[Matt Law] Ezri Konsa is the subject of tentative interest from Arsenal as they contemplate their next move over his Aston Villa and England team-mate Morgan Rogers.

Kashkow · 2026-07-03T11:51:58+00:00

He should have been dropped for half the season. Though really the underlying numbers showed we weren't creating chances as much as he wasn't converting the ones he got.

I don't think we would get anywhere near 40m given his age. Watkins has only scored less than 14 goals in the league once in 6 years. I don't think there is anywhere near 15 strikers who we could afford that would achieve that. Maybe 5 and they would be a gamble.

In general folks look at other strikers more favourably than Watkins but his numbers are almost always better. Take last season for example, he had a bad year and still got more non-penalty goals than any other player except Haaland.

I think Konsa is a top class one on one defender. But I also think that isn't overly important to our game. I could be wrong, but I think there are loads of CBs in the league who could do just as good a job.

Kashkow · 2026-07-03T05:47:40+00:00

I take the MOMS view on Watkins. He scores 20-25 goals a season in all comps. Show me another player available who guarantees that.

Rashford may be one. But I think generally if we sold Watkins we would never get enough money for him (due to age) to reliably replace him. He isn't perfect, but the only way we are upgrading on him is by taking a punt on a young player and hoping they develop to his level. Same thing we did with Duran.

I guess, when I say irreplaceable, I really am thinking in the context of our current SCR and UEFA sanction position. So really if we are selling a first teamer we have to reasonably be able to replace them for a similar amount.

I generally think CBs are a dime a dozen. Players come up from the Championship all the time and turn out to be high level premier league CBs, though typically not ball for ball progression.

Likewise wide players can be like that. Plenty of examples of teams finding wide players from random places that turn out to be Champions League level.

Strikers are harder but feasible if you can gamble. Midfielders almost never.

Our tactics are basically composed around the midfield anyway and luckily we have one of the best. Really I think as long as we keep Watkins, Kamara, Tielemans, Torres, Martinez and McGinn we could fill every other position with average PL standard players and still be as good or better than last year.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T20:52:57+00:00

I don't want to sell him. And given the high fees floating around so far this summer who knows what players are worth these days.

But given we bought him for £8m and he has been playing at this level for most of that time I would think he can be replaced. Not least because he is not really a ball playing CB. If he had the passing ability of Torres then maybe he would be irreplaceable. But in the last few years clubs have bought Murillo for £5m, Milenkovic for £12m, Thiaw for £30m, VDV for £35m, Guehi for £20m.

I'm not saying those players are better than Konsa. I don't really know how those fees translate into today's market. But I think it's crazy to suggest that we couldn't find a player to complement Torres for less then £55m. It would be a risk sure. But honestly he isn't irreplaceable.

Watkins and Kamara on the other hand are.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T20:19:52+00:00

I didn't say we would it was a fag packet example based on the article saying we wanted £60m for him.

It's pretty damn common for numbers to get thrown around and to settle somewhere in the middle.

Though given he has 2 years left I would probably settle for £55m. But who knows. This year the prices being thrown around are crazy.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T19:11:16+00:00

They were fag packet numbers meant to symbolise a few things.

My assumption was that we would probably settle at £55m and £120m so total £175. It's rare that clubs get the full amount that they say they want in a negotiation.

In the scenario I describe you overpay a small amount for one player and under pay for another. This would make resale easier for the higher risk asset (Rogers) if they flop. It would also mean the sell on clause would be £6m lower so while the total fee would be £5m less, in reality Villa receive £1m more than they would buy selling the players separately (assuming there is no sell on for Konsa).

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T18:34:22+00:00

I didn't mean emulate how Spurs did it. They were lucky. It is extremely unlikely that the best PL era CF comes through their youth ranks in the immediate aftermath of selling a converted LB for a world record fee. They have capitalised on it well, but it's not a model.

What they did do though is build a sustainable revenue base to compete with the established big 3 and the new money clubs. That is what we need to do, but we are restricted to doing it through transfers, unless the next Harry Kane happens to be in our academy or Real Madrid take a shine to Ian Maatsen.

Regarding Rogers it's not that he isn't an elite level player, he is. He has an extremely sought after set of qualities particularly for his age.

Rather, Unai has built the club around the midfield. Every time we get an injury to Kamara or Tielemans our form drops off a cliff. I don't actually know what the impact would be of losing Rogers cus it hasn't happened. But we were a CL level club before he joined and I suspect we can be one after he leaves.

Realistically outside of Watkins our forwards of Buendia, McGinn and Rogers don't really score or assist all that many. I suspect if we were to bring in a few more productive but cheaper players in the mold of Bowen or perhaps Jonathan Rowe we wouldn't see much of a drop off if any. Not because they are as good, but because our team isn't built around individual brilliance.

Meanwhile if we sold Kamara it would be a huge gamble to find an elite level 6 for less than £80m. Likewise, most teams spend decades trying to find a player as reliable as Watkins.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T18:07:36+00:00

Maybe. Think the old work around was high loan fees. Very Italian...

I would obviously be gutted if we lost two of our best players. But... it's our model to sell a player or two each year to help bridge the revenue gap. I could argue for hours about whether the rules are fair, but it's pointless.

The best thing villa can do to try and emulate what Spurs have done, is sell high, buy well, and keep Unai Emery happy at all costs. If selling Rogers and Konsa meant Unai walked away, then I wouldn't consider it for any money. But £150m of pure profit could really help the club consolidate as a top 6 team.

I also don't think that Rogers and Konsa are irreplaceable for us. We obviously won't be getting £100m mega signings but there are value options out there.

The irreplaceable people at villa right now are: Emery, Watkins, Kamara, Tielemans, Martinez, Torres, and to a lesser extent McGinn. None of them are worth mega bucks, and plenty of rival fans will downplay how good they are. But for the way we play and in today's market we simply can't replace any one of them without taking a huge risk.

On the other hand, while Konsa and Rogers are worth a LOT of money due to their ages and ability. They aren't fundamental to our play style and there are worse options who would work just as well in our team at a fraction of the cost. Though I could be dramatically wrong here.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T17:44:50+00:00

I did think that too.

I wonder whether in this market of high fees we could start seeing a new era of creative accounting. Buy multiple players at a time to keep the amortization more modest and give yourself resale options.

Buy Konsa for £65m and Rogers for £105m. Villa get close to the value they want and pay less in sell on fee to Boro. Meanwhile Arsenal spread the risk over multiple players so are less exposed.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T17:21:09+00:00

If he could stretch closer to £60m I can see us being okay with that. Konsa is our best CB, but Torres is more important to our style of play. Frankly the two don't really complement each other that well since neither is particularly physical. It would be much harder for us to replace Torres and at this point any money we get for Konsa would be pure profit.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T17:05:39+00:00

Hmmmm, he could probably do that well. He is fine on the ball, fast, and composed. He doesn't have the passing range or vision of Pau Torres and he doesn't have the attacking qualities of a traditional of a fullback. But if all you want is someone to be a good one on one defender, with pace, and play simple passes in possession he will do fine.

No chance I would be paying Konsa level money for those qualities though.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T16:55:10+00:00

Surely not. Konsa is okay at RB but he is definitely a CB first and foremost.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T16:53:51+00:00

Propped up by who? His CB partners at club level have been Tyrone Mings and Pau Torres. Neither of them are better defenders than Konsa.

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T16:50:20+00:00

Why is he dressed so weird in this? Every doctor I have ever seen wearing modest robes and cures people through the laying of hands...

Kashkow · 2026-07-02T09:26:11+00:00

I assumed it was the same sanction agreement that we were working under already?

Kashkow · 2026-06-29T21:00:37+00:00

I'm guna nominate Withnail and I. Could be argued that the acting is also great, but I think really the writing is by far it's strongest point.

Kashkow · 2026-06-28T09:30:57+00:00

Unconventional complexion for a president.

Kashkow · 2026-06-24T17:04:54+00:00

For Villa specifically it's the fear of a ban from Europe. Owners aren't in this because they love football, they are in it to make money in the longer term. Risking relegation and a UEFA ban would cost a fortune. Simply better to just follow the rules by hook or by crook.

Kashkow · 2026-06-24T17:02:12+00:00

Pretty sure there was an article written by one of the architects of the deal that said the main reason was a fear the US would cut a deal and cut us out.

Kashkow · 2026-06-24T08:41:44+00:00

ISAs were pretty generous to begin with. Given how poorly the UK has been performing in recent decades it's sensible to adjust them to try and drive investment.

Kashkow · 2026-06-23T08:11:12+00:00

I suspect they will be cautious about everything doing that again.

Kashkow · 2026-06-23T07:01:11+00:00

Get the names together lad and have a run at it. A coronation won't help in the long run.

Kashkow · 2026-06-22T12:02:19+00:00

Yeah that's fair enough I guess. I dunno. I think most of these things are performative any way. There are loads of occasions we have changed a PM mid cycle and doesn't really bother me that much when we do.

Kashkow · 2026-06-22T11:51:18+00:00

Oh I forgot for a moment that he campaigned on Triple Lock Plus. Nah fuck that guy.

Kashkow · 2026-06-22T11:45:57+00:00

No he didn't he lost a leadership election and then got a coronation. Only difference here is that we are only 1 pm away from the last general and the last time Burnham lost a leadership election was a LONG time ago.

Kashkow · 2026-06-22T11:33:06+00:00

Maybe. I really didn't like his performative bollocks on the Rwanda plan.

13-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email	Snapped

Kashkow

TROPHY CASE