Jump to content

Summer Transfer Window 2021


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, SuperSAINT said:

Especially when they are just about to get £100m.

I agree. If City are willing to pay 100m for Grealish, then why should we just roll over and accept anything less than 45m? Of course JWP and Grealish are different types of player, but the fact we are looking at is their value to the respective clubs. Grealish is Villa's main man, and in many respects JWP is our main man. If other clubs want main players from other teams, then the buying club should expect to pay over the odds. We sold Mane short, we simply cannot afford to make the same mistake with JWP. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly a lot of people who don't watch Sancho, he's a lot better than Grealish IMO and has the pedigree to back that up, just look at the numbers, performing regularly at the highest level, whereas Grealish has had one good PL season basically. Grealish is good but has to be the most over rated player in the league right now, I don't get the fuss. 

But also extremely weird that on one hand people will accept the Grealish fee and then at the same time think expecting over £50 million for JWP is far too much, shows how stupidly our fans under rated players. Grealish simply is not that much better than JWP and honestly I think he'll flop at City, he's not better than Sterling, Mahrez and personally I think Bernardo Silva will come good as well. 

As for people using Varane as a comparison, not a valid comparison. Varane only had a year on his deal, Real are struggling financially (and Varane had HUGE wages) plus Varane has injury issues.

Edited by tajjuk
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

All the JWP haters and yes there are plenty among our fan base can do one. The lad is not going to Villa and has no interest in going them. In this ridiculous market if Grealish is worth £100 mill then JWP is worth north of £50 mill every day of the week.

Villa are losing Grealish to City and are rightly making sure their fanbase can see them being interested in quality replacements EVEN if they have no chance of obtaining some of the players they are being linked with. I'm sure they would like JWP if they could get him for peanuts, hence the derisory offer, but i'm sure they know Saints are not selling and JWP is not interested , it's all a PR exercise.......one i'm sure Saints themselves have deployed many times "look we tried but it became very difficult"

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

Clearly a lot of people who don't watch Sancho, he's a lot better than Grealish IMO and has the pedigree to back that up, just look at the numbers, performing regularly at the highest level, whereas Grealish has had one good PL season basically. Grealish is good but has to be the most over rated player in the league right now, I don't get the fuss. 

But also extremely weird that on one hand people will accept the Grealish fee and then at the same time think expecting over £50 million for JWP is far too much, shows how stupidly our fans under rated players. Grealish simply is not that much better than JWP and honestly I think he'll flop at City, he's not better than Sterling, Mahrez and personally I think Bernardo Silva will come good as well. 

As for people using Varane as a comparison, not a valid comparison. Varane only had a year on his deal, Real are struggling financially (and Varane had HUGE wages) plus Varane has injury issues.

Grealish has had more than one good season in the PL, he pretty much single handedly kept them up the season before last. He is a fantastic player which is backed up by the stats. Sancho is a different type of player anyway and was very good at Dortmund, but is totally unproven in the PL and has failed to impress for England so far.

As with everything in life if you want something that isn't for sale you have to pay over the odds, Grealish is hugely important to Villa so they have every right to demand £100m or no sale, especially as they are financially well off. Just as we won't (or shouldn't) sell JWP for less than £50m. He's part of the fabric at Saints, our captain and contributes goals and assists and is coming towards the prime of his career. With four years left on his contract, if we sell it's on our terms.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, BARCELONASAINT said:

All the JWP haters and yes there are plenty among our fan base can do one. The lad is not going to Villa and has no interest in going them. In this ridiculous market if Grealish is worth £100 mill then JWP is worth north of £50 mill every day of the week.

Villa are losing Grealish to City and are rightly making sure their fanbase can see them being interested in quality replacements EVEN if they have no chance of obtaining some of the players they are being linked with. I'm sure they would like JWP if they could get him for peanuts, hence the derisory offer, but i'm sure they know Saints are not selling and JWP is not interested , it's all a PR exercise.......one i'm sure Saints themselves have deployed many times "look we tried but it became very difficult"

They've just signed Buendia and Bailey, both players would immediately improve our starting 11. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great player a few years ago, has lost his way but is still young enough to come back to form with the right club and coaching.

44 minutes ago, Wimborne_saint said:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

Hmmm Cahill out of contract , can head the ball and experienced , no fee , …..

Palace have sent £35m on two new centre backs. There is probably a reason for that. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Chez said:

Palace have sent £35m on two new centre backs. There is probably a reason for that. 

They wanted to keep Cahill by the sounds of it but for his big wage demands

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of our former targets, Olivier Ntcham, is available on a freebie. His Celtic contract has come to an end and Marseille didn't take up the chance to sign him.

Wonder if we're still interested?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Villa ‘undeterred’ apparently and will make second bid. If 30 mill we should still say no. Gut feeling is he’ll go though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Long time apparent Saints target...

 

I'd take him. Nothing special but as a 4th CM could do a job and we can focus on different areas of the pitch

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Saint Matty 76 said:

Ntcham seems a bit of a no brainer given our previous interest and the wages he was on at Celtic. I'm sure he'd have better options than being our 4th choice CM though.

JWP replacement?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DT said:

Villa ‘undeterred’ apparently and will make second bid. If 30 mill we should still say no. Gut feeling is he’ll go though. 

You are Marvin the paranoid android and I claim my five pounds.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, tajjuk said:

The things said on here, Villa are not a Leicester and Grealish is not worth £65 million more than what JWP is.  

Grealish is nowhere nowhere nowhere near what City are reportedly paying, Sancho is a better player than Grealish AND is four years younger, and for some weird reason City are paying like £30 million more than what Utd paid. IF it's actually true and goes through then IMO it will be the most baffling transfer in history and one of the most gross overpays ever.  This is a guy who can't get a start for England and was playing Championship football 2 years ago where the only people vaguely interested were Spurs who put in half hearted bids for him.

£100 million is what you pay for ballon dor winners, not a good winger from a mid table PL club.

 

Also still waiting for someone to show me proof we have spent the loan that people are claiming we need to pay back. 

If he played for us you’d be creaming yourself 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Saint Matty 76 said:

Ntcham seems a bit of a no brainer given our previous interest and the wages he was on at Celtic. I'm sure he'd have better options than being our 4th choice CM though.

He was utter shit at Marseille who weren t impressed by his professionalism. We should stay well away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

It wasn't really 'getting rid', Hasenhuttl has stated he wanted to keep Lemina.

That’s open to interpretation though. It could mean we wanted to keep him but his attitude was such that we felt compelled to get rid of him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

It wasn't really 'getting rid', Hasenhuttl has stated he wanted to keep Lemina.

Would imagine it was a case of working with what we had due to limited funds, as opposed to actively deciding to bring someone like that in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Wade Garrett said:

Great player a few years ago, has lost his way but is still young enough to come back to form with the right club and coaching.

 

Injury prone, a shadow of himself since rupturing his Achilles, and the antithesis of a Hasenhuttl player - he's a stroller who doesn't work out of possession.

Fulham's fans reckoned he was the worst player on the team by a mile last season.

26 in January. He's not going to live up to his potential. Not even close.

Edited by qwertyell
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, qwertyell said:

Injury prone, a shadow of himself since rupturing his Achilles, and the antithesis of a Hasenhuttl player - he's a stroller who doesn't work out of possession.

Fulham's fans reckoned he was the worst player on the team by a mile last season.

26 in January. He's not going to live up to his potential. Not even close.

Listening to TalkSport in the car earlier, they said he was the best player on the pitch today in Chelsea’s friendly.

 

I think he’d be a decent signing for a club our size, but only as a transfer. Then if he does achieve his potential, we benefit from it. Sadly he seems a player that is always close to injury, although Ings proved bad injuries aren’t necessarily the death knell of footballers they used to be. Not to mention I doubt we could afford him anyway, Ntcham on a free seems the more likely of the two.

On another topic, Ralph says we have enough options in attack now. While I disagree, it is something that can be pushed to January, especially if we keep Ings and if he plans to use Elyounoussi. He wants to concentrate on defensive signings. Hopefully that’s another left back, a centre back and a DM.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

Listening to TalkSport in the car earlier, they said he was the best player on the pitch today in Chelsea’s friendly.

 

I think he’d be a decent signing for a club our size, but only as a transfer. Then if he does achieve his potential, we benefit from it. Sadly he seems a player that is always close to injury, although Ings proved bad injuries aren’t necessarily the death knell of footballers they used to be. Not to mention I doubt we could afford him anyway, Ntcham on a free seems the more likely of the two.

On another topic, Ralph says we have enough options in attack now. While I disagree, it is something that can be pushed to January, especially if we keep Ings and if he plans to use Elyounoussi. He wants to concentrate on defensive signings. Hopefully that’s another left back, a centre back and a DM.

 

 

 

Quite right too, as we have been defensively shite for the last three seasons. Shame a GK won’t form part of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

Listening to TalkSport in the car earlier, they said he was the best player on the pitch today in Chelsea’s friendly.

 

I think he’d be a decent signing for a club our size, but only as a transfer. Then if he does achieve his potential, we benefit from it. Sadly he seems a player that is always close to injury, although Ings proved bad injuries aren’t necessarily the death knell of footballers they used to be. Not to mention I doubt we could afford him anyway, Ntcham on a free seems the more likely of the two.

On another topic, Ralph says we have enough options in attack now. While I disagree, it is something that can be pushed to January, especially if we keep Ings and if he plans to use Elyounoussi. He wants to concentrate on defensive signings. Hopefully that’s another left back, a centre back and a DM.

 

 

 

So why if he thinks we are ok upfront why bid for Armstrong? He has either changed his mind, is telling fibs or doesn’t know his arse from his elbow. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Saint_lambden said:

Still find it astonishing that signing a GK isn't seen as a priority. Neither of them are good enough and it'll cost us points this season. 

Unfortunately it'll be because they're two of our higher earners and they're both too shite to be wanted by another club. Ideal situation would've been selling Frase to Celtic last Summer but I don't think he wanted to go there. 

I imagine we're stuck with this pairing until next season where Forster goes on a free and we try to bring in a new starter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fitzhugh Fella said:

So why if he thinks we are ok upfront why bid for Armstrong? He has either changed his mind, is telling fibs or doesn’t know his arse from his elbow. 

Because I think it’s pretty obvious it’s for if/when Ings leaves.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fitzhugh Fella said:

So why if he thinks we are ok upfront why bid for Armstrong? He has either changed his mind, is telling fibs or doesn’t know his arse from his elbow. 

Or another option that you left out... Armstrong is the back-up plan and they want a deal in place and ready to go if Ings leaves.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SNSUN said:

Listening to TalkSport in the car earlier, they said he was the best player on the pitch today in Chelsea’s friendly.

 

I think he’d be a decent signing for a club our size, but only as a transfer. Then if he does achieve his potential, we benefit from it. Sadly he seems a player that is always close to injury, although Ings proved bad injuries aren’t necessarily the death knell of footballers they used to be. Not to mention I doubt we could afford him anyway, Ntcham on a free seems the more likely of the two.

On another topic, Ralph says we have enough options in attack now. While I disagree, it is something that can be pushed to January, especially if we keep Ings and if he plans to use Elyounoussi. He wants to concentrate on defensive signings. Hopefully that’s another left back, a centre back and a DM.

 

 

 

Anyone else stop reading that post after the first 3 words?

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, tajjuk said:

Clearly a lot of people who don't watch Sancho, he's a lot better than Grealish IMO and has the pedigree to back that up, just look at the numbers, performing regularly at the highest level, whereas Grealish has had one good PL season basically. Grealish is good but has to be the most over rated player in the league right now, I don't get the fuss. 

But also extremely weird that on one hand people will accept the Grealish fee and then at the same time think expecting over £50 million for JWP is far too much, shows how stupidly our fans under rated players. Grealish simply is not that much better than JWP and honestly I think he'll flop at City, he's not better than Sterling, Mahrez and personally I think Bernardo Silva will come good as well. 

As for people using Varane as a comparison, not a valid comparison. Varane only had a year on his deal, Real are struggling financially (and Varane had HUGE wages) plus Varane has injury issues.

I don't think there is an awful lot of difference in value between Grealish and Sancho.

Right now, for me, the key point is that you aren't tackling Grealish without giving away a foul 🤷‍♂️ - and on top of that he is a very competent attacking player - creativity, final product, dribbling, positioning etc. But its the mere fact that he's a walking free kick machine that adds so much to a team's play - opponents are scared to tackle him, his presence on the ball just builds pressure, and there is a very good chance he'll either directly create something or win you a direct/indirect free kick in a dangerous area. In the same way that Wilkinson added drop goals to England's rugby world cup team, Grealish adds a comparable tactical balance to the teams he plays for imo.

Edited by Saint86
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

I don't think there is an awful lot of difference in value between Grealish and Sancho.

Right now, for me, the key point is that you aren't tackling Grealish without giving away a foul 🤷‍♂️ - and on top of that he is a very competent attacking player - creativity, final product, dribbling, positioning etc. But its the mere fact that he's a walking free kick machine that adds so much to a team's play - opponents are scared to tackle him, his presence on the ball just builds pressure, and there is a very good chance he'll either directly create something or win you a direct/indirect free kick in a dangerous area. In the same way that Wilkinson added drop goals to England's rugby world cup team, Grealish adds a comparable tactical balance to the teams he plays for imo.

I hope you’re not saying that a player can be of use primarily because he wins set pieces. Next you’ll be saying players should also be picked because they’re good at taking them 🤔🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})