Harvey Elliott (signed on loan)

[Somniloquism]

As I mentioned previously, they probably did it so he could say goodbye to the fans as he had been there for awhile. I still believe the ten games clause was the final bollock drop by Monchi with him telling the club it would be next summer we have to pay for him and then us realising about midway through Sept that no, as soon as he hit 10 games it is triggered. We get rid of Monchi, Elliot stops being played.

If this Charlotte thing happens, I wonder if Smith was given the heads up of what was needed when he was over here prior to Xmas. Elliot still won't be able to play until March though but it is that or maybe 4 appearances for us in May. It also depends on Liverpool as they might just leave him with us to affect the SCR of a "rival" for the whole season.

[Percy McCarthy]

It also depends on Liverpool as they might just leave him with us to affect the SCR of a "rival" for the whole season.

I can’t see that being relevant. Well either keep him and pay his wages or send him back and probably pay his wages. Plus, if we don’t include him in the first-team squad he won’t count against SCR will he?

The more significant financial consideration is the freeing-up of the £35m that would have been accounted for.

[brontebilly]

I'm glad we found out he wasn't a fit for us before buying him. I wish him well but he's missed a few months of football and has been well paid, he's hardly had it hard.

Never even gave him a chance. Don't see him jumping out of tackles repeatedly like Sancho for example or stinking it out like Guessand has. But in Emery we trust. Just hope we have a first team signing in the wings rather than another PSR pawn...

[Somniloquism]

It also depends on Liverpool as they might just leave him with us to affect the SCR of a "rival" for the whole season.

I can’t see that being relevant. Well either keep him and pay his wages or send him back and probably pay his wages. Plus, if we don’t include him in the first-team squad he won’t count against SCR will he?

The more significant financial consideration is the freeing-up of the £35m that would have been accounted for.

He currently does for Europe being as he is named in the squad. After Feb, I don't know. Not sure why we would continue paying his wages if we sent him back to Liverpool though, but also no sure what happens if Liverpool decide to say no, he is your player until May as he doesn't have a long term injury so we don't want him back until then as per the loan contract you signed.

[Percy McCarthy]

It also depends on Liverpool as they might just leave him with us to affect the SCR of a "rival" for the whole season.

I can’t see that being relevant. Well either keep him and pay his wages or send him back and probably pay his wages. Plus, if we don’t include him in the first-team squad he won’t count against SCR will he?

The more significant financial consideration is the freeing-up of the £35m that would have been accounted for.

He currently does for Europe being as he is named in the squad. After Feb, I don't know. Not sure why we would continue paying his wages if we sent him back to Liverpool though, but also no sure what happens if Liverpool decide to say no, he is your player until May as he doesn't have a long term injury so we don't want him back until then as per the loan contract you signed.

Obviously we are paying his wages currently. If we don’t name him in the Europa League squad on Feb 1st I don’t think his wages, even if we are still paying him, will count towards UEFA SCR.

If he goes back to Liverpool we’ll effectively pay his wages by way of an early termination fee.

The Athletic are reporting that our January business is not contingent on Elliott. That’s because whatever else happens, it won’t include us triggering the clause, meaning we are off the hook for £35m that has already been accounted for.

[Dave]

Not sure why we would continue paying his wages if we sent him back to Liverpool though, but also no sure what happens if Liverpool decide to say no, he is your player until May as he doesn't have a long term injury so we don't want him back until then as per the loan contract you signed.

Well, that would be the result of what we negotiate with them. As things stand, we are on the hook to pay him the rest of the season and we want Liverpool to help us out by letting us send him back to free up a loan spot.

They're not going to help us out with those things without it being worth their while in doing so. Presumably the sort of thing that makes them say yes to having him back is us (at the very least) agreeing to the wages that we'd already signed up for.

[Mister E]

Not sure why we would continue paying his wages if we sent him back to Liverpool though, but also no sure what happens if Liverpool decide to say no, he is your player until May as he doesn't have a long term injury so we don't want him back until then as per the loan contract you signed.

Well, that would be the result of what we negotiate with them. As things stand, we are on the hook to pay him the rest of the season and we want Liverpool to help us out by letting us send him back to free up a loan spot.

They're not going to help us out with those things without it being worth their while in doing so. Presumably the sort of thing that makes them say yes to having him back is us (at the very least) agreeing to the wages that we'd already signed up for.

plus a premium for us being able to free up a loan spot ...

[Sexual Ealing]

Plus we're now a rival for a CL spot on account of them being shit.

[Percy McCarthy]

I'm glad we found out he wasn't a fit for us before buying him. I wish him well but he's missed a few months of football and has been well paid, he's hardly had it hard.

Never even gave him a chance.

Big gamble to give a few more games to someone who hasn’t impressed in his few appearances or training when to do so would probably wipe out most, if not all, of your transfer budget.

[Toronto Villa]

Deano to the rescue? Being linked with a move to Charlotte FC in MLS.

https://x.com/TheAthleticFC/status/2007102739231162630?s=20

[Sexual Ealing]

Start a thread!

[usav]

Deano to the rescue? Being linked with a move to Charlotte FC in MLS.

https://x.com/TheAthleticFC/status/2007102739231162630?s=20

I just don't see that happening.  In his prime, England U21 captain last summer and going to MLS?  The wages aren't there and I would think his ambition is better than that, albeit probably dented at the moment.

[brontebilly]

I'm glad we found out he wasn't a fit for us before buying him. I wish him well but he's missed a few months of football and has been well paid, he's hardly had it hard.

Never even gave him a chance.

Big gamble to give a few more games to someone who hasn’t impressed in his few appearances or training when to do so would probably wipe out most, if not all, of your transfer budget.

Maybe, though it's no time to judge a player. Lots of Villa players have had very slow starts to their careers and turned it around spectacularly. Have to trust Emery on it I guess.

[PaulWinch again]

Well it’d be until the summer and he has very few options.

[Dave]

Deano to the rescue? Being linked with a move to Charlotte FC in MLS.

https://x.com/TheAthleticFC/status/2007102739231162630?s=20

I just don't see that happening.  In his prime, England U21 captain last summer and going to MLS?  The wages aren't there and I would think his ambition is better than that, albeit probably dented at the moment.

But they're one of the clubs who he would be allowed to play matches for between now and next August.

And they're probably one of the best of a very bad bunch.