Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 500 of 669

Thread: Matt Targett - Joins Aston Villa (Official)

  1. #451

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chez View Post
    IMO it would be complete and utter madness to select Targett ahead of Bertrand, should that occur.
    Agree with this. Targett has improved, but he’s not great.

  2. Default

    TOP TARGETT Aston Villa eye £10m bid for Southampton left-back Matt Targett as Dean Smith continues transfer spending spree: https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/footb...tt-dean-smith/

  3. #453

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperSAINT View Post
    TOP TARGETT Aston Villa eye £10m bid for Southampton left-back Matt Targett as Dean Smith continues transfer spending spree: https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/footb...tt-dean-smith/
    Interesting that he would be brought in as competition and not the starter - which is exactly what he is here?

    Mings anyone? Personally I thought he looked good when I watched Villa play.

  4. #454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toadhall Saint View Post
    Interesting that he would be brought in as competition and not the starter - which is exactly what he is here?

    Mings anyone? Personally I thought he looked good when I watched Villa play.
    Mings is a Bournemouth player who has been on loan to Villa for last season.

  5. #455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitey Grandad View Post
    Mings is a Bournemouth player who has been on loan to Villa for last season.
    Yep but do you think hcdajfu?

  6. #456

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    17,226

    Default

    Mings is ****e.

  7. #457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benjii View Post
    Mings is ****e.
    Probbaly better than all of our lot tbf.


  8. #459

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    3,136
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Shame we let Mings go tbh.

  9. #460

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    11,503
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benjii View Post
    Mings is ****e.
    He really isn't. We should have signed him when he was at Ipswich, but doubt that he would come back anyway, we did treat him rather shabbily when he was with us as a youngster.

  10. #461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VectisSaint View Post
    He really isn't. We should have signed him when he was at Ipswich, but doubt that he would come back anyway, we did treat him rather shabbily when he was with us as a youngster.

    What makes you think that? I struggle to believe his claim he was released for being to small. He was at the academy at the same time as a lot of tiny players who the club didn't release. I think it is more likely he was deemed at the time to not be good enough and he uses the height story to cover that up.

  11. #462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toadhall Saint View Post
    Yep but do you think hcdajfu?
    Quote Originally Posted by benjii View Post
    Mings is ****e.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saint Garrett View Post
    Probbaly better than all of our lot tbf.
    I think he's probably better than some of what we have but not as good as we should be aiming for. To my mind if he were really good then he wouldn't have been out on loan.

  12. Default

    Depends how well the club rate Vokins and whether they think he is ready to step up and be back up to Bertrand.

  13. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tajjuk View Post
    Depends how well the club rate Vokins and whether they think he is ready to step up and be back up to Bertrand.
    Pretty much what I said too. Hard to sign a ‘Targett replacement’ who’s got real potential to challenge Berty for £10m.

    Vokins stepping up would mean we’d have an extra £10m to put down on a striker or centre-back.

  14. #465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitey Grandad View Post
    I think he's probably better than some of what we have but not as good as we should be aiming for. To my mind if he were really good then he wouldn't have been out on loan.
    Wasn’t the loan because of the injury and that he wasn’t going to get game time at Bournemouth?

  15. #466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperSAINT View Post
    Pretty much what I said too. Hard to sign a ‘Targett replacement’ who’s got real potential to challenge Berty for £10m.

    Vokins stepping up would mean we’d have an extra £10m to put down on a striker or centre-back.
    James Justin would be ideal as can play RB and LB but sounds like he is Leicester bound.

    If only Targett had a right foot he woulf have got so many more appearances in the last couple of years.

  16. #467

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New Forest
    Posts
    5,379

    Default

    Surprised he is still here. Any firm offer we should grab.

  17. #468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toadhall Saint View Post
    Wasn’t the loan because of the injury and that he wasn’t going to get game time at Bournemouth?
    Now you're getting above my pay grade but You're probably right:


    "After joining from Ipswich for an £8million transfer fee in 2015, the centre-back suffered a knee ligament injury on his Cherries debut, which kept him out for more than a year, while he was ruled out for eight months with a back problem last
    season."

    https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sp...ed-his-career/

  18. #469

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusic View Post
    James Justin would be ideal as can play RB and LB but sounds like he is Leicester bound.
    decent shout, although I think he played quite a few games further forward and on the other side. I guess that shows his versatility. The Norwich fullbacks would be the ideal signings in terms of youth and promise, but fat chance of that now they have been promoted.

  19. #470

    Default

    I'm heavily in favour of Voskins coming in if Target is sold. Makes total sense and like SuperSAINT said, we can use the money where its needed. Plus Voskins looks a real prospect.

  20. #471

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    On the frontline in Locks Heath
    Posts
    6,750

    Default

    When I’ve seen Vokins he’s looked very capable of the step up, although perhaps more in a defensive manner rather than as WB.

  21. #472

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Hurworth-On-Tees, nr Darlington
    Posts
    667

    Default

    Surprised no one has mentioned Sam McQueen! If Targett is sold then surely McQueen becomes the automatic reserve left back? That saves Vokins from the pressure of expecting to come in if Betrand is injured but also gives him the incentive to try and challenge McQueen first before he is expected to challenge Bertrand.
    Personally, I have always preferred McQueen to Targett, though I think Targett has shown some promise at times when used in the last couple of years. Admittedly, though, McQueen did start out on the left wing and in the past year or two he seems to have reverted to that position. It remains to be seen how Hassenhuttle sees him and whether he rates him at all.

  22. #473

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SaintJackoInHurworth View Post
    Surprised no one has mentioned Sam McQueen! If Targett is sold then surely McQueen becomes the automatic reserve left back? That saves Vokins from the pressure of expecting to come in if Betrand is injured but also gives him the incentive to try and challenge McQueen first before he is expected to challenge Bertrand.
    Personally, I have always preferred McQueen to Targett, though I think Targett has shown some promise at times when used in the last couple of years. Admittedly, though, McQueen did start out on the left wing and in the past year or two he seems to have reverted to that position. It remains to be seen how Hassenhuttle sees him and whether he rates him at all.
    Good shout - I’d forgotten about Sam.

  23. #474

    Default

    http://bit.ly/2WAKXOL

    Bit of a concern. To think we may have offers over £10m for Matt Targett and then decide not to sell him but to sell Bertrand instead is quite baffling.

    The simple facts:

    1. Targett is a poor PL player who has looked average as a LWB and consistently struggled as a LB due to weaknesses that cannot be improved.

    2. Bertrand is a good PL player, solid defensively with quality going forward.

    Sell Bertrand and we instantly make the first team weaker.

  24. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusic View Post
    http://bit.ly/2WAKXOL

    Bit of a concern. To think we may have offers over £10m for Matt Targett and then decide not to sell him but to sell Bertrand instead is quite baffling.

    The simple facts:

    1. Targett is a poor PL player who has looked average as a LWB and consistently struggled as a LB due to weaknesses that cannot be improved.

    2. Bertrand is a good PL player, solid defensively with quality going forward.

    Sell Bertrand and we instantly make the first team weaker.
    Agree.

    An interesting dilemma. We’ve already discussed the Vokins aspect on here.

    The biggest question from this article is how much would we get IF Berty left? As that (I assume) would go into reinvesting into other positions.

    The article indicates not a huge fee. I think in that case it’s not worth selling him.
    I suppose it all comes down to what Ralph thinks.

    I’ve also always been curious who would want Berty in the top end of the Prem (as everyone is obsessed with young fullbacks now).

  25. Default

    Does Bertrand want to go?

  26. #477

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    In the doghouse...again
    Posts
    2,899

    Default

    With RB being 30 soon and a short contract I doubt we'd get much more for him than Targett who imo isn't quite good enough so selling Targett makes more sense. That said, I think Mcqueen will really suit RH style and him and Vokins is a great prospect too. Something has to give and if we don't get decent offers for Targett I could see RB being moved on as we can't have 4 LB's.

  27. #478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by angelman View Post
    Does Bertrand want to go?
    From stories i heard, he wasn't expected to be here last season. Targett was going to be first choice, McQueen second.

  28. #479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusic View Post
    http://bit.ly/2WAKXOL

    Bit of a concern. To think we may have offers over £10m for Matt Targett and then decide not to sell him but to sell Bertrand instead is quite baffling.

    The simple facts:

    1. Targett is a poor PL player who has looked average as a LWB and consistently struggled as a LB due to weaknesses that cannot be improved.

    2. Bertrand is a good PL player, solid defensively with quality going forward.

    Sell Bertrand and we instantly make the first team weaker.
    Depends if Ralph thinks he can recruit better from Bundesliga or elsewhere.

  29. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Badger View Post
    Depends if Ralph thinks he can recruit better from Bundesliga or elsewhere.
    I *think* the theory is if Berty goes, we wouldn’t recruit another left-back.

  30. #481

    Default Matt Targett

    Sell Matt keep Bertie. I’d rather let Bertie go for nowt in 2 years (and he has been a good servant for us) as we still have McQueen and vokins- one of which could over take Bertie in the 2 years. That gives us money to invest and keeps the experience of Bertie in the team and with competition for his place.

    Win win in my book.

  31. #482

    Default

    If we sell Bertrand we'll lose one of our last genuinely quality players... If we sell Targett we lose a decent squad player.

    Looks like it's goodbye to Bertie then.

  32. #483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Toadhall Saint View Post
    Good shout - I’d forgotten about Sam.
    He’s on the long term injury list.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  33. #484

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Hidden behind enemy lines
    Posts
    11,050

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperSAINT View Post
    I *think* the theory is if Berty goes, we wouldn’t recruit another left-back.
    I flippin' well hope we do. If we don't it leaves us with Valery and Targett as two inexperienced and not all that fantastic full backs with basically nothing in reserve except Vokins and Stephens.

  34. Default

    Unless the fee we get for Bertrand is going to be substantially higher than Targett, like 2x or more, so like £25 million or so, then it seems pointless.

    Its very clear Bertrand is better than Targett, as soon as he was fit he took over the spot and played pretty much every game.

    Plus it does not sound like he wants to leave, whilst Targett wants first team football.

    So to me it seems obvious to keep the better player, have Vokins as his understudy, sell Targett for as much as possible, re-invest that elsewhere and in two years either Bertrand gets a new 1-2 year deal or we let him go cheaply and Vokins is hopefully ready to take over the first team slot.

    As others have said, swapping Bertrand for Targett permanently makes use weaker, and you are then putting a 23 year old in the way of a 19 year old, so Vokins would never have a chance to take the spot unless Targett basically got a lot worse, by which point we'd probably have to buy a replacement.

    The only scenario I can see Bertrand going is if he wants to go OR we get a big offer for him, neither of which seems likely.

  35. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    I flippin' well hope we do. If we don't it leaves us with Valery and Targett as two inexperienced and not all that fantastic full backs with basically nothing in reserve except Vokins and Stephens.
    I have no real issues with Valery being our first choice right back, the speed he has progressed in the last 6 months makes me think a full season next year under Ralph's training and we'll be struggling to hold on to him this time next year.

    I also quite like that we are trying to identify pathways into the first team for our academy players, its looks almost certain that our back up full backs next year are going to be Vokins and Ramsey, and I think that is a good thing.

  36. #487

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Hidden behind enemy lines
    Posts
    11,050

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tajjuk View Post
    I have no real issues with Valery being our first choice right back, the speed he has progressed in the last 6 months makes me think a full season next year under Ralph's training and we'll be struggling to hold on to him this time next year.

    I also quite like that we are trying to identify pathways into the first team for our academy players, its looks almost certain that our back up full backs next year are going to be Vokins and Ramsey, and I think that is a good thing.
    I don't have a problem with Valery being first choice but he is still young, inexperienced and 38 PL games is asking a lot physically and mentally. He will have injuries and patches of poor form, we need the option of resting and rotating him when needed. Ramsay is completely unproven and Stephens is awful as cover options.

    I just don't want to find us with a knock to Valery, playing a back four of Targett, Bednarek, Vestegaard and Ramsay. That's weak, inexperienced and we'd probably end up changing the whole system to enable a back five to cover our frailties.

  37. #488

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saint Fan CaM View Post
    When I’ve seen Vokins he’s looked very capable of the step up, although perhaps more in a defensive manner rather than as WB.
    like the sound of this. Has he got genuine pace?

  38. #489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    I don't have a problem with Valery being first choice but he is still young, inexperienced and 38 PL games is asking a lot physically and mentally. He will have injuries and patches of poor form, we need the option of resting and rotating him when needed. Ramsay is completely unproven and Stephens is awful as cover options.

    I just don't want to find us with a knock to Valery, playing a back four of Targett, Bednarek, Vestegaard and Ramsay. That's weak, inexperienced and we'd probably end up changing the whole system to enable a back five to cover our frailties.
    From what little I have seen of Ramsey looks a little bit of a fish out of water at right back. He looks more of a centre back to me, although I'm not convinced he is ready to do a job their.

  39. #490

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chez View Post
    like the sound of this. Has he got genuine pace?
    Can't say for certain that he's out and out fast - busy is perhaps a better word. I think he's got a touch of Chilwell about him, from what I've seen. Obviously less developed and not at that level yet, but there's something to work with for sure.

    Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

  40. #491

    Default

    selling Bertrand is madness IMO. He is a quality player and at some point you need consider talent on the pitch is more important than figures on the balance sheet.

  41. #492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by qwertyell View Post
    Can't say for certain that he's out and out fast - busy is perhaps a better word. I think he's got a touch of Chilwell about him, from what I've seen. Obviously less developed and not at that level yet, but there's something to work with for sure.

    Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk
    Chilwell looks a proper player to me.
    is he quicker than Target?

    What about built? Is he a big strong lad or more of a wippet type?
    How is he in the air and does he have the first touch for this level?


    The really top class fullbacks and pacey and tremendous judgement on distances, knowing when to jump into the tackle and when to drop off. How is his decision making?

  42. #493

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chez View Post
    Chilwell looks a proper player to me.
    is he quicker than Target?

    What about built? Is he a big strong lad or more of a wippet type?
    How is he in the air and does he have the first touch for this level?


    The really top class fullbacks and pacey and tremendous judgement on distances, knowing when to jump into the tackle and when to drop off. How is his decision making?
    He's not tall - he's about Luke Shaw sized. But minus the Happy Meal addiction.

    Aerially, he's going to have learn to box clever, but that's true of most full backs. They're rarely towering six footers. I imagine adapting to the physical side of first team football will be his first hurdle to overcome.

    Good touch, very willing worker up and down the line. Wouldn't say his delivery stands out as being above and beyond expectation - Targett's always had a lovely cross on him - but he's a nice looking footballer, comfortable on the ball, gets about the pitch, plenty of hustle.

    Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

  43. #494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chez View Post
    selling Bertrand is madness IMO. He is a quality player and at some point you need consider talent on the pitch is more important than figures on the balance sheet.
    This. RB is perfect for a club our size, a quality player but who isn't quite so brilliant that the big boys have taken him off us. Even if he goes for a free in 2 years he's been a great professional, a good buy and served us well. Hopefully he can be convinced to sign an extension.

  44. #495

    Default

    With our system the Wing backs need to be the fittest players on the pitch.
    IMHO Bertrand is not getting forward as much as he used too because he’s not getting any younger.
    That might be your reason why we are listening to offers?

  45. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Munster View Post
    This. RB is perfect for a club our size, a quality player but who isn't quite so brilliant that the big boys have taken him off us. Even if he goes for a free in 2 years he's been a great professional, a good buy and served us well. Hopefully he can be convinced to sign an extension.
    Agreed, say we sell him for £15million, we're basically saying that having him for two years is worth less than that.
    Having said that I seem to have more faith in Targett than most. I won't be too worried either way but if we do sell Bertrand i'd hope that we'd push for £20million.

  46. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    I don't have a problem with Valery being first choice but he is still young, inexperienced and 38 PL games is asking a lot physically and mentally. He will have injuries and patches of poor form, we need the option of resting and rotating him when needed. Ramsay is completely unproven and Stephens is awful as cover options.

    I just don't want to find us with a knock to Valery, playing a back four of Targett, Bednarek, Vestegaard and Ramsay. That's weak, inexperienced and we'd probably end up changing the whole system to enable a back five to cover our frailties.
    Depending on formation JWP actually covered right back/right back decently IMO. I'm not sure I'd necessarily want him playing as RB in a back 4, but I think in a back 5 where wingbacks have a little more defensive cover behind them he did pretty well.

    Quote Originally Posted by qwertyell View Post
    He's not tall - he's about Luke Shaw sized.

    Luke Shaw is big for most full backs, he is 6' 1"

  47. Default

    and Vokins is between 5'7"-5'8"

  48. #499

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    598

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusic View Post
    http://bit.ly/2WAKXOL

    Bit of a concern. To think we may have offers over £10m for Matt Targett and then decide not to sell him but to sell Bertrand instead is quite baffling.

    The simple facts:

    1. Targett is a poor PL player who has looked average as a LWB and consistently struggled as a LB due to weaknesses that cannot be improved.

    2. Bertrand is a good PL player, solid defensively with quality going forward.

    Sell Bertrand and we instantly make the first team weaker.
    Think I'd rather we sold Bertrand while still can. He's 29 and it's probably the last transfer window we'd get a decent fee for him. He's not been as good in the past season or two as he has previously, he's fallen out of the England squad and is a player on the decline.

    I think Targett's improved in the past season or two and he's going in the opposite trajectory. He's a real threat going forwards, with good pace and a quality cross. I'm not sure how you can know any defensive weakness can't be improved? It would be interesting to see the stats over the past couple of seasons for comparisson, I feel as if Targett's done well with assists at least.

    An option I'd quite like to see would be to keep both and possibly try Targett playing ahead of Bertrand as a left winger with them overlapping and covering for each other.

  49. #500

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tajjuk View Post
    Luke Shaw is big for most full backs, he is 6' 1"
    Never in a million years is he 6' 1". Horizontally, perhaps.

    In any case, he was (from memory) of not dissimilar stature to Vokins when he played for us.


    Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •