FFP

[VILLA MOLE]

There really isn't a simple solution that I can see. We want to be able to spend more freely, but to do so would mean the likes of the clubs ahead of us being able to do the same, and that wouldn't be good for us at all.

The only thing that would ensure some sort of "fair play" would be a wage cap, but the Premier League is never going to bring that in as it would reduce its competitiveness compared to other major European Leagues.

Which is why a wage cap needs to come in at FIFA level, and can't be as simple as "x% of turnover".

I also believe limiting the number of players you can own would help

[pablo_picasso]

Buendia came in before JG was sold; he came in to add further quality to the team not to replace JG.
But I take the point you're making.
I, like others, hold no vitriol towards JG: I think he made a big mistake (because he could have been part of our renaissance), but selling him may have saved us from financial restrictions.

Although "deals" are usually thrashed out in the weeks beforehand between clubs so although Bailey, Buendia and Ings were all bought before Grealish was sold, the money spent might be knowing he was leaving and ensuring transfer fees then didn't shoot up due to having the Citeh cash.

But when they came in, we did think the purchases were to free Grealish up as when he was stopped, the team used to be stopped.

Im pretty sure there were comments from Purslow about these three deals being the Grealish replacement & there were words to the effect of "Ings would replace Grealish goals, Buendia to replace his creativity/assists & Bailey to replace Grealish dribbling ability". Cant remember the exact quote but it was words to that effect.

So they were 100% brought in as Grealish replacement, despite arriving before he left.

I think it was done that way so that we wouldn't get stiffed on the fees cos clubs knew we had the £100M.

[pablo_picasso]

I wont be getting the Rosary Beads out and praying at the Alter of Saint Greasy any time soon.
The club nurtured him, invested in a youth program that fostered him and Dean Smith supported him through thick and thin, we got a return on that investment so what?. He was not thinking of The Villa when he fucked off up the M6 to be awarded meaningless trinkets. F*** him and all who sail in him.

And its not like he wasn't trying to manufacture moves away to ManU & Spurs the two years previous too.

[Risso]

Yeah I think that's pretty well spot on pablo. We were also trying for Smith Rowe before we got Buendia, both definitely with an eye on selling Grealish.

[Risso]

No one is calling him a Saint and definitely not me but there's no denying the 100 million quid we trousered off Ci£y has played a massive role in our current position. Without the Grealish money to help balance the books I'm pretty sure we would have fallen foul of ffp. We're still not sure we're compliant even now.

We are sure we're compliant because we haven't been charged for being non-compliant.

And if we hadn't sold him, our business would have continued without the money, but we'd have been OK. We'd have bought other players, and maybe sold others too. It's impossible to say.

[brontebilly]

I wont be getting the Rosary Beads out and praying at the Alter of Saint Greasy any time soon.
The club nurtured him, invested in a youth program that fostered him and Dean Smith supported him through thick and thin, we got a return on that investment so what?. He was not thinking of The Villa when he fucked off up the M6 to be awarded meaningless trinkets. F*** him and all who sail in him.

Maybe it worked out well for both parties? He was a key player for them winning their treble last season. He seems to have regressed again this season with injuries and whatever else but for them I'd say the trinkets last season justify the outlay.

For us, 100m still seems a huge fee given how inconsistent he has been over the three seasons. Ings was a dreadful signing but Bailey now looks the player we thought we were getting. Buendia, maybe not the level of the fee we paid, but has definitely been a big loss this season.

Under Emery, we are a far better balanced team now not being reliant on one player. Luiz, McGinn, Watkins et al have all eventually thrived. When Grealish was out injured those players simply couldn't cope. I'll never forget when we beat Spurs away, after Grealish came back from his injury, McGinn played his best game of that season.  But that wasn't sustainable. Also our finances simply werent sustainable without the 100m we banked from selling him. You would want to be particularly bitter to ignore his performances in getting us and keeping us in the PL too.

It's highly unlikely now with our finances but if that weren't an issue, he would be the ideal transfer target this summer. Imagine him playing in that Tielemans role with likes of Watkins, Ramsey, Bailey, Luiz around him.

[LeeB]

I'm happy to be seen as 'particularly bitter'.

[danno]

Selling him could easily have cost us more than the hundred million he brought in. Signing Ings and Buendia with their fees and wages. Then there’s loss of income from finishing lower in the table, less TV money because we’re less attractive to broadcasters without our star man, less commercial opportunities, less merchandise sold. Any number of things along those lines.

Then there’s the cost involved in sacking Smith, appointing Gerrard and then signing more expensive players for Gerrard. Assuming that Smith may have gotten better results with Grealish still here.

It’s impossible to say with any certainty. So I can’t thank him for leaving because it can’t be proven we wouldn’t have been better off keeping him.

[Sexual Ealing]

Selling him could easily have cost us more than the hundred million he brought in. Signing Ings and Buendia with their fees and wages. Then there’s loss of income from finishing lower in the table, less TV money because we’re less attractive to broadcasters without our star man, less commercial opportunities, less merchandise sold. Any number of things along those lines.

Then there’s the cost involved in sacking Smith, appointing Gerrard and then signing more expensive players for Gerrard. Assuming that Smith may have gotten better results with Grealish still here.

It’s impossible to say with any certainty. So I can’t thank him for leaving because it can’t be proven we wouldn’t have been better off keeping him.

That's like saying, "if my wife hadn't left me I'd still have the house and access to the kids." Well yeah, but she did leave you pal. She didn't love you anymore, and you crying into your pint about it three years later makes me think she had a point.

[danno]

Selling him could easily have cost us more than the hundred million he brought in. Signing Ings and Buendia with their fees and wages. Then there’s loss of income from finishing lower in the table, less TV money because we’re less attractive to broadcasters without our star man, less commercial opportunities, less merchandise sold. Any number of things along those lines.

Then there’s the cost involved in sacking Smith, appointing Gerrard and then signing more expensive players for Gerrard. Assuming that Smith may have gotten better results with Grealish still here.

It’s impossible to say with any certainty. So I can’t thank him for leaving because it can’t be proven we wouldn’t have been better off keeping him.

That's like saying, "if my wife hadn't left me I'd still have the house and access to the kids." Well yeah, but she did leave you pal. She didn't love you anymore, and you crying into your pint about it three years later makes me think she had a point.

I’m so glad she left me if she hadn’t I’d never have met that comedian online who turned me onto the writings of Adriian Chiles.

The broader point is it’s impossible to prove either way. So why does somebody who left for their own ambitions need to be thanked for something that might not even have happened had they stayed?

[Sexual Ealing]

I'm not thanking him. I'm not grateful to him. He's an ex-player, like thousands of others.

[chrisw1]

I think think any team trying to build a squad capable of competing for top 4 with the current FFP regulations will need to sell some high-value players and be incredibly shrewd with their squad building.

Jack's sale gave us some breathing room.  It wasn't just the 3 players mentioned - they were amortised over 5 years.  The £100m gave us room to manoeuvre over 3 seasons.

It seems Emery's choice now will to be broadly work with what he's got or sell another big asset to build further.

[ChicagoLion]

I'm happy to be seen as 'particularly bitter'.

Mines a pint.

[The Edge]

No one is calling him a Saint and definitely not me but there's no denying the 100 million quid we trousered off Ci£y has played a massive role in our current position. Without the Grealish money to help balance the books I'm pretty sure we would have fallen foul of ffp. We're still not sure we're compliant even now.

We are sure we're compliant because we haven't been charged for being non-compliant.

And if we hadn't sold him, our business would have continued without the money, but we'd have been OK. We'd have bought other players, and maybe sold others too. It's impossible to say.

I'm not trying to big Grealish up I've no reason to but the 100m we got for him which was pure profit certainly gave us wriggle room in the transfer market. Quite a lot of wriggle room.

[pauliewalnuts]

No one is calling him a Saint and definitely not me but there's no denying the 100 million quid we trousered off Ci£y has played a massive role in our current position. Without the Grealish money to help balance the books I'm pretty sure we would have fallen foul of ffp. We're still not sure we're compliant even now.

We are sure we're compliant because we haven't been charged for being non-compliant.

And if we hadn't sold him, our business would have continued without the money, but we'd have been OK. We'd have bought other players, and maybe sold others too. It's impossible to say.

I'm not trying to big Grealish up I've no reason to but the 100m we got for him which was pure profit certainly gave us wriggle room in the transfer market. Quite a lot of wriggle room.

It's swings and roundabouts, though, as you said, that 100m was immensely useful, but then again, so was the best player we've had in many years.