Jack Grealish / signs new 5 year contract

Status
Not open for further replies.
harms said:
I can’t see us paying over the top for him and even originally it looked like an unlikely deal – he wasn’t going to get a starting place anyway (not from the beginning at least) and surely a 24 years old player of his stature (rightly) wants a more prominent role? With Villa staying up, the price would rise up from over the top to borderline insane for someone who you won’t going to build your team around.
Click to expand...

This starting berth is a BS argument tbh. City had Silva D, Foden, KDB, Silva,Gundagon,Fernandinho, Rodri for 3 spots.
 
I could seriously see a situation where we miss out on Sancho, have a bid for Grealish rejected, him being pissed off at Villa, Villa digging their heels in and then we pay over the odds to secure him late into the window.
 
SATA said:
Not fussed. Let’s settle Sancho first and look at what our options are after selling some deadwood of ours
Click to expand...

I hope Sancho will take some the burden of creating off of the likes of Bruno and Pogba, especially if one of them is injured. Could end up having the following options

CF - Martial, Greenwood, Ighalo
LW - Rashford, Sancho, James
RW - Sancho, Greenwood, James
CAM - Bruno, Pogba
CM - Pogba, Matic, Fred, McTominay

Obviously things in the CAM position would look better with Grealish on board and it'll certainly be an issue if both Bruno and Pogba were to be injured at the same time but you can't be spending 80m on Grealish
 
charlenefan said:
I hope Sancho will take some the burden of creating off of the likes of Bruno and Pogba, especially if one of them is injured. Could end up having the following options

CF - Martial, Greenwood, Ighalo
LW - Rashford, Sancho, James
RW - Sancho, Greenwood, James
CAM - Bruno, Pogba
CM - Pogba, Matic, Fred, McTominay

Obviously things in the CAM position would look better with Grealish on board and it'll certainly be an issue if both Bruno and Pogba were to be injured at the same time but you can't be spending 80m on Grealish
Click to expand...


If we do get Sancho, he can play AM as well. LW, CAM, RW.

Not that I’m against signing Grealish, though. I don’t really care about the money anyway. I trust Ole.
 
Stay away from him if he costs more than 50m. Enough with overpaying for players, unless they are the real deal (Sancho).
 
still don't get the hype for DVB. I'd take Grealish for 60m over DVB for 40m. Mind you, I have only seen DVB in the CL last two seasons whereas I've seen much more of Grealish in the PL and the championship.
 
bond19821982 said:
This starting berth is a BS argument tbh. City had Silva D, Foden, KDB, Silva,Gundagon,Fernandinho, Rodri for 3 spots.
Click to expand...
Foden is an academy graduate, Bernardo was signed firstly as a wing option (with ageing D. Silva in mind), Rodri was signed as Fernandinho’s replacement. Gundogan was the only one who was signed as a squad option – it was after a career-changing injury and for 27 mil.

We have 2 definite starters in midfield aged 25 (Bruno) and 27 (Pogba) respectively. On the left wing (or even generally as a part of a front three), which is Grealish’s alternative position, we have 22 y.o. Rashford, 24 y.o. Martial and you can add 18 y.o. Greenwood & hopefully 20 y.o. Sancho. Those are, literally, our 5 (with another one in mind) most talented players, by far.

I’d love for us to have Grealish as an alternative option, don’t get me wrong. But we have glaring holes in our team – center back, defensive midfielde as Matić’s understudy/replacement, left back, maybe even goalkeeper... we can’t afford to spend 80 mil on a player who, with everyone being fit and in form, is going to sit on the bench (without any ageing starter to potentially replace). I’m also not sure if he would like that option himself. He’s not a youth prospect (like Foden) that can settle for a part-time role with a hope of breaking through some day. He’s approaching his physical peak and he’d want to play as much as possible – and he is good enough to demand that.
 
harms said:
Foden is an academy graduate, Bernardo was signed firstly as a wing option (with ageing D. Silva in mind), Rodri was signed as Fernandinho’s replacement. Gundogan was the only one who was signed as a squad option – it was after a career-changing injury and for 27 mil.

We have 2 definite starters in midfield aged 25 (Bruno) and 27 (Pogba) respectively. On the left wing (or even generally as a part of a front three), which is Grealish’s alternative position, we have 22 y.o. Rashford, 24 y.o. Martial and you can add 18 y.o. Greenwood & hopefully 20 y.o. Sancho. Those are, literally, our 5 (with another one in mind) most talented players, by far.

I’d love for us to have Grealish as an alternative option, don’t get me wrong. But we have glaring holes in our team – center back, defensive midfielde as Matić’s understudy/replacement, left back, maybe even goalkeeper... we can’t afford to spend 80 mil on a player who, with everyone being fit and in form, is going to sit on the bench (without any ageing starter to potentially replace). I’m also not sure if he would like that option himself. He’s not a youth prospect (like Foden) that can settle for a part-time role with a hope of breaking through some day. He’s approaching his physical peak and he’d want to play as much as possible – and he is good enough to demand that.
Click to expand...

What I meant was we need quality option to rotate. Grealish can be our B Silva who can do both wing and midfield (obviously not for 80m)
 
I’d like to think the Sky Sports story about cooling interest on Grealish and focusing on Sancho, is a tactic to try and get Villa to come down on price and potentially have Grealish get more adamant about leaving so Villa have to come down on price.
 
Chairman Steve said:
I’d like to think the Sky Sports story about cooling interest on Grealish and focusing on Sancho, is a tactic to try and get Villa to come down on price and potentially have Grealish get more adamant about leaving so Villa have to come down on price.
Click to expand...
Probably. But it's also likely genuine in that, they can truly feck off for 80m
 
We don't need Grealish if Pogba stays. Right now we need one of Ndidi/Rice/VdB
 
Villa deserve a big feck off if the 80m story is true. We shouldn’t pay a penny more than what we paid for Bruno. Might as well go in for Havertz and jack up the price for Chelsea to piss them off.

Ideally we should look around the continent. 40 million can get us players worthy enough to be Bruno’s backup.
 
£60m tops from my perspective. Not an international regular player, Not even capped, Not played in European competition, Played more in second tier league than top tier league.

This isn’t a teenage Kylian Mbappe at Monaco scoring like a seasoned pro in the Champions League knockout rounds, where £80m is more justified.
 
bond19821982 said:
What I meant was we need quality option to rotate. Grealish can be our B Silva who can do both wing and midfield (obviously not for 80m)
Click to expand...
As I've said – I'd love to have him in our squad ideally, but this deal, when we include the price mentioned and his personal growth as factors, doesn't seem to be a good deal for any involved party (including Aston Villa).
 
I think if we've briefed we've cooled our interest then that's likely the end of that, we did the same with the Griezmann. £80m was absurd though.
 
With the £80m, we could alternatively get Donny van de Beek and someone at least fairly decent at one of our other weaker areas like a Matić future replacement or a centre half.
 
harms said:
Foden is an academy graduate, Bernardo was signed firstly as a wing option (with ageing D. Silva in mind), Rodri was signed as Fernandinho’s replacement. Gundogan was the only one who was signed as a squad option – it was after a career-changing injury and for 27 mil.

We have 2 definite starters in midfield aged 25 (Bruno) and 27 (Pogba) respectively. On the left wing (or even generally as a part of a front three), which is Grealish’s alternative position, we have 22 y.o. Rashford, 24 y.o. Martial and you can add 18 y.o. Greenwood & hopefully 20 y.o. Sancho. Those are, literally, our 5 (with another one in mind) most talented players, by far.

I’d love for us to have Grealish as an alternative option, don’t get me wrong. But we have glaring holes in our team – center back, defensive midfielde as Matić’s understudy/replacement, left back, maybe even goalkeeper... we can’t afford to spend 80 mil on a player who, with everyone being fit and in form, is going to sit on the bench (without any ageing starter to potentially replace). I’m also not sure if he would like that option himself. He’s not a youth prospect (like Foden) that can settle for a part-time role with a hope of breaking through some day. He’s approaching his physical peak and he’d want to play as much as possible – and he is good enough to demand that.
Click to expand...
I've said this before but people will ignore how City actually came about their quality squad depth. It's quite abnormal to spend above 40m for a player about to enter his prime to come and play rotation. How many times has this actually happened??
 
Jibbs said:
We don't need Grealish if Pogba stays. Right now we need one of Ndidi/Rice/VdB
Click to expand...
We most certainly do need Grealish, you saw how having tired Pogba and Bruno starting (with no alternatives from the bench) worked in our final few games.

I read Grealish's good relationship with Aston Villa might help the clubs come to a fair deal.
 
We’re right to be backing off. I can’t sit here and say he’s not a good player because he obviously is, but at that price? No thanks.

If these latest rumours are true then I’m quite content. Obviously, like with all transfer speculation, we can only judge what we read. For me, it seems we like the player, considered him a good fit, monitored his situation and made the necessary enquiries. Subsequently, we considered their demands to be unrealistic and impossible to find a compromise with, so we’ve backed off. I’d much rather we did that and explored alternatives. Way better than letting things drag on all window and expecting Villa to cave, only for us to miss out on Grealish in the end, as well as alternatives who move elsewhere. Now, if things change and Jack decides he wants to push a deal through, then I’d entertain this again. However, that does seem unlikely, so let’s swiftly move on to other targets and see if their respective clubs are more receptive.
 
Villa are entitled to ask what they deem fair, but we don't have a limitless budget. At these prices, we should be shopping elsewhere. I truly hope we have alternatives lined up because we desperately need quality squad depth if we want to be successful next season.
 
Villa have all the right to ask for that price to be fair. In reality Grealish is worth around 60m all things considered. But for what we want to use him for he's worth around 40m
 
jamesjimmybyrondean said:
I've said this before but people will ignore how City actually came about their quality squad depth. It's quite abnormal to spend above 40m for a player about to enter his prime to come and play rotation. How many times has this actually happened??
Click to expand...
There are a few examples from here and there, like our signing of Fred recently, but no one can rival City, of course – they have around £1,1bn in net spent last decade alone, with us and PSG fighting for the second place with a mere £850m each. It gets even crazier when you take in account that they haven't signed anyone for more than £62m (compared to Neymar, Mbappe, Pogba, Maguire...) – but they've signed so many players for £40m-£50m that they are still miles ahead.
 
harms said:
There are a few examples from here and there, like our signing of Fred recently, but no one can rival City, of course – they have around £1,1bn in net spent last decade alone, with us and PSG fighting for the second place with a mere £850m each. It gets even crazier when you take in account that they haven't signed anyone for more than £62m (compared to Neymar, Mbappe, Pogba, Maguire...) – but they've signed so many players for £40m-£50m that they are still miles ahead.
Click to expand...
Wasnt Fred signed to 'unlock Pogba's? It's really rare for a club to sign a player entering his peak for 40m upwards to be rotational. Look at all the best clubs in Europe with solid squad depth, how many actually spent 45-60m on a 24 years(and above) player to be rotation.
 
£80m? greedy bastards. How about 40m + 40m in the form of bonuses? but make the requirements for the bonuses hard as feck :
  1. Champions League trophy = 10m
  2. Ballon d'or = 10m
  3. PL Player of the season + 3 times in a row player of the month in the same season = 10m
  4. A hattrick during a rainy day while wearing purple boots = 5m
  5. Convince Emilio Alvarez to train and become mates with De Gea again = 5m
 
tenpoless said:
£80m? greedy bastards. How about 40m + 40m in the form of bonuses? but make the requirements for the bonuses hard as feck :
  1. Champions League trophy = 10m
  2. Ballon d'or = 10m
  3. PL Player of the season + 3 times in a row player of the month in the same season = 10m
  4. A hattrick during a rainy day while wearing purple boots = 5m
  5. Convince Emilio Alvarez to train and become mates with De Gea again = 5m
Click to expand...
I like this idea. Maybe we could add in bonuses for every time they manage to take points off our rivals?
 
80M quid for Grealish, what are Villa smoking! When prices for what is a squad player (for a top 4 team) go to 80M, you know the market has gone mental.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.