Villa no longer interested in Cantwell*

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

10 hours ago, Petriix said:

What's 'pathetic' is the weird notion that we should keep hold of every player no matter what price we're offered. The Buendia money was astronomical as would any acceptable bid for Cantwell be.

I like Todd, but I wouldn't buy him for £35m. It would be fantastic business to get that kind of money for him. And if we don't move players like him on, there won't be enough opportunities to bring the next young players through into the first team.

That only works if we can get replacements otherwise the bank balance benefits but the playing side diminishes 

[horsefly 4,298]

7 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Guys can we all please stop trying to talk about these transfers like we don't have a choice!!!!

Who said that? I think you misunderstand the very important difference between being forced to sell a player and making a decision in the best interests of the club to sell him. We really didn't have a choice about selling Maddison, unless you believe going into administration was a genuine alternative option. However, we did clearly have a choice about whether to sell Buendia and it seems to me that choice ended up being determined by two key factors. Firstly, Buendia very clearly wanted to leave, and Webber and Farke judged that forcing him to stay would be detrimental to the squad morale. Secondly, Webber and Farke judged that a £38m transfer fee reached a high enough threshold to be in the best interests of the club. You may disgaree with that judgement, clearly a lot of us think it was very much justified. Either way it doesn't help if you accuse us of making claims that we haven't.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

9 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

That only works if we can get replacements otherwise the bank balance benefits but the playing side diminishes 

It’s know it’s only a very small possibility, but do you think we might just be working on the notion that we will get replacements? Or do you genuinely think we’re stripping the team just to swell the coffers? 

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

I think they sell hoping to store some wealth and also buy a replacement - but then often struggle to do the latter. Take the latest news that £40million is the price for Todd - at best we then swap him for three £10 million players - we struggle to attract any better- meaning a bit more depth but a loss to first team quality. As with Buendia. 
 

long term we do ok- but short term it’s a blow - if a financially rewarding one 

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

Or put another way - I think the board settled for being a top championship team with occasionally forays into the premiership some time ago. Ergo new signings are made with an eye to maintaining that level not pushing us on - because this would involve risk they are not prepared to take and cannot afford under a self sustaining model. 
 

which is why we tend to see more ambition when relegated than promoted 

[Alex Moss 2,165]

2 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

I think they sell hoping to store some wealth and also buy a replacement - but then often struggle to do the latter. Take the latest news that £40million is the price for Todd - at best we then swap him for three £10 million players - we struggle to attract any better- meaning a bit more depth but a loss to first team quality. As with Buendia. 
 

long term we do ok- but short term it’s a blow - if a financially rewarding one 

But that’s just it though, you’re working on the pretence that it’s a guaranteed loss of first team quality. Whereas that could happen of course, we could equally sign several players that could overall make us a stronger unit and thus more likely to do well in the Premier League. Can you accept and admit that, or is it only the negative outcome that exists? 

[cornish sam 953]

18 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

I think they sell hoping to store some wealth and also buy a replacement - but then often struggle to do the latter. Take the latest news that £40million is the price for Todd - at best we then swap him for three £10 million players - we struggle to attract any better- meaning a bit more depth but a loss to first team quality. As with Buendia. 
 

long term we do ok- but short term it’s a blow - if a financially rewarding one 

How many £10m players do we currently have? Probably 5 or 6 tops (including Todd). So by that logic, we sell one of our £10m+ rated players and add three more. Surely that has improved the quality of the first team as a whole?

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

15 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

But that’s just it though, you’re working on the pretence that it’s a guaranteed loss of first team quality. Whereas that could happen of course, we could equally sign several players that could overall make us a stronger unit and thus more likely to do well in the Premier League. Can you accept and admit that, or is it only the negative outcome that exists? 

Yes we could get lucky and unearth more gems like Pukki and Buendia. But do you accept in return that selling players worth £30 million and replacing them with players worth £10 million - more often than not- is a downgrade not an upgrade? 

[Alex Moss 2,165]

1 minute ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Yes we could get lucky and unearth more gems like Pukki and Buendia. But do you accept in return that selling players worth £30 million and replacing them with players worth £10 million - more often than not- is a downgrade not an upgrade? 

As I say, it could turn out badly, of course. I guess it comes down to how much you trust Webber, Farke, and our recruitment team? I’d be quite confident that if we got 3 x £10mil players in for Cantwell then we could make the team stronger as a whole, and then it that case it’s a very smart move indeed. Not to mention if we turn them into a combined value of more than Todd then when we sell and replace again we only build the squad further still, and repeat. But of course it would be foolish to think every player will come good, however that will always be the case with any transfers that any club makes.

[Mark .Y. 352]

33 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

As I say, it could turn out badly, of course. I guess it comes down to how much you trust Webber, Farke, and our recruitment team? I’d be quite confident that if we got 3 x £10mil players in for Cantwell then we could make the team stronger as a whole, and then it that case it’s a very smart move indeed. Not to mention if we turn them into a combined value of more than Todd then when we sell and replace again we only build the squad further still, and repeat. But of course it would be foolish to think every player will come good, however that will always be the case with any transfers that any club makes.

Whilst I generally agree with the sentiment, the problem I see is the wages bill. Those 3 £10m players are going to be earning a lot of money..............it's a very fine balance between squad numbers and quality.

[crispeduk 282]

32 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

As I say, it could turn out badly, of course. I guess it comes down to how much you trust Webber, Farke, and our recruitment team? I’d be quite confident that if we got 3 x £10mil players in for Cantwell then we could make the team stronger as a whole, and then it that case it’s a very smart move indeed. Not to mention if we turn them into a combined value of more than Todd then when we sell and replace again we only build the squad further still, and repeat. But of course it would be foolish to think every player will come good, however that will always be the case with any transfers that any club makes.

Agreed.

I believe in the club’s model and believe it’s working – but I don’t know it is, especially right now. Nobody (even Mr Webber) knows for sure at this stage. The scary thing is that it can’t work every time for all time, as we’ve seen. However carefully implemented it will always blow hot and cold. But it’s definitely too early to judge the summer’s business – comparing Emi coming off a season at the top of his game with the glimpses we’ve seen of newcomers still finding their feet at the club is a bit risky for all of us and definitely unfair on our players. We’re gambling at the poker table, not on the roulette wheel. For me that beats the possibility of flirting with administration but it doesn’t mean I lack ambition – and it doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s football’s endless uncertainty which keeps me coming back for more after every summer. Bring it on. OTBC

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

2 hours ago, cornish sam said:

Another way at looking at a dale of this magnitude is that if (and that's a big if) we had moved down our list of targets then the money from cantwell could allow us to move back up to our a list...

Also, those quotes from the Watford fella could be read to be saying pretty much what we have said "We want to keep the best players that we have in the squad (everyone wants to keep their best players, though it's not always possible). Sarr, Joao Pedro and the best players, or the players that we consider important for this team, we want to keep them (as did we with Todd, max, teemu and EMI, though not always possible). We are not in the market for selling our best players, we're just in the market for understanding how we can strengthen the team by signing good players, and especially signing players who we think can have an important chance at an important club (even though we aren't in the market to sell them we will if it is the best way to strengthen the team)."

 

'This isn't a "we aren't selling at any price" comment, it's a "we'd rather not sell but we need to see what is best for strengthening the team" comment, Webber has just wrapped it up differently.

 

Your first point may be true, but we are pretty hard about not paying above our own valuations for targets - see Ajer. So not sure it would make much of a difference, but we would be in a dire position so would probably need to push the boat out!

And sorry but I can’t agree RE there being any similarities between the two SD’s comments.

Watford issued a total hands off warning.

Webber went public saying ‘sell at the right price’ ‘it starts with a 3…’ ‘can’t guarantee any of them will still be here next season’ etc etc.

I know no one can ‘guarantee’ it, but we stipulated a clear willingness to negotiate and sell. 

Then you throw in the timing of the words from Webber, and how quickly Buendia then went out of the door after those comments (he was probably one of the first major signings of the transfer window) and it’s pretty obvious that we were massively complicit in all of it. 

The comments between the two SD’s are total night and day to me.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

1 hour ago, cornish sam said:

How many £10m players do we currently have? Probably 5 or 6 tops (including Todd). So by that logic, we sell one of our £10m+ rated players and add three more. Surely that has improved the quality of the first team as a whole?

But Todd is not a £10m player is he. His value reflects the fact he’s better than that. The key point is he’s used to how we play and he’s proven at premier league level. Most of the foreign signings need time to bed in. 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

11 hours ago, horsefly said:

So much naivity in every word of this. There is no player in any club that is "not for sale", every player has his price (as the sales of Suarez, Ronaldo, Bale, et al have shown). Even Villa fans are about to find out the truth of this basic fact. 

 

9 hours ago, Mr Angry said:

I totally agree. Please tell me what your plan is to prevent his sale and I will back you up 100%.

Horsefly - here are a couple of those comments which make it seem like the club have no choice but to sell. But it seems an attitude littered across most threads.

You have continually drawn comparisons to the sales of Suarez, Bale, Coutinho (no less than 3 times I make it now) etc etc which are all true, but I keep saying in response that those transfers only took place after the holding clubs fought for their lives and did their upmost to try to keep those players where they were.

Its not the same as what we did for Buendia - you also appear to recognise that so I’m not sure why you keep alluding to ‘everyone has to sell their best players sometimes’. Everyone agrees with that statement!

It’s the way in which we did the Buendia sale which makes us unique, not the fact we sold him. We put all of our best players in the shop window.

So rather than thinking of just any high profile player sale, can you try to think of some examples of clubs selling their best players after advertising them for sale at the start of the window? Can you go one better and think of any newly promoted clubs doing the same?

It could be a unique situation as a consequence of COVID, but there are plenty of other teams who have also had similar hits in the past 3 transfer windows without resorting to doing business like us. 

On the sale my opinion is that unless Webber has already got 2-3 players from the Buendia sale nearly through the door and has a strong idea that we can use the Todd money very well and very quickly, then it’s a hard nope from me. **** the money guys we need a team which will compete when the season starts in two weeks! 

Of course I’m happy to wait until the window ends before we see how the incomings have truly shaped up. But it’s not looking great as we are, I’m sure Webber would’ve sold Buendia on the premise that we’d have been able to sign a few more by now - but clearly we’re far from the only side struggling.

[cornish sam 953]

3 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

But Todd is not a £10m player is he. His value reflects the fact he’s better than that. The key point is he’s used to how we play and he’s proven at premier league level. Most of the foreign signings need time to bed in. 

But we were talking about improving the squad. If you have one 9 and 2 6s get rid of the 9 and get 2 8s and a 7 then you have improved the squad.

[lake district canary 4,531]

Anyone who thinks we are selling to build the bank balance (and there have been a few on here who seem to think that) need to know that keeping money is not something the club would want to do as it would be subject to a large amount of tax on that money.  Itwill be ploughed back into the club through player purchases and/or club infrastructure.

No-one, I repeat no-one, has any interest in us having a large bank balance - as a football club there is just no point in it. Any money will be spent. So if we sell Cantwell, that money will be invested back. 

People want investment - well selling players for top money supplies that investment.

[Jim Smith 2,317]

11 minutes ago, cornish sam said:

But we were talking about improving the squad. If you have one 9 and 2 6s get rid of the 9 and get 2 8s and a 7 then you have improved the squad.

As has been said above. We need a team able to compete in 2 weeks time. In my opinion selling Cantwell will weaken our team, considerably and whilst we may be able to bring players in who long term could be said to have strengthened the squad, if we have gone down in the meantime the damage is done.

I think it would be ridiculous to sell him at this moment in time. I’m pleased to see we’ve supposedly said it will take £40m but I’d prefer it if we just said hands off and got on with getting our team ready to start the season. 

 

[Gordon Bennett 783]

1 hour ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Yes we could get lucky and unearth more gems like Pukki and Buendia. But do you accept in return that selling players worth £30 million and replacing them with players worth £10 million - more often than not- is a downgrade not an upgrade? 

Not luck though is it, it's good scouting.

[Indy 3,297]

1 hour ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Yes we could get lucky and unearth more gems like Pukki and Buendia. But do you accept in return that selling players worth £30 million and replacing them with players worth £10 million - more often than not- is a downgrade not an upgrade? 

Nope you can argue that Buendia was developed from a £3 million pound player to a £38 million pound player, so if then buy a £10 million pound player you’re starting with potential of better quality. 
By selling one player you then buy better quality across the pith in three players thus give in us more strength in depth.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,715]

2 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Or put another way - I think the board settled for being a top championship team with occasionally forays into the premiership some time ago. Ergo new signings are made with an eye to maintaining that level not pushing us on - because this would involve risk they are not prepared to take and cannot afford under a self sustaining model. 
 

which is why we tend to see more ambition when relegated than promoted 

[LaUnionCanary 86]

10 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Whilst I totally appreciate the contract situation is the kicker on this topic, I would still be really reluctant to see Cantwell leave. 

The 'think of all the good players we could buy with £35 million' argument would be much better placed at the start of the window, not when there is two weeks till the first game of the season, not when we have barely even managed to utilise the funds from Buendia, not when we are struggling to land targets and already moving on to our plan-C and plan-D targets. How much deeper down our list would we have to go if we sold Cantwell now?

Staying up this season is worth a hell of a lot more to us than £35 million. Selling Cantwell this late on in the window when our squad is already looking at best - on par with last year - would be a disaster (in truth with the loss of easily our two best players in Buendia and Skipp I would say we're in a worse position). 

So is good money still good money if it puts us in an extremely desperate position? Doesn't there come a point where we have to draw the line and say no more? 

Or would you guys also be happy if we went and sold Aarons for £35 million now, Pukki for £15 million, Krul for £6 million etc etc? Never mind the fact we only have half a team look at all this shiny cash!!! 

The need for getting incoming players is already desperate, and that's WITH Cantwell, god knows how difficult we'd make it for ourselves if we lost him too.  

So given the current place the squad is at and our transfer struggles, I would rather we kept him and then sold him for say £15 million at the end of the season. 

Great idea so long as we avoid relegation. Get relegated and we have blown £20m. Logic says we will be better served by selling him in this window if he will not sign a contract extension. That is the crux of the situation, a new contract.

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

6 minutes ago, LaUnionCanary said:

Great idea so long as we avoid relegation. Get relegated and we have blown £20m. Logic says we will be better served by selling him in this window if he will not sign a contract extension. That is the crux of the situation, a new contract.

Well I appreciate surviving with or without Cantwell is a total intangible - however the season pans out. 

But assuming that staying up secures us say £90 mil. 

If we keep Cantwell this year and lose him for £15 mil, rather than £35 mil now, we are losing £20 mil as you say. 

So we are sacrificing a potential 20 mil now, but I would say at this stage at the window that our chances of survival are substantially improved with Cantwell still around - particularly as we have already lost our heart and soul in Buendia - and not to mention Skipp! 

Gambling with £20 mil to potentially secure £90 mil doesn't sound so bad does it? Gives us 4.5 / 1 on our money, i.e. as long as the risk comes off more than twice every nine seasons then its a worthy gamble...

[Uncle Fred 526]

£40 million for Cantwell that Webber is some negotiator 

[Capt. Pants 4,226]

Villa don't need Bailey, Buendia and Cantwell, not at £40m anyway. 

We are pricing Villa or anyone else out of it. Great in some ways, but this may be the last chance to get big money for Cantwell. 

[OnDaBall 137]

This is all just speculation, i'm sure Todd is on a potential transfer want list for a few clubs. But Let's face it a replacement for Grealish he certainly is not, I doubt he'd even make the Villa starting eleven.

Edited August 1, 2021 by OnDaBall
spelling error

[......and Smith must score. 1,342]

55 minutes ago, Uncle Fred said:

£40 million for Cantwell that Webber is some negotiator 

You know you love him really 😀

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

1 hour ago, Uncle Fred said:

£40 million for Cantwell that Webber is some negotiator 

Unintelligible claptrap as usual. Punctuation would at least make english of your drivel. Dolt.

[Essjayess 307]

May as well join in the fun here. Sell Todd for 40 mill, then why not go out and buy Skippy for 20 mill.

[Capt. Pants 4,226]

9 minutes ago, Essjayess said:

May as well join in the fun here. Sell Todd for 40 mill, then why not go out and buy Skippy for 20 mill.

Skipp doesn't want to come here. He's played for Spurs this pre season and made it clear he wants to be part of their first team.

[Bill 1,788]

So the numpty view is that Cantwell alone is capable of keeping us in the PL.

That claim is based on not knowing who else will be signed, who might 'blossom' this season and how well the squad will perform as a whole.

One 'looney tune' thought has that by keeping Cantwell we could stay up, but would then only receive £15m for him. Which, whatever the figure, we would merely be where we are now (if we sell).

A Cantwell less club.