VillaRoy Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Raul (34 coming on 35) and Van Nisteroy (35 coming on 36) are still doing quite well and playing plenty of games. Klose at Lazio still banging them in too. Could be easily be a good signing. Defiantly more of a risk involved at 32. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Didn't he score against us in the EL a couple of years ago, playing for Hamburg? Almost everyone wanted him then. But then again, I guess a fair few wanted Pires about 5 years ago too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 RvN isn't doing well.. certainly not at malaga, Rondon is ahead of him because he has been that poor. Raul however is different.. even when he turns 36 I think Raul would have something to offer and he has adapted his play as he got older, pure legend. Though I see your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 When fit he's one of the hardest working forwards in the game, arguably Bayern Münchens best player in the CL when they reached the final in 2010. Sadly at 32 he's gettin on a bit but he still got better football brain than any of our current players. Maybe he can bring Darijo Srna and Slaven Bilic with him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 3, 2012 Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2012 He's good, but too old. Short termism isn't going to get us out of the spot we're in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 think it could be a masterstroke signing. good little player but i believe keane will be our number one choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilbertoAVFC Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 He's good, but too old. Short termism isn't going to get us out of the spot we're in. Hmm, what an odd thing to say. If we decided to field a bunch of home-grown players to reduce the wage budget and give us a more "long-termist" approach, you'd be happy that we'd probably end up in (or flirt with) the Championship? Unfortunately, in modern football, the going rate for players with a bit of quality is probably 40/50k a week minimum. Even if we got him for a year or two, it's surely the sort of signing we need to move us in the right direction. I just think it's a bit utopian to pass up the chance of signing a proven player on a free just because he isn't the long-term solution. Football is no longer a long-term thing, as much as we'd both like it to be, otherwise Houllier and McLeish wouldn't have each been in the doghouse after less than six months in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashingqwerty Posted March 3, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted March 3, 2012 gilbertoavfc cant agree with you when looking solely at our own squad (excluding any potential signings). look at each of the high earners or experienced players in the squad: Shay Given - yeah would suffer without him Alan Hutton - dont think we'd notice any difference in defence if we played a youngster, cant see anyone being worse Warnock - again cant see us playing any worse with a youngster in his place Dunne - i think Clark and cuellar are both better than him, i'd keep him but he wouldnt start if the other 2 were fit Collins - i think this guy is awful, he's slow and hasnt any decision making ability and i cant wait to see the back of him Emile Heskey - well i think we all know he offers nothing to the team Petrov - still has something to offer N'Zogbia - if the manager would give him a chance i think he has something to offer Ireland - if the manager would give him a chance i think he has something to offer Gabby - played up front he has lots to offer, but if we're nothing going to play him up front then he should be let go because he isnt a winger Bent - honestly, becuase we are playing so badly i think he's too good for us. he offers nothing to the team other than a goal scoring threat and i dont think we can afford to have a player that does that at the moment so i'd say you could free up a couple of hundred thousand from the wage bill there without changing our performances at all really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilbertoAVFC Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that we shouldn't rule out signing good players purely because of their age - I wasn't really saying anything about players possibly departing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troglodyte Posted March 3, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted March 3, 2012 He'd be a fantastic signing if he could stay fit. Either way, I can't see it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 3, 2012 Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2012 He's good, but too old. Short termism isn't going to get us out of the spot we're in. Hmm, what an odd thing to say. If we decided to field a bunch of home-grown players to reduce the wage budget and give us a more "long-termist" approach, you'd be happy that we'd probably end up in (or flirt with) the Championship? Unfortunately, in modern football, the going rate for players with a bit of quality is probably 40/50k a week minimum. Even if we got him for a year or two, it's surely the sort of signing we need to move us in the right direction. I just think it's a bit utopian to pass up the chance of signing a proven player on a free just because he isn't the long-term solution. Football is no longer a long-term thing, as much as we'd both like it to be, otherwise Houllier and McLeish wouldn't have each been in the doghouse after less than six months in charge. What I'm getting at is that signing Olic for three years at a total cost of maybe £7.5m and absolutely no chance of a return might benefit us a little in the short term as he's capable of helping the team - but in terms of helping the club, we could go out and take a chance at a good young player for maybe £8m worth of transfer fee and £6m of wages over four years and know that even if he didn't quite make the grade we'd get £4-5m of that back. If he succeeded we could maybe bring in £15-20m so that we can get it right next time or god forbid even keep a very good player that could help us go forward. We're not going to win anything in the next few years - for me our priority should be developing a good squad of young exciting players playing the right way and managing the balance sheet by occasionally selling off those that aren't quite up to it. I'd rather be on the right end of a Hutton deal for once. Ilic might help us for a season or two, but he's dead money and in a season or two we'll be right back here. Tottenham have done this and done it well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Ilic would be a good signing on the right deal. One year contract based on appearances with the option for a second year. Anything more than that and i totally agree with OutByEaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilbertoAVFC Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 He's good, but too old. Short termism isn't going to get us out of the spot we're in. Hmm, what an odd thing to say. If we decided to field a bunch of home-grown players to reduce the wage budget and give us a more "long-termist" approach, you'd be happy that we'd probably end up in (or flirt with) the Championship? Unfortunately, in modern football, the going rate for players with a bit of quality is probably 40/50k a week minimum. Even if we got him for a year or two, it's surely the sort of signing we need to move us in the right direction. I just think it's a bit utopian to pass up the chance of signing a proven player on a free just because he isn't the long-term solution. Football is no longer a long-term thing, as much as we'd both like it to be, otherwise Houllier and McLeish wouldn't have each been in the doghouse after less than six months in charge. What I'm getting at is that signing Olic for three years at a total cost of maybe £7.5m and absolutely no chance of a return might benefit us a little in the short term as he's capable of helping the team - but in terms of helping the club, we could go out and take a chance at a good young player for maybe £8m worth of transfer fee and £6m of wages over four years and know that even if he didn't quite make the grade we'd get £4-5m of that back. If he succeeded we could maybe bring in £15-20m so that we can get it right next time or god forbid even keep a very good player that could help us go forward. We're not going to win anything in the next few years - for me our priority should be developing a good squad of young exciting players playing the right way and managing the balance sheet by occasionally selling off those that aren't quite up to it. I'd rather be on the right end of a Hutton deal for once. Ilic might help us for a season or two, but he's dead money and in a season or two we'll be right back here. Tottenham have done this and done it well. I do totally agree, I just don't think we as a club have the right structure to pull off a long-term approach. Our fans, like all nowadays will only settle for near-immediate success - as proven by the flak (rightly or wrongly) both Houllier and McLeish have had. I just think it's idealistic in modern football for a club like Villa to realistically be able to pursue a long-term strategy without sacrificing themselves in the short-term. With Spurs, they brought in good young players yes, but they have always had the money to be able to balance that with a top-quality first team. Their appeal and broader sources of income allow them to do that. We don't have either due to our location, our paltry gate receipts in comparison and the fact we have one sole backer - not to mention (I'd estimate) vastly inferior sponsorship income to Spurs. Somebody like Olic is definitely not the long-term option, but he is the sort of signing that may help to bring us back to somewhere near to where we expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Would be better than Heskey but a 30 + year old on high wages, I really don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 If it did happen could be similar to when we signed Nilis though hopefully not end as bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moorski Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 4years too late! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 How does signing Bosman's help keep the wages down? Keep the transfer fees down yes but wages? Hardly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_The_Villan Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Good player but there are countless other strikers who would be better options Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overdubber Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Sorry, not that good any more, and prone to injuries. Who is going to supply him? Best time was at HSV not Bayern Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pez1974 Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 A rye smile when I read that we sent our scout to watch a player who was on the bench! Probably harsh, and probably bollocks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts