January 2023 Transfer Rumours, Discussions and Done Deals Thread

[coreyfeldman]

It’s embarrassing to find yourself thinking this but Wolves - Wolves FFS - seem to be immune to the problems we have signing decent players.

I would imagine they also have a higher transfer fee paid than us.

Wolves.

I’m not suggesting we go and spunk 50m on some plodder to fix that, but I am starting to seriously doubt our transfer market ambition.

I’m tired of hearing the club talk the talk, time to start matching words with actions.

Ambitious? Great. Show us.

Really?

Matheus Cunha (loan, Atletico Madrid) - ok but only a loan and looks like it'll take most of that time settling in
Mario Lemina (undisclosed, Nice) - nowhere near the quality of our midfielders
Pablo Sarabia (£4.4m, Paris Saint-Germain) - potentially decent but could easily be a bit of a drinkwater
Craig Dawson (£3.3m, West Ham United) - past it
Daniel Bentley (undisclosed, Bristol City) - meh
Joao Gomes (£15m, Flamengo) - no idea on this one

Nothing on that list that makes me wish we'd snuck in ahead of them.

I am not saying I want their signings, I am saying that they are managing to sign players in January, whereas we seem to spend most of our time inventing excuses for our failure to do so.

I can understand getting outspent (ie record fee spent) by CL teams, but not Wolves.

Again, when do we get to see our ambition? We've spent - net - barely anything the last two years.

But exactly the point is who they're signing ffs. Obviously we would all love more numbers in, but Emery has said he's not just buying any old shit that's available. Personally I trust Emerys opinion over ours. As for the 'lack of ambition', you can have all the ambition in the world but if you buy loads of shit then you don't achieve it. West Ham spent loads of cash in thr summer, they're worse off, it's a balance building a successful squad. Let's give it time

[paul_e]

It’s embarrassing to find yourself thinking this but Wolves - Wolves FFS - seem to be immune to the problems we have signing decent players.

I would imagine they also have a higher transfer fee paid than us.

Wolves.

I’m not suggesting we go and spunk 50m on some plodder to fix that, but I am starting to seriously doubt our transfer market ambition.

I’m tired of hearing the club talk the talk, time to start matching words with actions.

Ambitious? Great. Show us.

Really?

Matheus Cunha (loan, Atletico Madrid) - ok but only a loan and looks like it'll take most of that time settling in
Mario Lemina (undisclosed, Nice) - nowhere near the quality of our midfielders
Pablo Sarabia (£4.4m, Paris Saint-Germain) - potentially decent but could easily be a bit of a drinkwater
Craig Dawson (£3.3m, West Ham United) - past it
Daniel Bentley (undisclosed, Bristol City) - meh
Joao Gomes (£15m, Flamengo) - no idea on this one

Nothing on that list that makes me wish we'd snuck in ahead of them.

I am not saying I want their signings, I am saying that they are managing to sign players in January, whereas we seem to spend most of our time inventing excuses for our failure to do so.

I can understand getting outspent (ie record fee spent) by CL teams, but not Wolves.

Again, when do we get to see our ambition? We've spent - net - barely anything the last two years.

but the players do matter. No one they've signed would've been on the radar of teams pushing for Europe. We've been heavily linked with players like Guendouzi and Williams who are on a level well above anyone on that list. I'm not making excuses, and I hope it doesn't come across that way, but to improve us we need players who are better than 8-12 standard that most of our squad is right now. That means finding more players like Martinez and Kamara but the number of players of that quality who are available and not being looked at by champions league clubs is very small.

[pauliewalnuts]

There is a world of difference between signing players, and signing GOOD players. The issue is, we want players who 1) will definitely improve us, 2) cost a 'not stupid' amount, and 3) are available for transfer.  Unfortunately, most players only fit two of those criteria. Finding players who match all three is very difficult.

I get that, even if i think we manage to do a pretty bad job of it - for a start, I think we are operating on a definition of 'stupid amount' which is different to a lot of other clubs these days.

What I absolutely do not get is the thinking behind clearing the decks halfway through the season and, by the looks of it, not replacing them, in a squad which was already threadbare.

[Footy-Vill]

Who has moved that we’d like and is a realistic target? 

The main one I can think of is Manduek, other than that we might have tried for felix or Depay before the big clubs bid.  I don’t think we missed out on much which suggests buying might be harder than usual.

Who’s Manduek?

Madueke, signed for Chelsea from Holland, looks a very good young player.

Wingers/Attackers/ Forwards that transferred this window linked with:
Joao Felix
Arnaut Danjuma
Matheus Cunha
Anthony Gordon
Memphis Depay
Hakim Ziyech


Other movers:
Mykhaylo Mudryk
Leandro Trossard
Javier Pastore
Kasper Dolberg
Tete
Viktor Tsyhankov
Bamba Dieng
Noni Madueke
Dango Ouattara
Terum Moffi
Isco
Wout Weghorst
Chris Wood
Mislav Orsic
Antoine Semenyo
Georginio Rutter

Can judge from the list.
Only time will tell.

[paul_e]

There is a world of difference between signing players, and signing GOOD players. The issue is, we want players who 1) will definitely improve us, 2) cost a 'not stupid' amount, and 3) are available for transfer.  Unfortunately, most players only fit two of those criteria. Finding players who match all three is very difficult.

I get that, even if i think we manage to do a pretty bad job of it - for a start, I think we are operating on a definition of 'stupid amount' which is different to a lot of other clubs these days.

What I absolutely do not get is the thinking behind clearing the decks halfway through the season and, by the looks of it, not replacing them, in a squad which was already threadbare.

It's been said many times that Emery prefers to work with a smaller squad who are all able to contribute to what he wants to do. I don't imagine he's been told to reduce numbers or had decisions made above his head (he doesn't seem the sort of guy who'd accept that) so I'd say the thinking is that he thinks this is the best way to achieve what he wants this season.

[Risso]

There's a smaller squad, and there's having one striker. Which is absolute madness and not a situation that any manager, however confident in his own abilities, would choose. And the one striker we have has the touch of a baby elephant. Ings had scored six goals, a quarer of our total. We haven't replaced him, and anybody thinking that Watkins will suddenly become more prolific in front of goal to make up the shortfall is probably kidding themselves.

[paul_e]

There's a smaller squad, and there's having one striker. Which is absolute madness and not a situation that any manager, however confident in his own abilities, would choose. And the one striker we have has the touch of a baby elephant. Ings had scored six goals, a quarer of our total. We haven't replaced him, and anybody thinking that Watkins will suddenly become more prolific in front of goal to make up the shortfall is probably kidding themselves.

We're going round in circles now, Emery has said he wanted more people in every position, almost everyone on here agrees we need another striker and I'd be amazed if the club aren't trying to get someone in.

That doesn't change the fact that Emery clearly decided that Ings wasn't the right fit and let him go for what was a decent fee given his age. Emery also decided that moving out a lot of fringe players was the right thing to do.

[kippaxvilla2]

Or we grabbed £15m did one of our main rivals a favour and had no plan to replace him.

[Risso]

There's a smaller squad, and there's having one striker. Which is absolute madness and not a situation that any manager, however confident in his own abilities, would choose. And the one striker we have has the touch of a baby elephant. Ings had scored six goals, a quarer of our total. We haven't replaced him, and anybody thinking that Watkins will suddenly become more prolific in front of goal to make up the shortfall is probably kidding themselves.

We're going round in circles now, Emery has said he wanted more people in every position, almost everyone on here agrees we need another striker and I'd be amazed if the club aren't trying to get someone in.

That doesn't change the fact that Emery clearly decided that Ings wasn't the right fit and let him go for what was a decent fee given his age. Emery also decided that moving out a lot of fringe players was the right thing to do.

He's a better fit than nobody though, as his three goals that earned us 4 points against Brighton and Wolves showed. You've mentioned a few times how many goals we need from the front players this season, well we've just sold our top scorer and not replaced him, and those goals aren't going to replace themselves.

[paul_e]

There's a smaller squad, and there's having one striker. Which is absolute madness and not a situation that any manager, however confident in his own abilities, would choose. And the one striker we have has the touch of a baby elephant. Ings had scored six goals, a quarer of our total. We haven't replaced him, and anybody thinking that Watkins will suddenly become more prolific in front of goal to make up the shortfall is probably kidding themselves.

We're going round in circles now, Emery has said he wanted more people in every position, almost everyone on here agrees we need another striker and I'd be amazed if the club aren't trying to get someone in.

That doesn't change the fact that Emery clearly decided that Ings wasn't the right fit and let him go for what was a decent fee given his age. Emery also decided that moving out a lot of fringe players was the right thing to do.

He's a better fit than nobody though, as his three goals that earned us 4 points against Brighton and Wolves showed. You've mentioned a few times how many goals we need from the front players this season, well we've just sold our top scorer and not replaced him, and those goals aren't going to replace themselves.

I don't think the idea was or is to not replace him though and I can't imagine people seriously believe the club thinks pocketing the money and not looking for another striker is plan a.

Personally I suspect we thought Deulofeu was in the bag and his injury has fucked us up a bit. He'd have covered Watkins, Bailey and Buendia and given enough room for Duran to feature and for Archer to slot in when he comes back. A lot of decent journos ran the story that we had a very good offer in for him so I think we were definitely interested.

[Villafirst]

Or we grabbed £15m did one of our main rivals a favour and had no plan to replace him.

Agree. Complete stupidity to have no replacement in by now. Emery surely has money to spend or else he wouldn't have taken the job?
 

[LeonW]

There is no way, no way, that Emery will be happy if we sold Ings and failed to replace him in this window. For those happy with taking the money in selling him, let’s check the happiness levels again if Watkins gets injured.

[eamonn]

Re low net-spend - it can be distorted. I don't think it would make anyone feel better if we had signed Kamara with two years left on his contract for £30m+. But because we craftily tapped him up last spring and pounced as early as possible, this ingenuity ironically becomes a stick with which to beat the club/owners.
I presume his signing-on fee was a few mill, and I also imagine we've chucked huge wages at him.

Was Grealish our only ever £100k a week player when he signed his last deal? I presume so, or close enough.

From reports/talk at the time of their respective signings, it looks like all our big 2022 purchases (Digne, Coutinho and Kamara) are all comfortably now in that wage ball-park. 

By crude comparison - Joelinton, reinvigorated at Newcastle, is on £43k a week per the news report about his conviction for drink-driving last week. I imagine their other sudden world-beater, Miggy Almiron is on similar wonga. I know they've spent big on Gordon and Isaac in the last two windows but they're clearly getting their squad to out-perform their salary levels at the moment.

It seems to me that our wage-bill has been far higher in the table than our league position for many years. It could be that this month's clear-out is an attempt to re-dress that while making funds available if Emery chooses to spend them. I can't imagine he agreed to the longest contract of a new Villa manager in years and years (ever?), without being given the keys to the kingdom. So if we don't get anyone of note in tomorrow, I won't put it down to us being too tight/broke/unambitious.

*Edit: Players are allowed to speak to third parties in the final 6 months of their contract aren't they? In which case, apologies Johan and Stevie. No tapping-up, just good work getting ahead of the competition.

[Drummond]

If every club held on to its players until they'd secured a replacement there would be no transfers.

I suspect Ings wanted to go to get gametime and whilst he's scored some, he's not exactly been prolific; if anything he's just had lots of people on here moaning about how slow, shit and past it he is.

[Risso]

I don't think the idea was or is to not replace him though and I can't imagine people seriously believe the club thinks pocketing the money and not looking for another striker is plan a.

Personally I suspect we thought Deulofeu was in the bag and his injury has fucked us up a bit. He'd have covered Watkins, Bailey and Buendia and given enough room for Duran to feature and for Archer to slot in when he comes back. A lot of decent journos ran the story that we had a very good offer in for him so I think we were definitely interested.

If the only option we were seriously looking at was Deulofeu who pretty much did nothing of note in English football, then that's a very poor show. Whatever "plan a" was or wasn't, the cold hard fact as it stands is that we haven't replaced Ings, so just maybe we shouldn't have been in such a rush to sell him. Our recruitment has been far more miss than hit since we came back up. We've either bought the wrong players, not invested enough when we should have, or we've over spent on the players we did bring in. The rare successes like Martinez and Kamara aren't going to stick around forever with that state of affairs.