Judas
Open to offers
I think what gives him the edge over Maddison is honestly we're more likely to be able to get him, and he'd be cheaper too most likely.
He’s also a more intelligent player.I think what gives him the edge over Maddison is honestly we're more likely to be able to get him, and he'd be cheaper too most likely.
Turns out you dont decide what is and isnt a fact about footballers.It's a fact mate.
He's certainly not the best at reading the game. But he's good enough to do it for half the teams in the league, just not for us regularly. He misreads and makes mistakes often because of how aggressive he is. When he's at his best and getting most things right its a good quality and he produces a high workload of dealing with opponents attacks successfully. But hes always got that 1 mistake in him where it goes wrong, thats why he isnt good enough to start for us.Jones is totally unable to read a game developing in front of him, oblivious to see danger unfolding.
It's why he is desperately throwing his body in front of the ball to make blocks, giving away fouls and penalties and constantly getting injured, because of his lack of footballing intelligence puts him behind the curve.
You are welcome to the perfect example anytime.
very close in ability, either is a massive upgrade. What I do like about Grealish though is he has become a leader at Villa, something we severely lack at present.I think he’s more nimble and agile than Maddison, better balanced and has better dribbling ability in my opinion. Really hard to see who is more technically skilled but Maddison can spot a through pass better. Not sure who i’ll prefer though
They are very evenly matched but do play a bit differently to each other and I would be happy to have either one on my team.I think Jack would look very good at Manchester especially as he wouldn't have to carry the team like he does at Villa. Having said that either one would be a fit at Man Utd.Who do you think is the better player between him and Maddison? Obviously Grealish is a year older so you have to take that into account but still...
I'm not as confident as you that Jones is good enough to start for half of the teams in the Prem but thats just an opinion.Jones would be great for them. He might not be good enough to start for us but he's good enough to start for half the teams in the league. Villa's defensive record is terrible.
Lingard would be good for a team to invest in because he's played well in the past, so if they could get a resurgence from him he could gain a lot of value and interest
True. But I'm sure we could come to an agreement about that and pay some of it ourselves. Its better than the whole lot and not playing him, or him coming off the bench and having no effect for usI'm not as confident as you that Jones is good enough to start for half of the teams in the Prem but thats just an opinion.
The trouble with taking a chance on Lingard is that he is on big wages already & that cuts out a lot of clubs.
Silvestre had that half a season of excellence in 03/04 where he was somehow one of the best players in the league (and then fell to pieces once Rio got that ban), but otherwise it's fairly close between him and Jones. I'm almost tempted to give Jones the edge as a central defender.Jones isn't fit to lace the boots of either Brown or Silvestre.
Infact, I am struggling to think of a CB of a major club having such a piss poor footballing brain as Jones.
I agree with all that except I think Lingard IS closer to a 10M player than a 20M one as he has strengths but it's tough to highly prize a 27 year old attacker who can't play a through ball and has 6 goals and 5 assists in 63 appearances over last season and this one. He hasn't been shunted out to the wing and he's not a playmaker. He could maybe do well in a 4-2-2-2 counter attacking system like a Leipzig play and end up being worth 20-25M but that's surely absolute best case scenario.I don't hate Lingard, I've been a long time defender of him, in the current market he's certainly more than a £10m player despite his terrible form of late. My point is that Villa are owned by a billionaire and wouldn't sell Grealish unless a) they were offered a ridiculous amount of money or b) Grealish demanded a move. An offer of £25-30m plus Lingard would simply be nowhere near Villas valuation of the player, unlike Maddison at Leicester he isn't just a player in their system, he's their leader both on and off the pitch & is effectively the face of the club, it would take crazy money while they're still a Premier League club.
And what do you think of 40M + Lingard on loan for the rest of the season with a option of buy?I agree with all that except I think Lingard IS closer to a 10M player than a 20M one as he has strengths but it's tough to highly prize a 27 year old attacker who can't play a through ball and has 6 goals and 5 assists in 63 appearances over last season and this one. He hasn't been shunted out to the wing and he's not a playmaker. He could maybe do well in a 4-2-2-2 counter attacking system like a Leipzig play and end up being worth 20-25M but that's surely absolute best case scenario.
Think of it this way. Lingard for 18M would make him the 2nd highest fee (behind Maddison) a championship (not relegated from Prem) club has gotten for a player. Would you rather have a younger player like Kalvin Phillips (24, DMs age well), Mitrovic (25 young for a target man) or Bowen (22) or sign Lingard, also have to pay him a higher wage?
If I was Villa I'd risk Lingard for 10M with or without Grealish, but 20M seems way too much.
I believe most players have relegation clauses in their contracts / take pay cuts and stuff if they go down.He is one player I just don’t understand why we are not chasing (we may be but I’m guessing not).
He would instantly be our best option in the #10 role. He is a long term option that could be a world beater.
It could be a tough transfer to get done but I think he would come to us this month and you would have to fancy us to be pretty lethal up front with his supply.
I live in hope....
How so? Bruno fits very well imo but what makes Grealigh a better fit? I could see both coming in tbh.Think Grealish fits Ole's and United's profile more than Bruno Fernandes.
Probably due to age,experience in the PL,looks more adaptable in his role and possibly a cheaper option too if/when Villa get relegated.How so? Bruno fits very well imo but what makes Grealigh a better fit? I could see both coming in tbh.
They are similar in age and price i don't think is to much of a consideration provided they are the right player. The PL experience i agree with.Probably due to age,experience in the PL,looks more adaptable in his role and possibly a cheaper option too if/when Villa get relegated.
The elements Grealish and Bruno do have in-common are leadership experience,composure in the final third,set-piece skills and ,by all accounts, both seemingly open to join us.
Staying in the PL is worth more money than any transfer fee, if they want any chance of staying in this league they won't sell him in January. Also don't think he would push for a move and leave them in the lurch.Maybe Villa will give him the move if they think the Bruno Fernandes deal is going to happen and they might lose the biggest payday as we will no doubt be good for £10M more than any other interested club.
Would he cost alot? Villa need the money for FFP, they could get relegated and it doesn't look as if any other big teams are after him?He's an absolute no brainer of a signing for me... would cost a bomb but then so do any young English players... at least he'll be worth it.
I would have figured £50-60m .... which seems like a lot, but actually probably isn't really these days.Would he cost alot? Villa need the money for FFP, they could get relegated and it doesn't look as if any other big teams are after him?
I am sure a deal for 45m can be done here.
I think that is the going rate for an English player, the only thing now is the media might drive his price up by having comparisons with Maddison and what not.I would have figured £50-60m .... which seems like a lot, but actually probably isn't really these days.
Depends on if they stay up or not. There's no way they can demand that if they get relegated.I'd be surprised if costs under £70m. I think Villa will want Maddison-level money.
He said he wants to play as an 8, not a 10, so he still could be on the cards as a Pogba replacement.Maybe Villa will give him the move if they think the Bruno Fernandes deal is going to happen and they might lose the biggest payday as we will no doubt be good for £10M more than any other interested club.
Bruno and Grealish can play like KdB and Silva. What we would then need another signing for Fernandinho role, although when fit McT can easily be slotted there.I think that is the going rate for an English player, the only thing now is the media might drive his price up by having comparisons with Maddison and what not.
The only thing is if we sign Bruno, where do we fit Grealish as a starter?
I dont know if that is too open, we have definitely not got the coaching set up for that. The teams needs to be well drilled in order for that setup to work. If that is the case wouldn'y Maddison suit the role more than Grealish?Bruno and Grealish can play like KdB and Silva. What we would then need another signing for Fernandinho role, although when fit McT can easily be slotted there.
We absolutely should be playing with two attacking midfielders if we setup in 4-3-3. That's the only way to dominate teams. Only maybe against other big teams we need to include an extra defensive midfielder like Fred. Having said that, two attacking midfielders can only work if your team's playing style is possession based. If we keep the ball 60-70% of the game, we can suffocate other teams with the right creative players. On the other hand if we lose possession too often, it leaves us exposed without that extra defensive midfielder.Bruno and Grealish can play like KdB and Silva. What we would then need another signing for Fernandinho role, although when fit McT can easily be slotted there.