New Four Year Deal for Gabby

[supertom]

There comes a point where you need to reward long term players and stalwarts of the club. I would say Gabby largely deserves it. Granted he's frustrating and inconsistent and he certainly should deliver more.

For me, the last 3-4 years our squad has been decimated. We currently have the worst side I've ever known us to have in terms of quality. That's being brutally honest. When Gabby doesn't play, we generally miss him because he's one of the few players we have who have the ability to turn a game. So right now he's very much a key player. For me he's been here 8 years. He deserves to be given the option to finish his career here. He hasn't always had an easy ride. Like many, he didn't enjoy working with Houllier, he possibly could have pushed for a move, but he stuck it out.

Do we need a better option? Probably yes. Are there affordable options out there on our budget who can offer what Gabby does and more (with more consistency)? Probably not, barring a piece of inspired scouting like Benteke.

The other thing is, Gab has been here 8 years. In that time many strikers have come and gone at the club: Angel, Baros, Phillips, Moore,, Sutton,  Harewood, Heskey, Delfouneso, Weimann Carew, Bent, Benteke,  Kozak, Helenius, Bowery.  How many of the strikers have had the ability to turn games by themselves? Pick up the ball and make something happen?
Gabby, Benteke and Carew probably. Bent as an example was always reliant on service.

We've had a lot of front men and Gabby has managed to still stand out above most of them. That says part about the quality of our signings of course, and the standard of fellow graduates, but still, he's stood out and has given his all for the club, and loves the club like none of the above could claim to probably. Many have come, gone, underwhelmed, or looked to fuck off at the first sign of something "better." Lest we not forget Benteke tried to jump ship last summer before seeing sense. Some may claim Gabby's never attracted interest which would likely be wide of the mark. Certainly in his younger days he was well thought of. I think a fair few clubs may have sniffed around, but we can only go by the odd rumour here and there over the years.

Does he deserve a payrise? No, not really. In that regard I can wholly agree. I think coming to his age, if he was to move he'd be looking at his last top level move, so I would say to stay here he should be willing (and I think he will) to remain on parity at best, but possibly take a paycut. Or perhaps they may work out a deal whereby he'll get parity for the first two years, and then his wage will go down in the final two? Who knows.

[PaulWinch again]

He deserves a deal, but he should contribute more often than he does.

[supertom]

He deserves a deal, but he should contribute more often than he does.

No question there. Better players around him will help. The ability to rest players, like him, will also help. He's looked jaded recently, as his Weimann, but we have only Albrighton as an adequate replacement for either.
We're pretty shite at the moment so occasionally you need someone to become a game turner for you. I'm think Norwich away last season. Probably Norwich at home this season, Arsenal away this, among others, but we have Gabby and Benteke, possibly Delph, who are really the only players who can drag the rest of the team single handed.
That's where we're at at the moment. Gabby might not do it often enough, but he still does it and has the capability to. Until we can afford someone more consistent (which seems a long way off) who can, he warrants his deal.

[Isa]

So let him leave for next to nothing and go out and spend another £8m + to replace him.  Don't offer him another contract of any substance and lose him so that we can recall Bowery...and slag the club off for not holding onto one of our most experienced players.  One of our few truely attacking threats capable of changing a game.

If you ignore the wage factor then that is how it may seem. £50k per week over four years would equate to £10.4m. Even if paid £6-7m to replace him with somebody on even half that, then financially it pretty much evens out and that's not even taking the potential sell-on value of any replacement into account. For what it's worth, if Gabby were to take a pay-cut and earn the same as most if the others in the squad then I would tolerate him as a squad-player.

Also, you describe a guy with 3 goals in 23 starts as a 'truely attacking threat'! Seriously?

[Toronto Villa]

He looked completely exhausted after the Chelsea game. He ran himself into the ground as did Weimann. I think if Gabby can be rotated, and that goes for any of our better players they will all be better for it. The issue we have right now is that the options off the bench aren't always of the needed quality, but as the squad fills out and deepends you would hope that is addressed. All of the good sides are able to rotate players and keep the best ones fresh. When you are a sprinter like Gabby the toll over the season is that much more than it would be on players who are not so dynamic.

[PeterWithesShin]

He looked completely exhausted after the Chelsea game. He ran himself into the ground as did Weimann. I think if Gabby can be rotated, and that goes for any of our better players they will all be better for it. The issue we have right now is that the options off the bench aren't always of the needed quality, but as the squad fills out and deepends you would hope that is addressed. All of the good sides are able to rotate players and keep the best ones fresh. When you are a sprinter like Gabby the toll over the season is that much more than it would be on players who are not so dynamic.

He'd had nearly 2 weeks rest between Norwich and Chavski. 8 days between Chavski and Stoke. It's not like he, or any of the squad are playing twice a week every week.

[PeterWithesShin]

Gabby has scored 3 times this season, those goals have got us 7 points. Where would be without those points? Flipside, where would we be if he scored a few more?

[TopDeck113]

I know he's one of us etc, etc, but he's far too inconsistent and he's reached the age when his biggest asset - his pace - is only going to go in one direction.

Two year deal max, with an option of additional year.  The Villa is his club, but it's also the biggest club he'll ever play for.

[Can Gana Be Bettered!?!?]

If he had a brain and could play football he'd be brilliant!

I think his prime has gone (playing alongside Carew with MON as manager), but still think he has a part to play at Villa.

Defenders shit themselves whenever someone fast runs at them, so whether we play him to do it from the start or bring on towards the end, he's useful to have.

However, I hope he's not going to be paid a stupid wage, because that would be ridiculous given we're trying to get rid of average players on stupid wages.

He's Villa through and through (probably why he escapes a lot of criticism), and he rarely gives less than 100% effort, but sometimes his play is very poor.

[Ad@m]

He's definitely average but he's got the one asset - genuine pace - that is very expensive to replace.

I think that if wages weren't being considered he'd be given a shorter contract but the offer of a longer contract will be to keep his wages down.  I think this is a sensible move.

[PeterWithesShin]

Another Gabby is important and at the same time frustrating fact. When is the last time he scored for us, in any competitive game, and we lost?

[Toronto Villa]

He looked completely exhausted after the Chelsea game. He ran himself into the ground as did Weimann. I think if Gabby can be rotated, and that goes for any of our better players they will all be better for it. The issue we have right now is that the options off the bench aren't always of the needed quality, but as the squad fills out and deepends you would hope that is addressed. All of the good sides are able to rotate players and keep the best ones fresh. When you are a sprinter like Gabby the toll over the season is that much more than it would be on players who are not so dynamic.

He'd had nearly 2 weeks rest between Norwich and Chavski. 8 days between Chavski and Stoke. It's not like he, or any of the squad are playing twice a week every week.

the entire side looked dreadful for 70 minutes against Stoke. I'm not making excuses for him other than pointing out that his game is sprinting and running hard which any sprinter will tell you is sapping. And especially after a good percentage of a season. That's not to say that he won't get another burst. I just thought he looked particularly jaded towards the end of the Chelsea game for all of the running he did, not only in attack but tracking back.

[Ad@m]

Another Gabby is important and at the same time frustrating fact. When is the last time he scored for us, in any competitive game, and we lost?

Isn't that just as likely to indicate that he only scores against shit defences?

[Toronto Villa]

Gabby is one of those rare players that has pretty much scored against every team hasn't he, or close to it. He just doesn't do it enough for his ability. I think PWS is just saying that he could do with scoring more because we don't lose very often when he does.

[sirlordbaltimore]

I'm not even sure his form/consistency even warrants a 2 year extension nevermind 4. One great game in 5 or more really isn't enough for me.

Nice bloke, Villa fan, heart in the right place. Great, but not enough on the pitch where it matters.