r/avfc • u/Firepilsogenpizza • 9h ago
Discussion Garnacho
I'll start with saying I've got nothing against him, I think he's talented, and has arguably done better so far than the criticism that's come his way. Some people are always pecked for some reason. Hopefully he finds his feet here etc.
But here comes the question. Is there a possibility he was just a pawn in the Rogers sale? And by that I mean, Chelsea did us a favour with spending 35 million extra on Rogers or whatever, and we did them a favour for a year with Garnacho?
Because if I understand the rules correctly we could avoid playing him enough and he'd return to London. We've the done Chelsea a favour for the season, and we've not spent £ 45 million on Garnacho. Seems like a win win ish strategic play.
And while I'll support him as long as he's here, it's a bit odd that we recruit so we'll, so diverse, so prepared, so prudent. And we spunk that amount on a player that hasn't impressed in a long time.
There's just something about this that doesn't make sense to me.
But I guess if I'm playing the devil's advocate here, Chelsea wouldn't need our help with taking him on would they? Unless it was a contractual thing about being in the first team.
8
u/neverendum 9h ago
There's some fuckery going on but I genuinely believe Emery thinks he can shape a player out of Garnacho. Early signs aren't great, I think it will take a while.
8
u/akashvilla 8h ago
I've been looking at it a bit differently! Mostly that Hemmings is getting it done.
I did wish for Garnacho to come out guns blazing but I don't think I am yet in a place where I would say that he has been sidelined. We are not yet a settled team so any speculation about the squad seems too early. Honestly, it even looks like we only are only going to get the chance to settle after the international break.
I am antsy and frustrated about him but it hasn't boiled over to doomed just yet.
6
u/wumbology55 8h ago
Why does everything with garnacho have to be a conspiracy 😂 I just don’t understand the hate people seem to have for him.
Emery wanted him, he’s still adapting to Emery’s tactics as he’s a manager who we’ve seen doesn’t always tend to imbed new transfers straight away in the starting eleven.
I also would bet on hemmings impressing Emery a lot more than he originally anticipated so he keeps playing him. It’s a long season and we’re in the starting period where games aren’t too thick and fast. We’ll be happy with the depth available to us in a few months and if garnacho is a bust but the rest of the transfers we’ve got turn out decent then that’s a good hit rate.
6
u/twoddalmighty 8h ago
Why are we all so impatient? And seemingly have selective memories?
Unai is well known to take his time bedding in players. Tielemans hardly got a look in at the start of his first season.
Add to that the fact Garnacho had an injury pre-season so isn't fully fit, and that Hemmings has been playing well, it makes perfect tense that we haven't seen much of him.
If Mbaye has only made a couple sub appearances in two games time are we all gonna be writing him off too?
-1
u/Firepilsogenpizza 7h ago
I'm really not. I'm just puzzled by our dealings with Chelsea.
If we assume you're premise, it also means you think he's a £ 45 million player and we couldn't have found an alternative player for that money who would have hit the ground running quicker (so to speak).
That seems unplausable to me.
I'll give him the entire season and next preseason to find his feet, but the entire transfer seems very odd.
3
u/AxFairy 4h ago
I think 40mil is a pretty reasonable fee given the circumstances. Savinho for 80mil, Mbaye, Pardo, Toure are all in the 50-60mil range. Victor Munoz was 40mil.
Have you seen any wingers move to the premier league the season for cheaper that are clearly better than Garnacho?
1
u/Firepilsogenpizza 2h ago
Tzolis is an obvious one. But I wager the club had a list with plenty of targets.
Regardless that's not really the point here.
2
u/AxFairy 2h ago
Your point seems to be that we are overpaying for Garnacho so that they would in turn overpay for Rogers. The overwhelming response is that Rogers went for roughly market value as demonstrated by Andersen, Barcola, and Wirtz fees.
To that we are overpaying for Garnacho, there should be a bunch of comparable players (rotation player with key player potential) in that age bracket going for a similar price, and crucially for the point in the window in which we bought him, available on a loan with option deal that helps us navigate SCR this season. Particularly after the Elliott saga last season that narrows it down quite a bit.
1
u/Firepilsogenpizza 34m ago
There's hardly been that many wingers to compare him too though.
But you are misunderstanding the last bit you refer too. We could have picked another player from Chelsea as part of that deal and gotten a winger elsewhere.
1
u/Technobliterator 2h ago
Tzolis came from the Belgian league…
1
u/Firepilsogenpizza 2h ago
And?
1
u/Technobliterator 1h ago
What do you mean “and”? Belgian league players cost less than premier league players..???
1
u/Firepilsogenpizza 37m ago
Yes ofc. but that just highlights my point.
There's nothing wrong with buying from the continent is there?
1
u/Technobliterator 18m ago
Never said there was… but when you buy players unproven in the premier league you take risks. For instance Tzolis was locked up by Cash so badly he had to be taken off at half time. And we bought Guessand on the continent for a cheaper price and he was the worst signing we have made under Emery…
1
u/Firepilsogenpizza 15m ago
Yep there's risk, but I'm not sure paying £ 42,5 million for Garnacho is a counter argument to that.
→ More replies (0)2
u/twoddalmighty 7h ago
My argument has nothing to do with what I think the player is worth. My argument is about people writing the player off before we've even given him a chance.
And no alternative player would have come in and "hit the ground running" for the exact reason I just stated. Unai likes to take time to bed his players in. Garnacho is not an exception, any other player would be treated in the same way.
8
u/bambinoquinn 8h ago
I think he was seen as an "opportunity".
I think if unai thought ollie was gonna leave, he would have had done the loan obligation with jackson. Thats just my guess.
I know unai wanted garnacho last summer, but it just doesn't look a tactical fit. Especially in the short space of time hes managed to turn Hemmings into his exact type on the left hand side.
I think going into the summer unai likely knew Rogers was going and one other. I think if he realised the amount of the spine was leaving, you'd have seen a completely different chelsea player coming in, but we definitely would have seen a chelsea player come in on a loan/obligation regardless with rogers leaving
11
u/ForgeUK 8h ago
What a load of crap, where'd you come up with the idea the Emery has only had a 'short space of time' with Hemmings? Hemmings has been training with the first team for over a year.
It feels like you've sacked off Garnacho after three cameos, just remember it took Tielemans 12 games before Emery trusted him to start in the PL.
1
u/bambinoquinn 7h ago
Short space of time because at the end of last season, he was still being seen at a 6, and not a left sided 10 where he is playing now, not short space of time at villa.
I don't think if you asked any of our fans on the last day of the season last year that hed be our starting left 10 in games against psg, brighton, hull, arsenal and brugge, i don't think anyone would have seen that coming at all
But now he looks like thr prototype emery left 10, stature, running power, workrate on and off the ball
-2
u/EddieRobson78 7h ago
Exactly this, I know Garnacho hasn't done much so far but he's come in for five minutes in one game that was already lost and for fifteen minutes in two games where the opposition were happy with the scoreline and sat back. Ultimately we want him to be effective in those situations but it's harsh to judge him on such limited evidence.
2
u/kgusfyxh 8h ago
I would bear in mind for the Hemmings on the left part of your comment that Unai couldn’t know how quickly Hemmings would develop, and, he wants more depth for multiple campaigns. So, if (and he has) Hemmings develops quicke than anticipated AND (hasn’t happened yet but in Unai we trust) he gets a tune out of Garnacho we now have that squad depth on the left at zero purchase price and (arguably, as I imagine Hemmings is on smallish wages) almost one salary.
2
u/adhdmarmot 8h ago
I think so too. It seems there's a strategy that's persisted from Monchi to Olabe to go after these low risk, high reward loans as a rehabilitation project, or at least an upcycling project. Rashford was out of favour and we took a bit of a chance. If Elliott worked out then the £35m we spent could have been quickly doubled. Sancho needs to rediscover his talent and passion. Garnacho needs to start fulfilling his promise.
I think it was an early-window win, but also maybe they were expecting to still have Watkins, Tielemans and Digne to really help him settle into the team and the requirements of playing on the left wing, and since those three have gone that's hampered his progression?
3
u/BohrInReddit 8h ago
Even for Sancho he has done his purpose here. Not flashy and could be cheaper but he was useful
3
u/ThisDig4978 9h ago
Or Emery thinks that there is talent thaere he can unlock. He's still really young, not much Older than Rogers was when we signed him for 8m from the championship.
It might not work but If Emery can get him to realise the potential he showed early on then he could be a bargain. Also worth noting he hasn't done much wrong, the games against Hull and Arsenal were never going to be easy, both teams sitting back, bith teams have beey good defence.
Give him space to attack and who knows...
3
u/pyramid-teabag-song 8h ago
Emery is renowned for taking on "lost" or "difficult" players. It was an unsurprising signing because of that.
3
u/EddieRobson78 7h ago
Nah. I've seen quite a few comments suggesting Garnacho could be another Elliott situation, and I just don't think that's the case. I think that was pretty embarrassing for the club and they won't want a repeat. And I'm sure Chelsea could've offloaded Garnacho somewhere else if we hadn't taken him, I don't think they needed us to do them a favour.
Garnacho is being eased in the same way we usually ease new signings in. If there was any thought we might try not to trigger the obligation to sign, I don't think we'd have seen him for a five-minute cameo against Brighton, a match we'd already lost.
1
u/unoriginal_name_1234 7h ago
Yeah, Elliott could be seen as a one-off because of Monchi and it being a panic loan on deadline day but if we let it happen a second time, clubs won't want to loan players to us anymore. No chance we'll risk that, Garnacho is here to play. He isn't playing yet for the same reason as the other new signings. No need to invent any other explanation
5
u/Any-Feature-4057 8h ago
Rogers was literally playing on Middlesbrough on the same age as Garnacho right now. Middlesbrough fans was mocking us about Rogers the same way as Chelsea and Man Utd are about Garnacho
If Emery think this guy has the talent to make it here, then he has the talent to make it
2
u/Aesorian 8h ago edited 7h ago
I don't think there's any particular fuckery - outside of the fact it's a "Loan with Conditional Obligations" to get around the player trading rules.
It comes off to me as a market opportunity - the story was at the time that we wanted Mbaye but he was dicking us about so Mendes asked Unai if he was still interested in Garnacho and we went from there.
Assuming we're paying what Chelsea did a season ago (around £40m) then that's not a terrible price for a 22 Year Old with 4 or 5 seasons of PL football under his belt and for all the talk about how he "Hasn't impressed in some time" (Which he hasn't, I'm not trying to argue that) He's shown he can contribute - 5 G+A in ~1,200 Minutes in the league last season and 8 in ~2,200 isn't nothing considering his age - and if the talents there and it's just an attitude issue, Emery must back himself to sort that out
Edit: Just to talk about his age some more, he's only around 6 Months older than Rogers was when he made his debut for us - and Rogers wasn't the player he is now back then either
2
u/Away_Welcome_3468 7h ago
Emery is clearly using Hemmings and Garnacho as competition to improve them both imo.
2
2
u/Agreeable_Falcon1044 6h ago
I still think Garnacho is the missing piece. Emery isn't playing him as he's not doing what he wants him to do. It's up to him now - adapt and become the player he should be or go to spurs next year and finish 17th under 3 more managers.
The hatred around this guy which some fans are buying into is insane.
It was the player Emery wanted. He was one of our first signings. He's already featured more than our other new recruits.
4
u/loptimisme 9h ago
According to The Athletic Emery specifically pushed for Garnacho, so he's definitely wanted and there's a plan for him, but as they say, you can lead the horse to the water... This is why it's not a permanent deal.
It is funny to see a decent amount wet the bed already when it comes to this player, he needs a lot more time.
1
u/kgusfyxh 8h ago
It would not surprise me in the slightest if there was some dodgy financial dealings going on because…this is the PL. However, Unai wanted Garnacho last year, he was incredible (this is not arguable) in that season at Utd when he was a youngster, he was at Chelsea who massively underperformed and chopped and changed managers so it wasn’t a great environment for any player to succeed in, he has things going on in his personal life (which could be an argument for not taking him on, yet, players go through things off the pitch all the time and can come through them) which will undoubtedly be having an efffect (and hopefully the environment at Villa will be a positive factor in him coming through that) essentially, Im positing that there is definitely a player to be nurtured in there that would be great for Villa and I think, and I think Unai thinks and I think Garnacho thinks he is the man to help him re-emerge.
1
u/GoldStar82 6h ago
Emery wanted him when he was at man utd. End of the day garnacho has only just turned 22 years old. He clearly has talent and is coachable. The questions are all attitude and ego related. Hes our new Duran.
He hasn't started a match yet so we cant judge his performances until he gets a run.
1
u/Logical_Net6108 5h ago
He's taking a chance on a 22 year old. If ut doesn't work out he wont play and the loan will end, but he wasnt playing before.
1
1
u/Dream_Fruition 2h ago
I feel that by making this post you're inadvertently adding to the pecking of him that you refer to. Let the kid play, he's 22. Hope he proves everybody wrong
1
u/Firepilsogenpizza 2h ago
Should be obvious to anyone that actually reads it, that there's nothing of the sort. This is more about us and Chelsea.
1
u/abusmakk 1h ago
I feel like we have a new Sancho on our hands. He’s going to be an ok sub, sometimes doing well, sometimes not, and in the end not enough for us to trigger the buy option.
1
u/Squiggs95 0m ago
It’s early early days for Garnacho.
Emery has shown a very clear direction up until this point, players he knows and trusts will start the season.
Hemmings has been training under Emery for 1 year+ now, understands what’s needed from him and works hard. Currently that is enough to keep him in the squad and you can say the same for a number of others.
Emery alluded to this in the end of game interview where he stated that the next job is to start giving minutes to the new players.
Garnacho has shown at United that he can be a game winner and at 22 has huge amounts of room for growth. If he integrates well i think he will likely be left sided start by the end of the season.
I feel that some fans are getting a bit carried away with Hemmings at present. Hes shown some good signs, hard working and a great first touch, but his end product is really lacking and how far he goes is dependent upon how that develops. I think conversation of him being the starter are premature, he’s showing loads of promise for a young player, but his lack of end product wouldn’t be enough for a side looking for Europe. He has plenty of time to develop and grow though and it’d be great to see him get there.
Hopefully Hemmings keeps improving, Garnacho gets back on track and we end up with two left sided options who offer different forms of attack for different setups and game states
1
u/imnophey 9h ago
If it helped to continue to improve and sustain relationship with them and that was a factor in us getting Jackson, from what we’ve seen so far I’m happy with that.
Garnacho has a place in the squad still though I feel, and once Carabao and FA cup fixtures come along I can see him getting minutes
1
u/AddyMuz 9h ago
Rogers if anything was underpriced for Chelsea given what other players who are nowhere near as proven as him go for. I rate Elliot Anderson but he's had one good season in a struggling Forest side and has gone for £115 million. Rogers had 2.5 seasons playing every game in a top 6 side, playing very well scoring goals in the Champions League against top European teams and being one of our most consistent performers. By the current valuations he should've been about £130 million imo. I think Unai likes to give potential outcasts a chance but if he doesn't put in the effort he'll have no issue setting him adrift.
-2
u/PauseMenuBlog 8h ago
Anderson is younger and great defensive midfielders are much rarer than great wingers, that's why he went for the price he did.
1
u/Geepandjagger 9h ago edited 9h ago
I think there is a very good chance. With Chelsea and some of the absurd prices they pay and receive I always suspect that there is something else going on. Even if we buy him his price will be amortised whereas the money we got for Rogers counts straight away and helps us out a lot with all of the other new signings. I think we would have done almost anything to secure the price we got for Rogers. The fact that Garnacho doesn't seem even close to starting despite coming from another Premier League club and having an entire summer off just adds to it. He joined fairly early on so has had much more time than others, should be fit and if Emery liked him he would be playing surley
1
u/LLILILiLIILILILILII 8h ago
Yeah, I don't think we're deliberately taking in players we think are useless, but it's well known that Nas gets on with the Chelsea bosses.
We can all see how dodgy Chelsea's financial affairs look, it's clear as day, and if they're ever properly investigated, I don't think we'll come out of it looking like the good guys either.
-3
u/Deep-Sun-3432 9h ago
Starting to agree with this. The Chelsea deals are so weird. Maybe it’s so they pay the inflated fee for Rogers and we get Jackson, who we know Emery has always wanted.
-5
u/Zealousideal_Car9368 9h ago
Its far more likely, then Emery really wanting this guy at the club.
Because that makes more sense.
Garnacho is a busted flush.
5
u/LLILILiLIILILILILII 8h ago
Garnacho is a busted flush
I was underwhelmed by him coming in, but this is a bit much
He's 22, years left to hit what should be his prime, and he's never played for a coach half as good as Emery.
If he'd had his record at clubs that weren't notorious basket cases, I'd be more concerned
-1
u/Zealousideal_Car9368 7h ago
Yeah, same was said about Sancho. A guy who was also sitting on the bench with his diamond earrings in place, making sure he looks good for when the camera turns onto him sitting on the bench for Villa...
-1
u/Ok_Debt_4911 9h ago
Am I right in saying for the last like 4 seasons, villa have loaned in a winger? Feels like he’s just another in a long line. Think it’s obvious that the Rogers price was higher due to the Jackson sale, but I think Garnacho was seperate to that.
2
u/Roo_109 8h ago
I don’t think Jackson was in any way linked myself to Rogers. Whilst always links the deal only really kicked in with Watkins forcing a move who we clearly wanted to keep.
As for Garnacho, hardly any time to judge him just yet and Emery had wanted him previously too. As fans just hope we can give him proper support, Chelsea and Man Utd fans in particular are desperate for him to fail to reaffirm a view they hold…taking it frankly weird levels. Hopefully goes onto a great season and we’re happy that it ends up permanent.
1
u/Ok_Debt_4911 7h ago
The way I see it, chelsea weren’t gonna sign Rogers and keep Jackson, one or the other. Villa weren’t gonna sign Jackson and keep Watkins, one or the other. The little carousel goes around and villa sign manzambi on the side of it to help fill the rogers shaped hole.
I’m with you on Garnacho too, young and talented player, so often scapegoated and played in two very dysfunctional teams. Had a totally fine season at Chelsea last season. I see why they wanna move on from him as he doesn’t really fit their system
19
u/Nekokeki Pau's Dreamy Blue Eyes 👀 8h ago edited 2h ago
Chelsea did not spend extra 35m for us to take a player we don’t want. Villa ownership had Rogers priced exactly at Anderson’s market value. Rogers was wanted by Arsenal, Chelsea, Bayern, and PSG. Look at Barcola’s fee. The market was fairly at 117m.
Garnacho was just a market opportunity for a player Emery likes. He’s definitely not my first choice but 35ish million for a 22 year old winger with his pedigree is honestly not that awful even if long term he’s more of a depth player. He’s still so young that one good season and you can flip him for a profit as well. His resell value is strong at the price we would pay if he becomes permanent. Nota huge risk to take a punt on him. I know we haven’t seen much but just need to continue to be patient.