David Villa to Chelsea/Mancity for 45M ? With or Against?

seriously our line up could've been eto-villa-messi if it wasnt for our transfer failness

There were too many reasons for selling Eto'o. He had burned bridges with many important people at the club including most probably Pep also. He was asking for salary parity with Messi which given the future direction of the club we just couldn't give. If we wanted to play in a different way, he was no way going to give up a guaranteed starting place or even accept a change of role or position. Think if we still had Eto'o, would Messi get to play in the center? He would want to be top scorer every season rather than concentrate more on assisting Messi. Given what has happened since then, would any of you like that? I said it before and I say it again that one of the reasons for selling Eto'o was to majorly enhance the role of Messi. Now name one thing that Villa has done wrong for us to consider taking any kind of action against him.

Yes i agree with Messixaviesta. Selling Eto was a good decision in hindsight, although i was against the move at that time.

Villa should never be sold. He should be kept for around 3 years more because the guy is a workhorse. He makes so many runs consistently and that kind of work usually goes unnoticed.

He had burned bridges with many important people at the club including most probably Pep also.

The guy constantly comes back to barcelona to visit them and even got invited to the barcelona celebration after we won our 3rd consecutive la liga title. if he truly had burned bridges with 'many important people' they wouldnt even invite him to half of the events.

He was asking for salary parity with Messi which given the future direction of the club we just couldn't give.

you realise ibra was getting paid nearly as much as messi when he was barca right?

windkick wrote:

The Franchise wrote:No.

Selling the best striker in the world is never a positive move.

You mean when we sold Eto'o?

so true

english_jewel wrote:We aren't getting Villa. Period. This rumor isn't even funny.

not funny? i think its hilarious that people are dumb enough to believe chelsea want ANOTHER forward when we currently have:
-Drogba
-Torres
-malouda
-zhirkov
-sturridge
-kakuta
-kalou
-anelka

and not only that they think we will spend upwards of 30million on a forward who only as a few good years left in him and also take the gamble on bringing him to a league he has never played in (even through im sure he would succeed)

personally i think its bloody hilarious

honestly if i were barca and any club were to offer 45mil for villia id sell without a second thought, it would be an amazing deal for barca but cant see it happening, its the type of rumours that goes hand in hand with the fab rumours eg villia gets sold for 40mil to city allowing barca to offer 50mil for fabregas, nothing more then media speculation

MaraVilla wrote:
The guy constantly comes back to barcelona to visit them and even got invited to the barcelona celebration after we won our 3rd consecutive la liga title. if he truly had burned bridges with 'many important people' they wouldnt even invite him to half of the events.

you realise ibra was getting paid nearly as much as messi when he was barca right?

Your points are quite fair.

See inviting someone to events and actually keeping him at the club are two different things. He is of course our legend and we should show him all the respect. However his continuing day to day with us was making things difficult. Pep never saw him as his player when he announced right when appointed that he wasn't part of his plans. Also there were cases when he had said some things about some administrators. You might recall Laporta calling him a strange character. Consider another player. Ronaldinho is given tributes whenever he comes to Barcelona but selling him was our best decision in ages. So my bottom line is that showing respect towards a player and having him at the club are two different things which require different considerations.

Yes Ibra did start on a very high salary but Messi's salary was immediately increased. The club wanted to make it very clear who is numero uno at Barcelona. Eto'o wanted to be exactly equivalent which was not possible.

Overall this is a difficult issue and it's hard to say what exactly happened. I would like to know from you what you think were the reasons for Eto'o's departure.

Only a moron would consider this rumour credible.

Barca won't sell TBSITW and no club is going to pay £40m+ for a 29 year old.

I would like to know from you what you think were the reasons for Eto'o's departure.

i dont know the exact reasons, but i do remember reading an article cryuff wrote saying that pep wanted to try to add an different dimension and they (pep and cruyff) thought Ibra was the right man for the job, but at the end it was a fail or something along those lines. ill try to find the article again. I still dont believe the whole Eto burned bridges stuff, just media propaganda crap imo

end of the day of the day i would of gave eto'o a pay rise, it wasnt like he didnt deserve it anyway

MaraVilla wrote:
i dont know the exact reasons, but i do remember reading an article cryuff wrote saying that pep wanted to try to add an different dimension and they (pep and cruyff) thought Ibra was the right man for the job, but at the end it was a fail or something along those lines. ill try to find the article again. I still dont believe the whole Eto burned bridges stuff, just media propaganda crap imo

end of the day of the day i would of gave eto'o a pay rise, it wasnt like he didnt deserve it anyway

Thanks for the reply. I agree that they were looking to add a different dimension and Ibra was key to it. However there are a few significant things to note here. Ibra was thought of as soon as summer began. Then after the first discussion with Moratti the idea was dropped. Then onwards we chased Villa for several weeks. Finally Valencia proved reluctant and somehow a second discussion started with Moratti. The rest is history. Now my question here is that if we wanted to buy Ibra then why would it be possible only by selling Eto'o? Why didn't we sell Henry instead or some such thing? Then when we had dropped the idea of buying Ibra and were chasing Villa in mid summer, why did we still want to sell Eto'o? How much of a quality upgrade did we see Villa to be over Eto'o? There are a lot of things to wonder about here and I insist that the matter is not yet clearly understood by any of us.

Now my question here is that if we wanted to buy Ibra then why would it be possible only by selling Eto'o? Why didn't we sell Henry instead or some such thing?

i think that year it was pretty much eto'o,henry,bojan,pedro.. we didnt sell henry cause he was going to MLS anyway.. end of the day we could of had eto-villa-messi (would be the craziest attking line up ever!).

but yea noone other then eto and the high rank barca staff knows why he left.

MaraVilla wrote:[
but yea noone other then eto and the high rank barca staff knows why he left.

Agreed. Only they know and we are all trying to make our own speculations which we think are close approximations.