Transfer Speculation / Gossip

[Villafirst]

The current transfer dealings are really making me want to renew my season ticket......

[saunders_heroes]

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.

Well Lescott won't be coming here now we've signed the cheaper option in Senderos.
Sadly this is the way it'll be till Lerner finds a buyer.

[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.

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.

Yet the one example you mentioned was three decades ago. Our transfer deals aren't perfect, and neither are those of any other club, but they're certainly not the litany of disaster you claim them to be.

[RussellC]

In fairness to Senderos though, in recent years I don't think he's been any more error prone than Lescott.

Since leaving Arsenal in 2010 Senderos has only really managed about 50 games for Fulham and a handful of games during various loan deals. Lescott may not have played much last season but there's a big difference between being on the bench for the most highly paid sports team on the planet and not being valued by a struggling Fulham team.

[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.

Yet the one example you mentioned was three decades ago. Our transfer deals aren't perfect, and neither are those of any other club, but they're certainly not the litany of disaster you claim them to be.

Yet our performance both on the field and in the boardroom would certainly suggest that they are.

[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.

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.

Yet the one example you mentioned was three decades ago. Our transfer deals aren't perfect, and neither are those of any other club, but they're certainly not the litany of disaster you claim them to be.

Yet our performance both on the field and in the boardroom would certainly suggest that they are.

There are other reasons for that, not least the inconsistent managerial policy.

[pauliewalnuts]

I don't really know if we'd actually need Lescott now. Having signed Senderos, and with Okore coming back and assuming Vlaar stays, maybe we've got enough there.

It's not Lescott going to Albion or Hull *now* that worries me, it is that - thus far - we're still to see any evidence that we're not fishing in the same shitty pool we were fishing in last summer.

We'll see who else we sign, but I've got a gnawing feeling that, with Randy having played the "trying to sell it, not going to be spending" card, Senderos and Cole are going to turn out to be a good indicator of our transfer policy.

Time will tell.

[sirlordbaltimore]

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.

we've already signed TWO in effect. Okore and Senderos

half the reason our defence is so poor is obviously the midfield shape and the tactics chosen by the current manager

[pauliewalnuts]

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 don't really care too much on their spending policy, but it's worth noting that Lambert himself came out and said he tried to get Lukaku in on loan, but wages were the problem (he actually specified this).

Lukaku then went on to join Albion.

I think you're right re their usual tightness, however I do start to wonder just how tight the restrictions are when a player we can't afford the wages for goes on to sign for Albion, who obviously are willing to pay the wages.

[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.

I don't really care too much on their spending policy, but it's worth note that Lambert himself came out and said he tried to get Lukaku in on loan, but wages were the problem (he actually specified this).

Lukaku then went on to join Albion.

I think you're right re their usual tightness, however I do start to wonder just how tight the restrictions are when a player we can't afford the wages for goes on to sign for Albion, who obviously are willing to pay the wages.

Because he was their only signing whereas Lambert wanted him and Benteke together maybe?

[RussellC]

There are other reasons for that, not least the inconsistent managerial policy.

True, but I do honestly believe that our transfer- policy (or lack of one) is our major downfall.

In the current game I think our peers are (or at least should be) Tottenham and Everton. I genuinely believe that it's been the consistency of their transfer strategies that have kept them both comfortably above us in recent times. They both get cherry-picked by the Top Clubs, as we do, but sensibly re-invest instead of going into meltdown when this happens.

Their buying is also very balanced. They don't go through summers of buying just kids, or just experienced pros, or just unknown foreign players, like we do.

[pauliewalnuts]

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 don't really care too much on their spending policy, but it's worth note that Lambert himself came out and said he tried to get Lukaku in on loan, but wages were the problem (he actually specified this).

Lukaku then went on to join Albion.

I think you're right re their usual tightness, however I do start to wonder just how tight the restrictions are when a player we can't afford the wages for goes on to sign for Albion, who obviously are willing to pay the wages.

Because he was their only signing whereas Lambert wanted him and Benteke together maybe?

He wasn't their only signing, though. He did want to play him with Benteke, but Benteke won't have been on big money when he first moved here.

Wage affordability will always take into account the other players on the pay roll, obviously, but I dunno, it disturbs me when I see us being downbeat about players we can't afford going on to play for a club as tight as Albion.

Every window we get at least one occasion of Lambert talking about how we can't afford this player or that, and how tight the wage bill is. It just makes me wonder whether we're ever going to hear anyone at the club talk about us showing ambition, or indeed signing players that show ambition.

It's the sort of "no money, going nowhere but down eventually" mood that we had in 2006.

[Ger Regan]

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.

Disagree fundamentally with this. That's why I consider O'Neill to have ultimately been a failure.

[Brend'Watkins]

Senderos or Lescott?

At this stage of their careers, not a great deal of difference . 

[pauliewalnuts]

There are other reasons for that, not least the inconsistent managerial policy.

True, but I do honestly believe that our transfer- policy (or lack of one) is our major downfall.

In the current game I think our peers are (or at least should be) Tottenham and Everton. I genuinely believe that it's been the consistency of their transfer strategies that have kept them both comfortably above us in recent times. They both get cherry-picked by the Top Clubs, as we do, but sensibly re-invest instead of going into meltdown when this happens.

Their buying is also very balanced. They don't go through summers of buying just kids, or just experienced pros, or just unknown foreign players, like we do.

They also understand that players aren't just "single use" objects that walk away for nothing once you're done with them, too.

We have done an awful job of protecting the value of the squad, managing contracts effectively, over the last eight years.