Summer 2025 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc.

[Duncan Shaw]

Canvot off to Palace. Think he'll be one that got away.

That's a shame, I like the look of him and hoped he might have been an option for us.  Comes to something when we are missing out on players to Palace.

[eye digress]

Canvot off to Palace. Think he'll be one that got away.

That's a shame, I like the look of him and hoped he might have been an option for us.  Comes to something when we are missing out on players to Palace.

That's disappointing, if we really wanted him, given our stature relative to Palace, the offer of a higher level of European football, our management team and the fact that we are talking relative bargain basement fees.

[aev]

Possibly, but that suggests we are in this holding pattern for 3 years?

No I don't think so. It would be meeting the requirements for year 3 this year and then they go away so long as we stay within SCR, that's how it reads to me at least.

From Copilot...

"Villa has agreed to restrictions on registering new players for UEFA competitions in the 2025/26 season, unless the value of incoming players is offset by outgoing sales. If they fail to meet financial targets, these restrictions could be extended to future seasons."

[Dave]

An interesting counter-factual, I wonder how the summer would have played out if he we had finished fifth?

As presumably we'd stil be hamstrung by the "net positive transfer spend" thing. So if we had wanted to go out and buy all those shiny baubles like Rashford, we would have had to cover it by bigger sales from the current squad - Rogers / Emi / Watkins etc to satisfy UEFA that we're not being naughty.

Obviously the extra money and prestige is A Good Thing, but squad-wise would that definitely have been better?

[Dick Edwards]

Does the window close on Sunday?

7pm Monday

Monday I think.

[aev]

An interesting counter-factual, I wonder how the summer would have played out if he we had finished fifth?

As presumably we'd stil be hamstrung by the "net positive transfer spend" thing. So if we had wanted to go out and buy all those shiny baubles like Rashford, we would have had to cover it by bigger sales from the current squad - Rogers / Emi / Watkins etc to satisfy UEFA that we're not being naughty.

Obviously the extra money and prestige is A Good Thing, but squad-wise would that definitely have been better?

Yep , but perhaps the penalty would have been different as we could argue we had greater  guaranteed revenue coming in next season (ie this one).

It does seem to suggest that we are taking the medicine early, and that if we do so we can be off the naughty boy step.

[VILLA MOLE]

It really feels like you when are really drunk and the night is going on around you but cant do anything !!

[ozzjim]

An interesting counter-factual, I wonder how the summer would have played out if he we had finished fifth?

As presumably we'd stil be hamstrung by the "net positive transfer spend" thing. So if we had wanted to go out and buy all those shiny baubles like Rashford, we would have had to cover it by bigger sales from the current squad - Rogers / Emi / Watkins etc to satisfy UEFA that we're not being naughty.

Obviously the extra money and prestige is A Good Thing, but squad-wise would that definitely have been better?

Agreed. All the hand wringing that coming 6th screwed our summer, I don't think it would have made much difference. The only leeway may have been the wages into the season after, but essentially the positive fee thing and not selling a big earner has killed our summer. I think we were banking on £35-40m for Martinez, or £60m for Watkins coming through the door giving us way more room.

[Dave]

An interesting counter-factual, I wonder how the summer would have played out if he we had finished fifth?

As presumably we'd stil be hamstrung by the "net positive transfer spend" thing. So if we had wanted to go out and buy all those shiny baubles like Rashford, we would have had to cover it by bigger sales from the current squad - Rogers / Emi / Watkins etc to satisfy UEFA that we're not being naughty.

Obviously the extra money and prestige is A Good Thing, but squad-wise would that definitely have been better?

Yep , but perhaps the penalty would have been different as we could argue we had greater  guaranteed revenue coming in next season (ie this one).

I think that's unlikely - we're being punished for previous transgressions which (in their eyes) had "unlevelled" the playing field to allow us to qualify again. So it wouldn't really be mitigation.

Chelsea had a more severe punishment than us, and they could point to both Champions League and Club World Cup revenues coming their way.

[ozzjim]

Which is I guess the issue with Canvot. If we could have got Asensio on loan again, we might have had the fee room to get Canvot, but as it is we're probably looking at a loan to buy and Toulouse has an offer of all the money from Palace. Watch him be sold on for £75m next summer.

[LeeB]

An interesting counter-factual, I wonder how the summer would have played out if he we had finished fifth?

As presumably we'd stil be hamstrung by the "net positive transfer spend" thing. So if we had wanted to go out and buy all those shiny baubles like Rashford, we would have had to cover it by bigger sales from the current squad - Rogers / Emi / Watkins etc to satisfy UEFA that we're not being naughty.

Obviously the extra money and prestige is A Good Thing, but squad-wise would that definitely have been better?

No slight on you personally Dave, but when you say 'interesting' I'd have to disagree.

[Dave]

An interesting counter-factual, I wonder how the summer would have played out if he we had finished fifth?

As presumably we'd stil be hamstrung by the "net positive transfer spend" thing. So if we had wanted to go out and buy all those shiny baubles like Rashford, we would have had to cover it by bigger sales from the current squad - Rogers / Emi / Watkins etc to satisfy UEFA that we're not being naughty.

Obviously the extra money and prestige is A Good Thing, but squad-wise would that definitely have been better?

No slight on you personally Dave, but when you say 'interesting' I'd have to disagree.

Would it be better if I added a few bits about caravan maintenance?

[Sexual Ealing]

Ha!

Edit: this Ha! was earned by LeeB. I hadn't seen Dave's reply and I'm yet to decide on its Ha!-worthiness.

[Des Little]

link=topic=65746.msg4887333#msg4887333 date=1756461812]
It really feels like you when are really drunk and the night is going on around you but cant do anything !!


More like there’s a party going on but we’re sat at home because the uber hasn’t turned up

[LeeB]

An interesting counter-factual, I wonder how the summer would have played out if he we had finished fifth?

As presumably we'd stil be hamstrung by the "net positive transfer spend" thing. So if we had wanted to go out and buy all those shiny baubles like Rashford, we would have had to cover it by bigger sales from the current squad - Rogers / Emi / Watkins etc to satisfy UEFA that we're not being naughty.

Obviously the extra money and prestige is A Good Thing, but squad-wise would that definitely have been better?

No slight on you personally Dave, but when you say 'interesting' I'd have to disagree.

Would it be better if I added a few bits about caravan maintenance?

Absolutely.