Transfer Speculation / Gossip

[saunders_heroes]

Lescott would have been ideal for our team but to Goethe better players you have to pay the going rate in wages

But then we're back in the Faustian contracts of the O'Neill era.

You get what you pay for in life. That's why we've struggled over the last 4 years.

[Gareth]

I'd say that two full backs who can actually do their primary job of defending should be top of the list...not one of ours is defensively sound.

[RussellC]

It’s “typical” of Villa to be generally stumbling around in the dark when it comes to any kind of transfer policy. Yes, we've bought some very good players over the years. Yes, we’ve also found a few bargains, and even made handsome profit on some of our signings. But the way that we’ve toed and froed with our spending over the years is ridiculous. From the likes of Gregory and McLeish throwing money and aging players with little shelf-life and no resale value, to MON failing to acknowledge any league outside of the UK.  Even under Randy’s stewardship, the shift from Mon to Houllier to Lambert (who has now been forced to completely change tack in his approach to the transfer market) has been seriously badly managed by the powers that be. In fact it doesn't smack of bad longer-term planning, it smacks of no longer terms planning.

[supertom]

We had the 4th worst defensive record in the league last season. The 3 worse than us were relegated. I'd say that Centre-back was a failry high priority.  I'd also say that signing one that was discarded from one of those 3 aforementioned teams isn't much of a solution.

I wouldn't say Senderos was discarded particularly. His deal ran out and he was probably earning more at Fulham than what we're currently paying him, so he was never going to get offered a new deal. They'll need to drastically slash their wage bill too.
They were also a mess last season. 3 different managers, so it goes without saying, not all of them were going to fancy him. Magath let him go, but he was still deemed good enough for Valencia.

Whether we were ever genuinely interested in Lescott I don't know, but if there was a choice, we've chosen between a 29 year old asking for 25k a week for two years, and a 31 yr old who would want twice that at the very least, and may well be holding out for a longer deal too.

[Dave]

Lescott would have been ideal for our team but to Goethe better players you have to pay the going rate in wages

But then we're back in the Faustian contracts of the O'Neill era.

You get what you pay for in life. That's why we've struggled over the last 4 years.

Never mind.

A German literature-themed punathon was bound to be more difficult than a nautical one.

[dave.woodhall]

So it's not typical at all - in fact, it's never happened before. Whoever Lescott signs for, none of us know which one of the many reasons for making his decision was the one why he didn't join us, if indeed we were after him in the first place.

One thing I know for certain, though, is that if he is Stripeybound then either money doesn't matter to him or they've broken a tradition for parsimony dating back to the 1880s.

[ozzjim]

I can see the logic Supertom, if Senderos was likely to be fit! Vlaar is not exactly renowned for his rock solid fitness record and Okore has just had one of the worst possible injuries a footballer can have. We had the 4th worst defence, which was even worse the season before. We are drastically short of quality at the back. Lescott is not a great centre half at all, but he is better than what we have. Senderos is possible decent on his day but error prone.

If it is a decision that allows us to still sign a genuine physical presence in holding midfield, something we are desperate for, then great. If we go into the season with the same left back situation and holding midfield situation as we have now, then frankly we are truly buggered. It is only 18th June thankfully and there is time for 3-4 more players to come in.

[saunders_heroes]

Lescott would have been ideal for our team but to Goethe better players you have to pay the going rate in wages

But then we're back in the Faustian contracts of the O'Neill era.

You get what you pay for in life. That's why we've struggled over the last 4 years.

Never mind.

A German literature-themed punathon was bound to be more difficult than a nautical one.

Punathons are for bores.

[saunders_heroes]

So it's not typical at all - in fact, it's never happened before. Whoever Lescott signs for, none of us know which one of the many reasons for making his decision was the one why he didn't join us, if indeed we were after him in the first place.

One thing I know for certain, though, is that if he is Stripeybound then either money doesn't matter to him or they've broken a tradition for parsimony dating back to the 1880s.

It is typical that we've gone for the cheaper option. Well certainly typical of the last few years anyway.

[supertom]

I can see the logic Supertom, if Senderos was likely to be fit! Vlaar is not exactly renowned for his rock solid fitness record and Okore has just had one of the worst possible injuries a footballer can have. We had the 4th worst defence, which was even worse the season before. We are drastically short of quality at the back. Lescott is not a great centre half at all, but he is better than what we have. Senderos is possible decent on his day but error prone.

If it is a decision that allows us to still sign a genuine physical presence in holding midfield, something we are desperate for, then great. If we go into the season with the same left back situation and holding midfield situation as we have now, then frankly we are truly buggered. It is only 18th June thankfully and there is time for 3-4 more players to come in.

I think sorting our midfield will go a long way to helping out our defence. We put too much pressure on the backline by having no defensive presence in midfield, and also piss poor ball retention. We spend most of our matches on the back foot.

As things stand central defence is reasonable. I'd be identifying 1-2 more midfielders and a couple of good fullbacks. Again, fullback has been a major weakness for us too. I thought Vlaar had a good season. Clark had an okay season largely too, Baker wasn't good, but I think thats down to his ability, which isn't Prem level. But I think most of our problems last season stemmed from a midfield that gave in like warm butter and poor fullbacks, and not so much through the middle of the defence who at times just about managed to hold us together in games (particularly in the first half of the season).

[Dave]

Lescott would have been ideal for our team but to Goethe better players you have to pay the going rate in wages

But then we're back in the Faustian contracts of the O'Neill era.

You get what you pay for in life. That's why we've struggled over the last 4 years.

Never mind.

A German literature-themed punathon was bound to be more difficult than a nautical one.

Punathons are for bores.

We're very sorry that we don't live up to the high standards of permanent grumpiness that you expect.

[Archbishop Herbert Cockthrottle]

Lescott would have been ideal for our team but to Goethe better players you have to pay the going rate in wages

But then we're back in the Faustian contracts of the O'Neill era.

You get what you pay for in life. That's why we've struggled over the last 4 years.

Never mind.

A German literature-themed punathon was bound to be more difficult than a nautical one.

Punathons are for bores.

Quite right; whenever you get a thread like this, why have one pun when a tunnel do?

[ozzjim]

I am very grumpy today to be fair. I would hate to be this grumpy everyday though. Must be torture.


If Lescott does go to Albion, it does suggest to me Lambert is even more hamstrung financially than we all feared, which still makes no sense with the new TV money coming in.

[RussellC]

So it's not typical at all - in fact, it's never happened before. Whoever Lescott signs for, none of us know which one of the many reasons for making his decision was the one why he didn't join us, if indeed we were after him in the first place.

One thing I know for certain, though, is that if he is Stripeybound then either money doesn't matter to him or they've broken a tradition for parsimony dating back to the 1880s.

I think you need to re-read my comment Dave. I wrote "It's just a typical Villa transfer fuck-up". I would say that our poor transfer dealings are fairly frequent and therefore relatively typical of us as a club under the current ownership and management.

[supertom]

So it's not typical at all - in fact, it's never happened before. Whoever Lescott signs for, none of us know which one of the many reasons for making his decision was the one why he didn't join us, if indeed we were after him in the first place.

One thing I know for certain, though, is that if he is Stripeybound then either money doesn't matter to him or they've broken a tradition for parsimony dating back to the 1880s.

It is typical that we've gone for the cheaper option. Well certainly typical of the last few years anyway.

In fairness to Senderos though, in recent years I don't think he's been any more error prone than Lescott. Lescott tends to get niggly injuries too. He's definitely not the player he once was, and has never really recaptured his Everton form for City.
He would still improve us, but I also believe Senderos will improve us and for significantly less.
If we're going to pay a bit more for a player at this time, I'd rather give 50-60k to Barry than Lescott. Sort the midfield out and you go a long way toward making the defence and the attack better in one. We had probably one of the most piss poor midfields in the top flight last season. Delph was all too often carrying the can single handed while the rest just disappeared. 

Whether we're still willing to pay 50-60k for a player of course, remains to be seen.