Summer 2024 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc.

[jwarry]

Romano

EXCL: Aston Villa are closing on an agreement for 2005 born midfielder Kane Taylor from Manchester City U21.

Long term deal almost sealed between player and #AVFC after deal in place between the two clubs.

[jwarry]

Romano

EXCL: Aston Villa are closing on an agreement for 2005 born midfielder Kane Taylor from Manchester City U21.

Long term deal almost sealed between player and #AVFC after deal in place between the two clubs.

Just notice he’s a brummie and they nicked him from our academy 4 years ago

[Ger Regan]

Would he count as homegrown in a couple of years? is it 3 or 4 years between 15 - 21?

[Dave]

They've brought in £300m in the last three years from the sales of academy players. For as long as they are able to do that, they'll be able to keep spending what they want.

But havent they spent like treble that and then that's not even looking at their wage bill?

The numbers don't have to equalise. We spent around £120m the year after we go promoted and another £100m the year after. The fees we brought in over the same period were a couple of million for Hogan and a few million for Kodjia.

The year after we then got £100m for Grealish but spent £120m.

Then we brought in £50m, but spent £100m. Last year we got £30m, spent £100m.

We've spent well over double what we've brought in since we've been promoted and our wage bill has increased three-fold.

Which is fine and to be expected. But we're not really in a position to complain about other teams pushing themselves to the edge of their spending limits and using academy sales to help grease the wheels as they go.

[Demitri_C]

They've brought in £300m in the last three years from the sales of academy players. For as long as they are able to do that, they'll be able to keep spending what they want.

But havent they spent like treble that and then that's not even looking at their wage bill?

The numbers don't have to equalise. We spent around £120m the year after we go promoted and another £100m the year after. The fees we brought in over the same period were a couple of million for Hogan and a few million for Kodjia.

The year after we then got £100m for Grealish but spent £120m.

Then we brought in £50m, but spent £100m. Last year we got £30m, spent £100m.

We've spent well over double what we've brought in since we've been promoted and our wage bill has increased three-fold.

Which is fine and to be expected. But we're not really in a position to complain about other teams pushing themselves to the edge of their spending limits and using academy sales to help grease the wheels as they go.

I think for me my main complaint is the wage bill and the volume of players they have.

As you allude to in your post you are correct we seem to be adopting the same rules. It seems thats thw way clubs are going about it now

What will be interesting is that 2nd wage rule that was spoken about yesterday with Monchi  and vidagany about diaby how that relates to chelsea. As surely they will massively be not meeting that rule?

[Dave]

I think for me my main complaint is the wage bill and the volume of players they have.

As you allude to in your post you are correct we seem to be adopting the same rules. It seems thats thw way clubs are going about it now

What will be interesting is that 2nd wage rule that was spoken about yesterday with Monchi  and vidagany about diaby how that relates to chelsea. As surely they will massively be not meeting that rule?

I'm pretty sure that the whole thing will blow up in their face at some point. Either that or the rules change and it all goes away.

Just that at the moment, the money coming in supports pretty much anything they want to do. Wages, transfer fees, squad sizes - they can just point at £60m for Mount, £35m for Maatsen, £35m for Hall, £20m for Hutchinson, £15m for Loftus-Cheek (all in the last year) and legitimately say that their finances are fully in order.

Just like we could point at £100m for Grealish which meant we were fine to spend £300m in the years surrounding it.

[LeeB]

I think for me my main complaint is the wage bill and the volume of players they have.

As you allude to in your post you are correct we seem to be adopting the same rules. It seems thats thw way clubs are going about it now

What will be interesting is that 2nd wage rule that was spoken about yesterday with Monchi  and vidagany about diaby how that relates to chelsea. As surely they will massively be not meeting that rule?

I'm pretty sure that the whole thing will blow up in their face at some point. Either that or the rules change and it all goes away.

Just that at the moment, the money coming in supports pretty much anything they want to do. Wages, transfer fees, squad sizes - they can just point at £60m for Mount, £35m for Maatsen, £35m for Hall, £20m for Hutchinson, £15m for Loftus-Cheek (all in the last year) and legitimately say that their finances are fully in order.

Just like we could point at £100m for Grealish which meant we were fine to spend £300m in the years surrounding it.

They get some stick but honestly whoever drove that deal deserves a knighthood.

[TaxDodger]

Romano

EXCL: Aston Villa are closing on an agreement for 2005 born midfielder Kane Taylor from Manchester City U21.

Long term deal almost sealed between player and #AVFC after deal in place between the two clubs.

Just notice he’s a brummie and they nicked him from our academy 4 years ago

So we're re-signing somebody from Man City? Someone who initially came through our academy? The mail could definitely get a click bait headline out of that.

[Demitri_C]

I think for me my main complaint is the wage bill and the volume of players they have.

As you allude to in your post you are correct we seem to be adopting the same rules. It seems thats thw way clubs are going about it now

What will be interesting is that 2nd wage rule that was spoken about yesterday with Monchi  and vidagany about diaby how that relates to chelsea. As surely they will massively be not meeting that rule?

I'm pretty sure that the whole thing will blow up in their face at some point. Either that or the rules change and it all goes away.

Just that at the moment, the money coming in supports pretty much anything they want to do. Wages, transfer fees, squad sizes - they can just point at £60m for Mount, £35m for Maatsen, £35m for Hall, £20m for Hutchinson, £15m for Loftus-Cheek (all in the last year) and legitimately say that their finances are fully in order.

Just like we could point at £100m for Grealish which meant we were fine to spend £300m in the years surrounding it.

Those ongoing fees for some of their players is nuts.

Im guessing someone is going to pay crazy money for broja. Also if gallagher goes they are making huge profit on that which allows them to continue spending obscene money

[Brazilian Villain]

Romano

EXCL: Aston Villa are closing on an agreement for 2005 born midfielder Kane Taylor from Manchester City U21.

Long term deal almost sealed between player and #AVFC after deal in place between the two clubs.

He's the replacement for Luiz. (1.01 in)

[cdbearsfan]

Doesn't seem to have played for West Brom? Presumably we will loan him to them.

[pauliewalnuts]

Doesn't seem to have played for West Brom? Presumably we will loan him to them.

Only after we make them get on their knees, beg, and call us 'Your Royal Highnesses'.

[pauliewalnuts]

I think for me my main complaint is the wage bill and the volume of players they have.

As you allude to in your post you are correct we seem to be adopting the same rules. It seems thats thw way clubs are going about it now

What will be interesting is that 2nd wage rule that was spoken about yesterday with Monchi  and vidagany about diaby how that relates to chelsea. As surely they will massively be not meeting that rule?

I'm pretty sure that the whole thing will blow up in their face at some point. Either that or the rules change and it all goes away.

Just that at the moment, the money coming in supports pretty much anything they want to do. Wages, transfer fees, squad sizes - they can just point at £60m for Mount, £35m for Maatsen, £35m for Hall, £20m for Hutchinson, £15m for Loftus-Cheek (all in the last year) and legitimately say that their finances are fully in order.

Just like we could point at £100m for Grealish which meant we were fine to spend £300m in the years surrounding it.

Their problem will be that it is fine selling home grown players and banking the revenue from them in the current year's PSR figures, but they are going to have to keep doing that for a long time. It's a big gamble.

[Dave]

Exactly.  The summer that they don't have £50-£60m from academy players is the summer they probably have to accept £100m for Palmer instead.

But again, that's not a million miles away from where we find ourselves (albeit on a less lavish scale).

[pauliewalnuts]

It is interesting that another club limited in what they can spend, as we are, Newcastle, the difference being that they do not have much of an academy to speak of, don't really move players on for decent money (exception of Anderson this summer), and thus don't really have this as an option.

The degree to which clubs which already are highly competitive financially, like Man City and Chelsea, totally get this is massively important. They sell plenty of players who never play for them, plenty of which are youth products, because they understand that - rightly or wrongly - that's what you have to do to generate spending power.

I think we seem to get it now. Kellyman, for example, yeah, he may have become a great player, but then again he might not, and £20m from a sale of a "maybe" player is the sort of deal we should be all over.