Summer Transfer Window - The Verdict

[Smithy]

The Ings move seemed very opportunist that's all wel and good as he's quality however what happend to the precise planning and strategy of clearly identification of players to bring in.

The fact that we didn't know about it, doesn't mean it was "opportunist".  I think it would be a mistake to equate, "we didn't hear about it" with "the club only decided on him at the last minute".

It was common knowledge he was going into the last year on his contract, and since early summer he'd been spoken about as a possible option for Spurs, or whoever missed out on Kane.  The fact that we snuck in under the radar doesn't mean we weren't also interested from the very beginning, it just means we managed to keep it quiet, or that the media didn't see us a serious option for him. He could well have been top of our wanted list for that type of player.

It could equally be that we only decided to bid for Ings once Joe said he wanted to go, but we're only speculating either way.

[Beard82]

The consensus on how transfers work at the Villa these days seems to be that we have a system where Lange, assisted by scouts and suggestions from Smith is given a remit for the type of players Smith requires. He then compiles a shortlist of 'getable' players that fit the profile and budget for us to select from. It also seems that Smith gets to pick, and gets a veto on any he does not fancy.

Pure conjecture this, but given the noises from the various ITK types (yeah I know) what I suspect may have happened is this. Smith identified that we required a RW (selected Buendia), a CB (selected Tuanzebe), and a CM (selected JWP) and an AMC (selected Smith Rowe). We got two of them.

Jack then left and priorities changed. I think we then needed another winger, and a centre forwards (In came Bailey and Ings) but still were looking at a couple of midfielders with JWP and Cantwell being Smiths top targets.

What I think then happened is that Smith has stuck to his guns and rejected the alternatives to his top picks, insisting on 'proven premier league' like JWP but our budget has been around tha £25m a player mark and we would not pay the £40m+ quoted by Southampton and Norwich. I suspect we had other alternatives in the list identified by Lange, but Smith has stuck his neck and said he would rather not have them if he can't get his first choices.

If that is the case then the onus is on him to make it work, or it will no doubt cost him his job. I simply do not believe our owners did not make around £50m available for a couple more players, as all the noise around JWP, ESR and Cantwell had us offering £25m each for them. I think we could have got good players from elsewhere for that kind of money, but not the 'proven Premier League' ones the manager wanted.

For me the best value signing this window has been the one most likely to from Lange - Bailey. Buendia is a good player but we paid a lot of money to get him. Ditto Ings. I would have liked us to have gone and recruited at least one more 'Lange' signing. It does feel like Smith is becoming a bit like MON in this respect.

This seems plausible - he does seem a touch stubborn at times.  Think this season is make or break for him.

[PaulWinch again]

Not really sure what wouldn’t be to like about buying Ings. We had no real striking depth beyond Ollie and we now have two proven top flight goal scorers.

[mike]

I think the owners might be saving the, ahem, war chest for January. That gives them some flexibility to get players that will suit Dean or the new manager if he hasn’t made a good start by about November. To clarify and avoid further ‘how can you know that’ remarks, this is just an opinion, the expression of which I believed to be the point of the thread.

[Smithy]

To be fair, EVERY full season has been make or break for him.  Keep us up or he'll be gone, consolidate and no risk of relegation or he'll be gone, now we're at 'challenging for Europe or he'll be gone'.  We compete in a result-oriented industry, and there will definitely be pressure, but I don't believe that's anything new.  I would imagine every single premier league manager knows he could be out of a job in 15 games if things go badly.

My only hope is that hovering around the same place we were last season won't mean he's under too much pressure.  If he falls below that, then fair enough.  But I think given the loss of Joe, and the new faces, if we're in mid-table come January - having shown at times that we're capable of much better - then I'd be reasonably comfortable.  I absolutely want us challenging for the top 6, but I'm not going to immediately blame Dean if we're not, given the summer we've had.

[Smithy]

I think the owners might be saving the, ahem, war chest for January. That gives them some flexibility to get players that will suit Dean or the new manager if he hasn’t made a good start by about November. To clarify and avoid further ‘how can you know that’ remarks, this is just an opinion, the expression of which I believed to be the point of the thread.

I'd like to think so. I would love to know what impact the Joe sale has had on our FFP position? I'm not sure how much of this is likely to be public, and how much comes down to creative accounting, but I imagine it has put us in a pretty good position to land a really big signing if one becomes available?

[sickbeggar]

Maybe we thought that Covid had depressed the market to an extent where those figures were thoight realistic, I think we were more sensible than the market is.

I wasn't that excited about any of them as potential signings but the JWP bid was hilariously low-ball.  40m at least in the market and considering what we bought Ings for with no contract left. Cantwell, 2 years of his contract left, has to be at least what we paid for Buendia with the British premium. Smith Rowe was about the most realistic bid for, imo an unproven youngster - 30m tops for me.

Could well be we were willing to negotiate and then the ratboy money arrived and everything went up by 20m. I could understand them pulling out in those circumstances.

[paul_e]

Clearly agenda to get English speaking or premier league experience players who can settle in

We already knew that, there were plenty of reports stating that Premier League Experience was the top priority - https://www.expressandstar.com/sport/football/aston-villa/2021/06/03/dean-smith-aston-villa-have-strategic-plan-to-challenge-premier-league-elite/

When seeking the signings who can help them take the next step, Smith and the club’s recruitment team talk of first finding the “sweet spot” of British players with prior Premier League experience, so as to lessen any adaptation risk. After that, the focus shifts to those who have played in Europe’s top five leagues.

[JUAN PABLO]

Robbie Earles likes it



quite happy myself thou a CDM would have been the icing .

[Risso]

We get told every year that January is a crap time to try and do any business, so I really don’t believe that’s what they’re doing.

Greasy’s sale has given us £100m boost straight to profit, so FFP worries should be a thing of the past.

[chrisw1]

The Ings move seemed very opportunist that's all wel and good as he's quality however what happend to the precise planning and strategy of clearly identification of players to bring in.

The fact that we didn't know about it, doesn't mean it was "opportunist".  I think it would be a mistake to equate, "we didn't hear about it" with "the club only decided on him at the last minute".

It was common knowledge he was going into the last year on his contract, and since early summer he'd been spoken about as a possible option for Spurs, or whoever missed out on Kane.  The fact that we snuck in under the radar doesn't mean we weren't also interested from the very beginning, it just means we managed to keep it quiet, or that the media didn't see us a serious option for him. He could well have been top of our wanted list for that type of player.

It could equally be that we only decided to bid for Ings once Joe said he wanted to go, but we're only speculating either way.

Ings has said himself that it was all done in two days.  Villa tried desperately to delay Grealish announcements unitil it was done.  It was almost certainly an opportunistic deal, partly to take the edge off losing Grealish.  That's not to say it's not a good deal, but I'm convinced it was reactionary and partly damage limitation.

We all knew we were light up front, but getting a 29 y/o England striker was an odd move in our circumstances, particulaly if it forces a change of shape to a system Smith has never shown any inclination to play.

[Dave P]

Surely we can’t be happy with our midfield options but I’m not going to say that out loud until tomorrow.

Surely we can’t be happy with our midfield options

[Dave P]

In all seriousness, we did some very good business earlier in the window so we didn't have to panic on deadline day.  Surely we all prefer that?  I do, like everyone else, think we are short at DMF but it has to be the right one and not just 'beast' from anywhere.

[Smithy]

The Ings move seemed very opportunist that's all wel and good as he's quality however what happend to the precise planning and strategy of clearly identification of players to bring in.

The fact that we didn't know about it, doesn't mean it was "opportunist".  I think it would be a mistake to equate, "we didn't hear about it" with "the club only decided on him at the last minute".

It was common knowledge he was going into the last year on his contract, and since early summer he'd been spoken about as a possible option for Spurs, or whoever missed out on Kane.  The fact that we snuck in under the radar doesn't mean we weren't also interested from the very beginning, it just means we managed to keep it quiet, or that the media didn't see us a serious option for him. He could well have been top of our wanted list for that type of player.

It could equally be that we only decided to bid for Ings once Joe said he wanted to go, but we're only speculating either way.

Ings has said himself that it was all done in two days.  Villa tried desperately to delay Grealish announcements unitil it was done.  It was almost certainly an opportunistic deal, partly to take the edge off losing Grealish.  That's not to say it's not a good deal, but I'm convinced it was reactionary and partly damage limitation.

We all knew we were light up front, but getting a 29 y/o England striker was an odd move in our circumstances, particulaly if it forces a change of shape to a system Smith has never shown any inclination to play.

I'm not denying it was done quickly, I mean more that it's unlikely we only decided to put Ings on our 'wanted list' at the very last minute.  I would imagine he was on our list of players we wanted if Joe went from early on in the summer.  The fact that we executed the deal quickly once Joe decided he was off, isn't necessarily evidence that we only decided we wanted Danny Ings at the last minute.  I have no doubt Danny Ings probably only heard about our interest a day or two before the deal was done, but I suspect he was on our list LONG before that.  I could be wrong, obviously, but it just doesn't seem like the way we do things these days.

[Beard82]

To be fair, EVERY full season has been make or break for him.  Keep us up or he'll be gone, consolidate and no risk of relegation or he'll be gone, now we're at 'challenging for Europe or he'll be gone'.  We compete in a result-oriented industry, and there will definitely be pressure, but I don't believe that's anything new.  I would imagine every single premier league manager knows he could be out of a job in 15 games if things go badly.

My only hope is that hovering around the same place we were last season won't mean he's under too much pressure.  If he falls below that, then fair enough.  But I think given the loss of Joe, and the new faces, if we're in mid-table come January - having shown at times that we're capable of much better - then I'd be reasonably comfortable.  I absolutely want us challenging for the top 6, but I'm not going to immediately blame Dean if we're not, given the summer we've had.

Good point - what I mean by make or break is showing he can adapt to post JG world and find a new way that consitently works and gets us safe to midtable.  I would be happy with 12 now given all thats happened.   I think we have our work cut out to do that.  I really hope we do, I really want Smith to be here for years to come - but its feels like there is no excuses for bad runs as it looks like there was cash there and he seems to be instremental in not spending it.  (clearly most of this is guess work mainly based on what vinnie said)