Other clubs' transfers

[joeyt]

Tielemans is 27. That's not old

[leffe186]

23 minutes ago, cubaricho said:

So funny the different reaction to Barkley from us and from wor Brummie.  

 

 

 

Sounded like you guys agreed it was a good idea. Is there another discussion somewhere else where he’s been dismissed?

 

It’s interesting that last Summer we were interested in Tosin and Kelly, and a fair few of us were looking at Barkley too this year. They all seem like good value buys to strengthen a squad.

[brummie]

29 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Selling high potential academy players to fund signing players 26+ is short term thinking. I don’t think you will continue to sign players of that age on big wages. 
 

Carlos wages makes him hard to shift. He’s not going to get £100k in La Liga. 
 

Digne, Tielemans, Moreno, Carlos - these are players with poor release value in Europe. And if you can shift them, the fees will be moderate due to age.  
 

Again - that might not matter because you have a productive academy to offset.  

 

Tielemans cost nothing, lest we forget. Moreno was 14, so, not exactly huge. Morgan Rogers was up to 14m with add ons, is 21 and has been superb since we signed him.

 

I totally disagree with the first line. If they are good enough to play, they play. If they are not, they go.

 

Aaron Ramsey - 15m

Cameron Archer - 19m

 

Not good enough for us, but that's a lot of money. And of course, Grealish, Chukwuemeka.

 

And who says using the profits to buy 26+ players is 'the plan'?

 

Kamara is 24, Diaby is 24, Torres is 26. They're not exactly pensioners. I am also not sure how Tielemans has poor release value - he's 26.

 

You've just landed on one player who is getting on, who we will probably lose money, and who was bought by the genius of Gerrard.

 

 

Edited May 20 by brummie

[toon25]

3 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Who do Villa think is buying Diego Carlos and taking on his wages? I hope Saudi stay away.

 

The one thing I don't understand about Villa's strategy is they have signed a good few older players (Digne, Moreno, Carlos) and then a few high wage free transfers. They will be hard to shift.

 

They do have a good academy they can continue to flog. But that's short-term thinking.

 

I've just checked and their average age is a lot younger than ours so I'm probably wrong somewhere. Must be the Pope/Dubs, Trippier, Schar, Burn, Wilson, Dummett, Ritchie.

 

The core of the side is a great age mind. It's really only Schar (not counting Pope as old for a GK) that doesn't have a younger model ready-made to replace him.

He's got Saudi written all over him, Carlos

[Pata]

23 minutes ago, joeyt said:

Tielemans is 27. That's not old

 

Will be hard to try to move him if they want to at some point if the reported £150k a week salary is accurate (unless Saudi Arabia). I believe that was TCD's point but I have no idea how he did this season.

[brummie]

Just now, Pata said:

 

Will be hard to try to move him if they want to at some point if the reported £150k a week salary is accurate (unless Saudi Arabia). I believe that was TCD's point but I have no idea how he did this season.

 

Started slowly, did very well towards the end.

 

he turned 27 last week, cost us nothing and is a very good player.

 

I'm gobsmacked as to how that's an example of buying a player who is hard to shift (even if we wanted to).

[Pata]

There are no free transfers. Lack of fee usually means a massive signing bonus and higher wages than on a normal transfer.

[brummie]

For clarity - Tielemans cost £0, Harvey Barnes cost £38m. Tielemans is a whopping 7 months older than Barnes.

 

I appreciate Tielemans will have a higher salary because that's what happens with free transfers, but I am sure Barnes isn't on poverty wages.

 

So if Tielemans is a bad signing in terms of future options, what does that make Barnes at 38m more?

[Menace]

A cheaper flop than Diaby 

 

Edit: Tielemans has been decent last few months TBF. We could've done with him this season.

 

 

Edited May 20 by Menace

[The Fountain]

On 15/05/2024 at 17:19, Interpolic said:

 

If it means they stop sniffing around Isak I'll take it. 

They're sniffing round Isak the same way I'm sniffing round a house at Darras Hall.

We both can't afford it.

[The College Dropout]

Tielemans and co. have poor resale value because their wages are so high (excluding Kamara) and/or they’re getting on. 
 

Like I said - you seem to be moving away from the Carlos, Moreno, Digne type transfers. Those have poor resale value. Tielemans has poor resale value because nobody else in Europe would pay his wages and a fee. I’m talking purely financially. 
 

Im on record saying that the Barnes transfer doesn’t make sense financially.  It’s a heck of a lot of money for a player to sit on the bench. 
 

As I keep saying. You can do that because you have a great academy to sell. We can’t do that so we’ve largely avoided signing players 26+. We have to consider resale. 

[Checko]

With frees I guess you accept you pay over the odds in signing bonus/wages, but of course you save on the big upfront cost of a transfer fee.

 

When selling you then might get less to subsidise the player losing relatively high wages (assuming they leave to take a step down), but you've already benefitted from a lower initial fee.

 

Even if you're paying an extra £50,000 per week on wages, say, that's still only £10,000,000 over 4 years. Can probably more than offset that on a good players by selling them, even if you take a slightly reduced fee due to the high wages.

 

Basically, if you sign someone decent on a free you're probably fine. If you sign Jeff Hendrick god help you.

 

 

Edited May 20 by Checko

[The College Dropout]

Saying what I’ve said about Barnes. We could probably get our money for him this summer or next. Which would be an FFP profit. And again - that transfer didn’t make sense to me. 
 

Tielemans is on a reported £175k per week salary.  Nobody in Europe will pay a fee for him. And he drags up the wage structure. What does McGinn or Luiz get if Tielemans is on 175k and Kamara is similar?

 

 

These are sentiments I’ve shared about Tosin and Kelly.  

[Checko]

13 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Tielemans and co. have poor resale value because their wages are so high (excluding Kamara) and/or they’re getting on. 
 

Like I said - you seem to be moving away from the Carlos, Moreno, Digne type transfers. Those have poor resale value. Tielemans has poor resale value because nobody else in Europe would pay his wages and a fee. I’m talking purely financially. 
 

Im on record saying that the Barnes transfer doesn’t make sense financially.  It’s a heck of a lot of money for a player to sit on the bench. 
 

As I keep saying. You can do that because you have a great academy to sell. We can’t do that so we’ve largely avoided signing players 26+. We have to consider resale. 

I feel like you're maybe not taking into account the value of just being a good football team. Successful teams get more TV money, sponsorship money, prize money, merchandise money, might be able to charge more for tickets etc. Just more supporters in general, which is how teams make much of their cash.

 

If the extra Villa spent on some of their guys with relatively low resale value [assuming this is the case] gets them Champions League then it's money worth spending.

 

Same as Trippier for us. His resale value isn't what made him such a good transfer. Actually just being good and making your team better now is also quite useful and has indirect financial benefits.

 

 

Edited May 20 by Checko

[The College Dropout]

Villa finished 4th. What they are doing is working on the pitch. And they have enough to make it work off the pitch. 
 

However - with financial limitations signing older players and players with inflated wages is a poor tactic for financial viability in this era. I don’t suspect they’ll sign many more Diego Carlos, Luca Digne type players (28/29 for fairly big fees) going forward. Don’t watch Villa enough to talk about their ability. 

[cubaricho]

1 hour ago, leffe186 said:

Sounded like you guys agreed it was a good idea. Is there another discussion somewhere else where he’s been dismissed?

 

I guess I thought the consensus was different than that.

 

Although to be fair I stopped reading when someone was suggesting Barkley being a Bruno replacement, even late in games.  

[timeEd32]

1 hour ago, brummie said:

For clarity - Tielemans cost £0, Harvey Barnes cost £38m. Tielemans is a whopping 7 months older than Barnes.

 

I appreciate Tielemans will have a higher salary because that's what happens with free transfers, but I am sure Barnes isn't on poverty wages.

 

So if Tielemans is a bad signing in terms of future options, what does that make Barnes at 38m more?

 

No one costs £0. 

 

It's hard to know for sure in the murky world of free transfers but Tielemans costs you ~£9-10m per year.

 

Barnes costs us ~£12m per year.

[KaKa]

Fair play to Villa for the Barkley pickup. Great move.

[KaKa]

23 minutes ago, cubaricho said:

 

I guess I thought the consensus was different than that.

 

Although to be fair I stopped reading when someone was suggesting Barkley being a Bruno replacement, even late in games.  

 

That's because you've likely not watched Luton play this season or paid any attention to how Barkley was being used, and so it was probably the right move for you to exit the conversation. 

[KaKa]

2 hours ago, brummie said:

 

We, and you, are going to have to work the system.

 

Our (ours and yours) fans are going to have to realise it will be about smart transfer moves, too, not just spunking money everywhere.

 

Also, I've seen Barkley play for us already.

 

TBF, I reckon Emery could turn me into a decent PL player, and I can't run further than the end of the road.

 

Yeah, exactly. 

 

Regarding Barkley, remind me, did you guys ever play him in central midfield proper like Luton have this season, where he's been initiating their play from deep?

 

It's been quite the transformation for him playing in that part of the pitch. 

 

Reminds me of when Benfica did similar with Taarabt a few years ago, which was just as surprisingly effective.

[Astroblack]

9 minutes ago, KaKa said:

Fair play to Villa for the Barkley pickup. Great move.

 

He was there before, no? Remember him and Grealish ripping Arsenal apart once. 

[KaKa]

40 minutes ago, Astroblack said:

 

He was there before, no? Remember him and Grealish ripping Arsenal apart once. 

 

Yeah, @brummie, mentions this a few posts up.

[Ketsbaia]

If even Barkley to Villa is getting praised then it's going to be a long, repetitive summer  

[gbandit]

It’s a very astute signing, going into a CL campaign. It makes a lot less sense for us with our best outcome being Europa Conference 

[cubaricho]

Gotta agree it's a good move for Villa. FFP makes it about raising the floor, not always about raising the ceiling.