Indy_Bones

Why do you seem so convinced that Webber blindly wanted to sell Emi just for the hell of it, especially after making it clear we don't need to sell? There's been interest in him since LAST season from clubs like Arsenal, but apparently Webber is completely focused on selling arguably our best player for no good reason???

A) How long do you think it would be before half the first team began knocking on Webber's door demanding a similar uptick? We have a 30 goal a season striker, one of the best young English fullbacks in the game, a Dutch international keeper who's simply got better and better for us, another young English midfielder who didn't look out of place in the PL last time etc. Are you honestly saying you think they don't deserve more but Emi does? B) If wages were the ONLY reason, then you might have a point, but it's pretty clear it wasn't simply about wages, and even if it was, we can't afford to simply start paying 80k to our top players, that was lies financial instability and would take our transfer kitty away and put it into wages instead, and there's clearly upgrades and replacements needed that we're unlikely to get for free (Pukki notwithstanding).

Let's be totally clear here, there's no directly attributable quote from the player saying "I want to move", but as many others have also alluded to - anything else simply doesn't make any sense. Webber has been very honest and transparent with us as fans from day 1, he accepts responsibility for failures and has made a whole host of changes at the club all of which are designed to make us better, more attractive, more succesful and all whilst keeping us financially stable. Firstly, when bids have come in under what we're willing to accept, be this for Lewis (Liverpool), Godfrey (Everton's Initial Bid), Max (Barca and Roma) or Emi (Arsenal), Webber has simply rejected them and basically said not to come back unless you're willing to pay what we want. Secondly, it's pretty obvious that we've improved our team quality quite a bit since Webber came in, and there's been zero evidence of him trying to sell players on the cheap unless we actually wanted rid of them (e.g. Drmic). Thirdly, we've been clearly told what sort of financial position the club is in, what approximate funds we had available for signings, and that we have absolutely no need to sell, so unless it's a big offer that too good to refuse or if a player is looking to leave, we won't be letting anyone go. Fourthly, there was clearly an issue with Emi at a point last season, we can all speculate as to the reason (interest from Arsenal which caused a head turn is the most plausible reason I've heard), but it lead to a run of poor performances and Farke dropping him, and this is where the suggestion that a gentleman's agreement regarding a sale this summer came from - again, no concrete evidence on either. Finally, there's not a fan, manager or anyone else out there who doesn't consider Emi one of our key players, probably the most valuable asset we had on paper, the creative genius which has helped Pukki storm the scoring charts whilst weighing in with goals and assists themselves, so what possible reason could we have to want this player to leave the club? Now take all these factors into account and ask yourself which is more likely: 1) Webber is simply jumping the gun, cashing in early and forcing one of integral players out of the club, knowing full well that a direct replacement simply isn't just around the next door and what impact this could have on our chances of staying up, or 2) Emi has wanted a move since our relegation, had his head turned by suggestions of Arsenal, Athletico and similar, but was told if he knuckled down and helped us back up, we'd let him have his move this summer to a club who would pay the asking price and if he wanted to go there? I'm pretty damn sure that Leicester weren't looking to offload either Kante or Mahrez when they did (winning the league not enough?), but I didn't see any suggestion at that point that they were lacking in ambition, that they were forcing Kante out or that they were foolishly selling their best players when they didn't have to, and that's a club with FAR more wealthy owners who could easily pay bigger wages and had just won the PL ffs, so why did they let them go - Because the players wanted the moves and the price was right. Funny how it's perfectly ok and plausible when it happens to a bigger club than us, yet somehow we're different and it's all Webber's fault? Pull the other one ffs.

You mean aside from his comments about wanting to play at the very highest level and challenge for trophies, the clear wobble he had last season after reported interest in him which lead to him being dropped, and the fact that Webber isn't the clueless moron some would paint him as and isn't looking to purely offload players for the hell of it at whatever price he feels like? There's no clear reason beyond Emi wanting to move for the sale to happen, so Occam's Razor applies alongside the limited evidence we have which leads to the conclusion that he was pushing for a move (or already had a Gentleman's agreement on one).

This should be good... So, how much is Webber personally trousering from the sales of Lewis, Godfrey, Emi and probably Max and Todd? Any actual source for your baseless accusations?

We only blocked Max's move to Barca because it was a loan deal, I'm pretty sure that if they'd have been willing to give us the 25+mil we were wanting, we'd have happily sold him to them and we'd not have had him this past season, but I agree that there was likely a chat with all of Max, Emi and Todd along the lines of 'give us a another year and if a fair offer comes in from a decent club, we won't stand in your way'. I wouldn't be happy with Max to Brighton for 13 mil, as we all know we can easily get 25+ mil for him even in the current climate, but that wouldn't be the argument, as we haven't sold Emi for half his current value.

This

That's because it's not, it's "Sell your best player purely because THEY want out whilst getting the best price you can and having time to bring in replacements". Maybe you've got a different version of the plan than I have?

I was slightly miffed when we sold Sutton to Blackburn for 5 mil, but the first time I was truly upset was when Eadie left for Leicester, I genuinely felt he would have been England's answer to the left-sided problem, with pace to burn and a keen finisher as well, but injuries sadly stopped all that. The first time I ever had a name put on the back of the shirt it was Eadie's on the classic 'Egg N Cress/Canary Droppings' design, loved watching him play and didn't really get the same excitement from others in that position probably until we brought Hucks in some years later.

I've still got my special edition, Disney Store only Lithograph from the release of the Lion King, and that's only worth £20...

On a side note, many years ago a friend of mine decided to sell all his VHS tapes for about £200, I laughed at his choice saying he'd been ripped off and I'd want at least twice that for the same thing. Funny thing is that he enjoyed using that £200 for other things, whereas I kept the bloody tapes, which you can't even give away to charity shops these days, so which of us made the right choice? Me sticking to my guns and wanting more but ending up with nothing, or him taking arguably less than their perceived value, but being happy with the price and actually getting something more out of the deal than I did?

It's difficult to say exactly what the price is though Chelm. I've see a number of reports claiming 33 mil upfront + 5 mil in addons + a sell on clause, which takes the whole deal to over 40 mil. I can't possibly imagine that any other genuinely interested club wouldn't have been on the phone, nor that Webber would deliberately rush a deal through if he genuinely thought we'd get a reasonable amount more by waiting and hoping for another team to come in.

Apols Chip, just trying to even the scales a little bit towards reality!

If we didn't get any more offers he'd still have gone to Villa, and we'd have wasted the time we could have had getting new players in. The only way Emi was staying was if nobody was willing to pay the sort of price we were wanting (but within reason), and quite clearly, Villa really wanted him.

And which clubs have come up from the Champs with a player of Emi's standard who's made it clear they want a move? We could EASILY have lost the lot of them last year when we went down, instead it was just Lewis and Godfrey on the way out (for good fees btw), so would it have been better for us to lose Emi a year ago for probably 10-15 mil (or more) LESS than what we're getting now, and all on the back of him helping us get back up?

Does anyone actually think that if Toney had already told Brentford he wanted a move this summer and was pushing hard for it, that they also wouldn't sell him for a similar fee to Emi's if a club came in for him??? We're talking about us and Brentford FFS, not Man City and Real Madrid...!!!

And that's relevant to your previous question how? You asked if they'd sell for the same deal, and I replied they would if Toney wanted a move. Now it's morphed into a completely different statement. But to answer that one, who cares? Emi was leaving one way or another, it's foolish to think he wasn't, so the question isn't about WHY the sale has happened or how influential he was, but a necessary acceptance of the situation, because in truth, how many clubs have been promoted with a player like Emi on their hands following a global pandemic and the player wanting to leave - answers on a postcard...

If Toney wanted to move and had already made it clear anywhere up to a year previously he wanted to go elsewhere, then absolutely I think it would be accepted, as it would for 90%+ of players in a similar situation.

Any player is only worth what another club are willing to spend on them regardless of talent or perceived value. Was Coutinho worth £142 million? Not in my view, but Barca were willing to pay it. We could have valued Buendia at £200 million, but if nobody was ever going to pay that, then it's simply an arbitrary value designed to do nothing more than try to prevent any deal ever happening. When a player makes it clear they want to move, the goalposts change, as you know a deal realistically needs to happen, and then it comes down to which clubs are interested and how much they will pay. I do feel Emi is a 50+ million player, but clearly no other club did, and if the likes of Arsenal or Athletico really wanted him, then they'd have put in a bid to at least match Villa, if not completely beat them - they didn't. Which leaves us with a player determined to move, no better offers on the table, and a need to start our own recruitment asap, thus the deal happens, even if it's at a value below what many of us think is fair. It will be interesting to see what other deals happen across the globe in the next couple of months as we'll have more data to show the real impact Covid has had on finances and valuations, but outside of the ultra-rich clubs, I expect values to be somewhat lower than many would think, and it may well show we actually got a relatively fair deal all things considered, or it could show that Villa got a complete bargain (even if there was little we could do to prevent it).

I can't say I agree with that at all. We all knew Emi would be going sooner rather than later, it's blindingly obvious that he wanted a move (and there may even have been an agreement about this last summer), and I see this as Webber having his hands tied to a level where he couldn't prevent the sale, but could simply try to get the best deal he could, and with seemingly no bids from anyone else, and our desire to get to work on bringing in the replacements the inevitable sale would facilitate at some point, it made more sense to deal quickly and move on, than drag things out in the hope of an extra few million, by which point it could be too late to get our priority targets. Webber HAS delivered since his arrival, we've seen a great manager arrive, great players brought in, youth talent flourish, club facilities massively improved, 2 promotions to the PL, and all while staying financially secure and giving us some outstanding football, yet because we've sold Emi, all of that will mean nothing if we did happen to be relegated again??? We should be thankful of the sweeping changes Webber has brought to the club, respect the hard work and effort that's gone in to give us 2 promotions in 3 years, that we're now an extremely attractive prospect to younger talents who may well choose us over 'bigger' clubs because they can see the path forwards we offer, and we've come a long way from Portakabins at Colney, to the Soccer Bot 360 which is being installed. We have NO divine right to play at the top level, clubs have shown that spending big money doesn't guarantee safety - just ask Fulham and Bournemouth how well that went for them in the past couple of seasons, and just like we thought players such as Maddison were irreplaceable, Webber and Farke have already shown that they're not. Webber has a remit to work under, as far as I can tell, he's done a great job overall, and irrespective of where we finish this season, he'll still have plenty of credit with me regardless.

Ah, you're one of the ones who think we could have forced Emi to stay despite his wishes to leave, and that maybe we could have simply paid him 100k a week (who cares about squad unrest and financial stability?), and the whole thing would have been a non-issue. You need to accept the reality of the situation in football, where our place in the pyramid is, and that it's got nothing to do with the clubs ambition or desire to stay up, when the players have all the power to force moves and cut through all our intent in one fell swoop. I see West Brom are saying Pereira can go if someone offers 15 mil, you don't think they'd rather have him there? But realistically, he's better than the champs, had a very good season in the PL this year, clubs ARE going to be interested, but I guess West Brom are also simply lacking ambition to come back up as they're advertising their star player on the cheap, for less than HALF what we got for Emi. So many clubs who are happy to not compete eh?

As with ANY of our players, it comes down to 2 aspects: 1) Are other clubs willing to pay what we're asking? 2) Does Max want to move? The interesting part here is that unless 2 is true, the first could be irrelevant, as we don't need to sell and if they player is happy, then we'll keep them, however if it's not, then Max would be going regardless of our current finance situation/desires etc. I would certainly imagine a discussion was had with him when Barca came knocking, and I wouldn't be surprised if he was given assurances that we wouldn't stand in the way of a deal if a fair offer came in and he was in favour of the move, we only turned Barca down because it was a loan offer, had they been willing to throw 25+ million at us at that point for Max on a perm, he'd have already been gone.

The message board is likely to be pretty spicy at the minute, with much hand-wringing over lack of ambition, Emi's price being too low and we didn't need to sell, contracts blah, Villa being no better than us etc, etc, ad nauseum. So let me start with a quote: “So for sure it’s a moment in my career where I have to reflect and see where I’m at and have a good honest conversation with the chairman. I hope we can have that conversation. I’m sure he’ll want to set out the plan of where he sees it. But ultimately it’s going to be down to me and how I feel and what’s going to be the best for me in my career at this moment in time.” Look at the section in bold and take that in for a moment. Now you've had that moment, I'm sure you'll be looking to see where this interview is with Emi where he states that, well, you won't find it, as it's directly from a Harry Kane quote from an interview he gave regarding the possibility of him leaving Spurs this summer. Here is as almost direct replica of our situation with Emi. Spurs don't need to sell him, just as we didn't need to sell Emi, but the underlying issue here is based on what the player wants, rather than the club. Both players have contracts, both players are/were only likely to move if a suitable offer is forthcoming, but as Kane himself states "ultimately it’s going to be down to me and how I feel ", and let's face it, Spurs are a MUCH bigger club than us, able to pay pretty much any wages they want, are absolutely classed in the top sides in the PL, and even they won't be able to keep Kane if he decides to wants to leave, yet some of our fans think we could force Emi to stay because of his contract, or we could demand a transfer fee that no club would pay thus keeping him by making a deal impossible, yet all this would lead to is a demotivated and unfocused player, who won't perform at the level we've come to expect and will make his future value far less in the process. We also have no inside knowledge about conversations that may or may not have happened with the player in terms of promises this summer on the basis he gave us the last year, and if anything of the sort has been agreed, trying to keep him here would be even harder and also make our gentleman's agreement mean nothing, not to mention the impact it would have in blocking the transfer in the minds of all the new upcoming players we sign who can genuinely see a path to the first team and their future careers with us, that suddenly turn to dust if we refuse the likes of Emi, Max, Todd or even Godfrey/Lewis (who we allowed to go for a good price), as there's less incentive to come to us to begin with. So with that all being said, as much as I'd have loved for us to have kept Emi, even if just for another year, I can understand the whole situation, and see that at least in this scenario, we're at the mercy of player power, and rather than drag things on and hope a 'bigger' club than Villa come in for a bidding war, we've done a deal now (that realistically was going to happen at some point this summer as long as a decent club came in with our price) which gives us the chance to make our own moves much sooner, and also gives Daniel more time to work out what the approach is going to be this year sans Emi (and maybe Max/Todd as well if that happens). Let's not also forget that 3 years ago, pretty much nobody had heard of Emi Buendia, we were still licking our wounds from the Maddison sale and here we were signing some unknown Argentinian from the Spanish 2nd league who we just hoped was at least going to be better than Becchio, and here we are 3 years later with an outstanding player that's making us a 30+ million profit as well as having helped us get promoted twice, but what do Webber and Farke know about players eh? On top of that we added a Finnish striker on a free transfer who was seen as a failure some years ago at Celtic and expected to play 2nd fiddle to the on-loan Jordan Rhodes, and instead we ended up with one of the most lethal players in the league, whose movement, workrate, clever play and finishing have netted us great returns, and like Emi, propelled us into the PL twice, but again, Webber has no clue what he's doing. We're now waiting to see what the next name is that Webber has seemingly pulled out of thin air, and if they're even close to either of Emi's or Teemu's performance levels, then it will be another vindication of the model, and chances are in a year or two we'll either be complaining they've been sold for a massive profit, or we'll have established ourselves to some degree in the PL - neither of which are bad things! Until such point as we are an established top 8 side in the Premier League, sales like this are inevitable (and even then there are exceptions), we can't start throwing money around like candy by tripling wages and causing unrest at the club whilst risking our financial stability, nor should we be happy when our star players move on to bigger and better clubs (regardless of what some think of Villa in this case), but there needs to be an acceptance of our place in the footballing echelon, and as shown with situations like Kane at Spurs, or Kante at Leicester, it doesn't matter how big you are as a club, how wealthy your owner is, or even if you've challenged for the league/Europe - if a player decides they want to go, it WILL happen, and it happens to better clubs than us with better players than we are selling. On a final note, I'd just like to wish Emi all the best, to thank him for his contribution to the club and the wonderful talent we've been able to watch on a weekly basis during his time here, he will go down as one of the greatest talents to grace this club, and I hope he moves on to a truly gigantic club sooner rather than later and that we enjoy seeing him turn out regularly for his Nation, just as we have for ourselves.

This is exactly the point I've been making, it's not likely to simply be about wages, but about how he sees his career prospects, and only the most rabid fans on a yellow and green kool-aid binge can claim that clubs like Arsenal and Athletico aren't bigger than us and likely to give him far more chances to reach and play at the very top of the game.

No, we all understand it will be difficult if not virtually impossible to replace Emi, but what many of us sadly accept is that if a club of a higher stature than ours who are willing to pay the asking price come knocking, there's pretty much nothing we can do about it. Any player who's looking at their career would see a move to the likes of Arsenal and Athletico as being better for them than staying with us, and not simply because of wages either, so if the interest is genuinely there and they will pay accordingly, the player will go, regardless of whether or not a replacement of an even vaguely similar level is possible. This is purely about player power in these situations, and just like Spurs can't force Kane to stay if he decides to move, we can't keep Emi if that's his choice either. Leicester couldn't keep Kante on the back of actually WINNING the Prem, so why do people think we can keep Emi when we've not even got close to that level of performance and chance of Europe????