2023 Summer transfer window - hopes, needs, expectations and rumours.

[PaulWinch again]

I don't give a toss this way or that about the Grealish element, but on account of Man City ruining football, I can not think of anything worse in that context than them winning the Champions League.

The way the football establishment just plays along with what is clear cheating over a period of years is vomit inducing.

115 charges that have taken years and years to levy, and which everyone knows will lead to absolutely nothing happening to them.

Yeah the idea that people acknowledge the charges and then say, “but you have to look at the quality on a footballing level” - no, because the quality of football doesn’t exist without the cheating. It is impossible to separate them, and the difference between then and other clubs they have cheated on a systemic level.

[Smithy]

We got a British record fee, the first £100m English player, and still people think we were robbed, or it was a bad deal?

I absolutely didn't want him to leave, because he meant more to Villa than just his performances on the pitch or money in the bank.  But leave he did. We didn't spend the £100m well at all, but at least we had it to spend.

I hated him leaving at the time, but I look at it now as another sliding doors moment, much like losing the play-off final to Fulham which felt like the end of the world at the time.  If he stays, Dean almost certainly keeps his job and maybe we muddle around in mid-table, maybe we improve and challenge for Europe. Maybe we even qualify for Europe, but maybe we don't.  However, we certainly wouldn't be sat her today with an elite manager and on the verge of something very special. 

It could all still go tits up, but I think in a few years time, we'll look back at the Grealish sale like we do the Fulham defeat, as an important milestone that felt terrible, but actually served the club well on the way to our eventual success.

[chrisw1]

Apparently Tammy has done his ACL in the last match of the season poor lad
So he’s not going anywhere soon

Looks painful, hopefully he recovers well. I think we can definately take him out of the discussion now.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1665498668693090304

That's a shame.  I still had a sneaking suspicion he'd be back.  But that one's over now.

[ASHTONVILLA]

We have to do what Leicester did 17-21 (but not run out of rope by paying stupid wages or shorter contacts) - silly money clauses and try and replace with better.

It is bloody hard work mind and the Grelaish money wasn't well spent.

six months ago I'd agree but it is starting to look less wasted now we have better coaching. Buendia and Bailey have improved a lot, and we got our money back on Ings. We have had relatively low net spends last two windows now, so the real benefit of the Grealish money is still to come too.

[paul_e]

But more to the point that was being made, I think this summer at least the owners would probably say to Martinez, sorry but you're not going anywhere this season.

I think it has been proved that if a player really wants to go, then he goes.
What you don’t want is shenanigans going on at the end of the window when you don’t have time to plan replacements and it can be unsettling for the squad.

... Exactly like when Grealish left then, despite there being a very clear release clause. Man City can take their time and piss about if they choose to because it's monopoly money to them and they can afford to spend £100m on a player who spends 18months sitting on the bench. The only way we could've stopped that going on for so long would've been to accept a lower offer, they knew he'd be joining and didn't give a fuck if they messed with us all summer.

[Risso]

We have to do what Leicester did 17-21 (but not run out of rope by paying stupid wages or shorter contacts) - silly money clauses and try and replace with better.

It is bloody hard work mind and the Grelaish money wasn't well spent.

six months ago I'd agree but it is starting to look less wasted now we have better coaching. Buendia and Bailey have improved a lot, and we got our money back on Ings. We have had relatively low net spends last two windows now, so the real benefit of the Grealish money is still to come too.

Don't agree with that mate. Buendia has been OK in patches, but is still too wasteful with the ball, and hasn't nailed down a spot of his own really. Bailey has mostly been ineffective, especially in away games. Considering the two of them cost around over £60m, I think you'd be hard pushed to say we've had value from them. And we didn't get our money back on Ings, we got about half.

[pablo_picasso]

Grealish wanted to join Spurs and then Man United (twice I think).

In the summer before he went, Man Utd wanted him and we got him to sign a big fat contract to keep him, to much fanfare. Little did we know that his agent had negotiated a £100m release clause.

There had clearly been some long-term thinking from his agent. Double/treble his wages, cement his image/branding, agree that clause and then exercise it the following year.

Our owners did well to make sure the clause was record setting but once the clause was agreed, it was a matter of time. But Grealish and his representatives showed long before he moved that he had no intention of staying long-term.

And I agree about the money being spent poorly. Selling a player for £100m, especially a home-grown one, is understandable. Using that money poorly isn't.

This. Grealish & his people manufactured a move away & were trying to do so for years before he forced the move.

Our people said no every step of the way & I imagine they never thought anybody would shell out £100 mil for a player whose goals & assist numbers were average at best.

We got a British record fee, the first £100m English player, and still people think we were robbed, or it was a bad deal?

I absolutely didn't want him to leave, because he meant more to Villa than just his performances on the pitch or money in the bank.  But leave he did. We didn't spend the £100m well at all, but at least we had it to spend.

I hated him leaving at the time, but I look at it now as another sliding doors moment, much like losing the play-off final to Fulham which felt like the end of the world at the time.  If he stays, Dean almost certainly keeps his job and maybe we muddle around in mid-table, maybe we improve and challenge for Europe. Maybe we even qualify for Europe, but maybe we don't.  However, we certainly wouldn't be sat her today with an elite manager and on the verge of something very special. 

It could all still go tits up, but I think in a few years time, we'll look back at the Grealish sale like we do the Fulham defeat, as an important milestone that felt terrible, but actually served the club well on the way to our eventual success.

Despite all of his quality, we are definitely a stronger team than we were back when he played for us.

[Chris Smith]

We have to do what Leicester did 17-21 (but not run out of rope by paying stupid wages or shorter contacts) - silly money clauses and try and replace with better.

It is bloody hard work mind and the Grelaish money wasn't well spent.

six months ago I'd agree but it is starting to look less wasted now we have better coaching. Buendia and Bailey have improved a lot, and we got our money back on Ings. We have had relatively low net spends last two windows now, so the real benefit of the Grealish money is still to come too.

Don't agree with that mate. Buendia has been OK in patches, but is still too wasteful with the ball, and hasn't nailed down a spot of his own really. Bailey has mostly been ineffective, especially in away games. Considering the two of them cost around over £60m, I think you'd be hard pushed to say we've had value from them. And we didn't get our money back on Ings, we got about half.

Yet they’ve both been regulars in a team that went from relegation candidates to European qualification over the course of a few months. I’d say they have shown that they are decent players when coached correctly and expect them to be key members of the squad next season.

[LeeB]

We have to do what Leicester did 17-21 (but not run out of rope by paying stupid wages or shorter contacts) - silly money clauses and try and replace with better.

It is bloody hard work mind and the Grelaish money wasn't well spent.

six months ago I'd agree but it is starting to look less wasted now we have better coaching. Buendia and Bailey have improved a lot, and we got our money back on Ings. We have had relatively low net spends last two windows now, so the real benefit of the Grealish money is still to come too.

Don't agree with that mate. Buendia has been OK in patches, but is still too wasteful with the ball, and hasn't nailed down a spot of his own really. Bailey has mostly been ineffective, especially in away games. Considering the two of them cost around over £60m, I think you'd be hard pushed to say we've had value from them. And we didn't get our money back on Ings, we got about half.

Yet they’ve both been regulars in a team that went from relegation candidates to European qualification over the course of a few months. I’d say they have shown that they are decent players when coached correctly and expect them to be key members of the squad next season.

I watched a little compilation of our wins under Emery up to the Spurs game I think, and it surprised me how many times Bailey was involved in key moments

[john e]

We have to do what Leicester did 17-21 (but not run out of rope by paying stupid wages or shorter contacts) - silly money clauses and try and replace with better.

It is bloody hard work mind and the Grelaish money wasn't well spent.

six months ago I'd agree but it is starting to look less wasted now we have better coaching. Buendia and Bailey have improved a lot, and we got our money back on Ings. We have had relatively low net spends last two windows now, so the real benefit of the Grealish money is still to come too.

Don't agree with that mate. Buendia has been OK in patches, but is still too wasteful with the ball, and hasn't nailed down a spot of his own really. Bailey has mostly been ineffective, especially in away games. Considering the two of them cost around over £60m, I think you'd be hard pushed to say we've had value from them. And we didn't get our money back on Ings, we got about half.

Yet they’ve both been regulars in a team that went from relegation candidates to European qualification over the course of a few months. I’d say they have shown that they are decent players when coached correctly and expect them to be key members of the squad next season.

I watched a little compilation of our wins under Emery up to the Spurs game I think, and it surprised me how many times Bailey was involved in key moments

I still wouldn’t be surprised if he wasn’t here at the start of next season

[ASHTONVILLA]

Various dodgy media outlets linking Spurs with Watkins. Can't see us selling, or him wanting to go there anyway.

Also a few links to 'Bono' the Algerian goalie that looked quite good at the world cup. Presumably as a backup option if Emi goes (don't think he will this season). Be a bloody good backup if he replaced Olsen though.

[Dave]

We have to do what Leicester did 17-21 (but not run out of rope by paying stupid wages or shorter contacts) - silly money clauses and try and replace with better.

It is bloody hard work mind and the Grelaish money wasn't well spent.

six months ago I'd agree but it is starting to look less wasted now we have better coaching. Buendia and Bailey have improved a lot, and we got our money back on Ings. We have had relatively low net spends last two windows now, so the real benefit of the Grealish money is still to come too.

Don't agree with that mate. Buendia has been OK in patches, but is still too wasteful with the ball, and hasn't nailed down a spot of his own really. Bailey has mostly been ineffective, especially in away games. Considering the two of them cost around over £60m, I think you'd be hard pushed to say we've had value from them. And we didn't get our money back on Ings, we got about half.

Yet they’ve both been regulars in a team that went from relegation candidates to European qualification over the course of a few months. I’d say they have shown that they are decent players when coached correctly and expect them to be key members of the squad next season.

I reckon a big part of it is that they are two players who were supposed to most do what Grealish did for us.

And after Grealish's last few seasons with us, anyone was going to look pretty patchy in comparison.

[Percy McCarthy]

£100m for three players isn’t that much nowadays, and on the plus side the team is littered with excellent value for money. I’ve also heard the reported fee we paid for Ings was exaggerated, so maybe we did get most of it back.

[john e]

Various dodgy media outlets linking Spurs with Watkins. Can't see us selling, or him wanting to go there anyway.

Also a few links to 'Bono' the Algerian goalie that looked quite good at the world cup. Presumably as a backup option if Emi goes (don't think he will this season). Be a bloody good backup if he replaced Olsen though.

I met Watkins cousin in the local club a few weeks ago, he was Arsenal and said all the family were including Ollie
so I know it doesn’t always translate anymore but maybe Spurs won’t have the same pull as it might have had

Plus the fact they’re absolute gash

[rob_bridge]

Various dodgy media outlets linking Spurs with Watkins. Can't see us selling, or him wanting to go there anyway.

Also a few links to 'Bono' the Algerian goalie that looked quite good at the world cup. Presumably as a backup option if Emi goes (don't think he will this season). Be a bloody good backup if he replaced Olsen though.

I met Watkins cousin in the local club a few weeks ago, he was Arsenal and said all the family were including Ollie
so I know it doesn’t always translate anymore but maybe Spurs won’t have the same pull as it might have had

Plus the fact they’re absolute gash

2 years ago I could have seen it. Not now. They are a shambles on the pitch.