paying a player £40k per week plus isn't a guarantee of quality, true.  But there is a direct correlation more often than not between overall wage bill and final league placing. I'm not hugely bothered about the financial aspect of things, truth be told, If player x earns more than player y.  But that last part -as a football fan- concerns me. 

It's fine to have a squad with a number of promising young players looking to prove themselves, but we are big enough to have a core of players closer to the finished article, and I would have liked to have seen more of that type arrive this summer, particularly for the key spots in defence. 

But this is Lambert's philosophy. Good and very thorough scouting for young, hungry players who will see Villa as a big step-up and challenge. This will always see some players unable to make the step-up of course, but with relatively low price fees and initial wages it's never a massive gamble when it doesn't work out.
 And we have shown with recent contract extensions that we are willing to reward those who do make the grade, so there's another incentive as well as being able to make their name in the Premier League.

 You can either buy into this philosophy or not, but Plumbutt isn't going to change so constantly hoping for a "marquee" signing or some proven experience at a high initial wage cost is pointless, it just isn't going to happen, Lambert didn't panic buy when it looked like it was going to shit last season so I doubt he's going to change his ways now it looks like were on track.

Maybe it is purely his philosophy, his choice alone.   He's purposely buying young, hungry players who want to play for the club, and the lower wages are merely a by product of that.  Rather than the main criteria. 

The bid for Dempsey and the interest in Lescott last Jan would be at odds with that, but who knows. 

The concern would be if we are prioritising the wage bill above all else.  Are the club realistically aiming for European qualification anytime soon, or is the target to have one of the lowest wages to turnover ratios in the top flight?  We must easily be outside the top 10 in that particular category now. 

Of course it's never as simple as 6th highest wage bill in the league =  6 place guaranteed.    Newcastle went down in 2009 with a wage bill far in excess of at least 10 clubs above them, we struggled in in 2011 and 2012 with a wage bill far higher than most clubs around us.  That's the beauty of sport, it can't always be condensed to a numbers game.  There is scope for good coaching, team dynamic and team chemistry to upset the balance. 

But if -as a club- we are specifically aiming to have a wage bill at the lower end of the scale compared to the rest of the league, we can't then be surprised if our league position reflects that.

As we get rid of those high paid players from the bomb squad we should see new players on higher salaries than young players we got now. I do wonder how big salary bump Westwood, Lowton, Weimann etc got in the summer when they signed new contracts and Benteke got 15-20k more per week than he was on before if I'm not mistaken.

The MO now is probably to gradually climb up the table and in the progress to get players get in we need rather than buying now the players on inflated fees and wages who could push us to top 6.

[frankmosswasmyuncle]

I don't agree that their lower wages are in any way an indication of policy. I think we have identified players that are talented and are looking for the opportunity to prove themselves and earn that next contract. Something that club has not messed about on when said players have earned them. It's one thing buying a player that is worth x amount per a week and another paying a player that has done something with you to actually deserve it.

With this in mind it's interesting to note Ireland's comment today about being linked up with Hughes again as "he knows how to get the best out of me".
Implies that Lambert didn't, but also that Ireland relies a little too much on others to get the best out of him rather than taking some responsibility and getting on with it himself!

[Matt Collins]

I can well understand that. We shouldn't be in relegation trouble this year so no improvements to the side needed are particularly desperate ones, so we can take our time. I wouldn't be surprised if we're doing what Spurs have done and what Lyon did for years and waiting to spend next year's Benteke money - which, let's face it, should be considerable.

This is what bugs me most though. Imagine us with a top creative playmaker with Benteke in the side. It could have brought us untold joy this season. Now we'll only likely get one by selling the best striker we've had in decades

Same old story. Never complete the jigsaw, just keep moving the pieces around

The money was there, it must have been. We just don't want to spend it

Is that a serious post?

[john e]

its about having a long term cohesive policy, our forward line of Benteke, Wieman and Gabby would cost 50 mill to replace like for like, but it cost us 7,5 million

so can Lambert and the club keep doing it, well yes but they will have to be pretty special

the new striker we have bought in raised eyebrows including mine because we were already strong in that department, but maybe its Lamberts long term policy, he is  looking 3/4 years down the line, if that's the case we are in new territory,
 Kevin G makes some good points, but I would argue the reason the league top spenders are in the leagues top positions is because no ones ever done it a different way before

the Dortmund model gets mentioned, i'm not to clued up on exactly how that evolved, but they look to be doing there own thing in a different way, Lamberts connections with them can only be good for us

we hear all the time from supporters of clubs, Arsenal, Man Utd, Chelsea, Newcastle, Spurs etc, spend spend spend, we were crying the same thing last January because in a football fans mind its the only way, buy yourself success, but Lambert didn't, he stuck to his principles and saw it through

most people now believe we are in a stronger place because of it, how much would Delph, Westwood, Lowton, Okore cost now to replace with new for old, an awfull lot of money many milllions

so why cant this keep being done for the next 5, 10 years, you need the right man in charge and the right owners to keep the faith and supporters who don't panic, and can see the project

maybe its fancifull, and the game is all about money, but I would like to think we are bucking the trend and doing something groundbreaking here

[frankmosswasmyuncle]

Take a bow john e!
I think you speak for quite a few of us there.

[danlanza]

Spot on john.

[KevinGage]

I agree with a good chunk of that John e. 

As I've said on numerous occasions in the past, there is merit to what PL is doing. 

We ourselves have seen the negative impact older players on fat contracts can cause. 

I just think that with the sums of money involved in the game now, there was scope to bring in 2/3 players closer to the finished article to supplement what we already have.   Not necessarily 'marquee' types either. 

[LeeB]

John, top post pal.

Kevin Gage, I see where you're coming from, but I think we need a bit of trust.

I think they've earned it.