The sale of Emiliano Martinez will only intensify Aston Villa’s need to be “creative” in the final days of the transfer window.
Villa’s summer overhaul is far from finished heading towards the 1 September deadline, and Chelsea’s deal for Martinez adds a fresh twist.
Villa have already made more than £250m in player sales, including £117m from Chelsea for Morgan Rogers.
And with the Blues agreeing a £7.5m fee for Martinez, Villa will then take their transfer revenue for this window past the £300m mark once Ollie Watkins joins Al Hilal for £50m, as is expected.
Villa meanwhile have spent almost £140m on five incomings, as well as signing Alejandro Garnacho and Aaron Wan-Bissaka on loan, while Leon Goretzka joined on a free transfer on Thursday.
Nicolas Jackson is set to be the next arrival, and Villa will have financial headroom for further transfers once Watkins follows Martinez out of Villa Park.
Watkins sale ‘unlocks more spending power’
Villa are expected to sign Jackson from Chelsea for £47.5m upfront plus £17.5m in potential add-ons.
That overall package is more than Watkins’ outgoing fee, but significantly the cost would be spread over the course of Jackson’s contract at Villa.
“Financially, selling Watkins creates enough room to buy Jackson and still leave Villa with meaningful flexibility elsewhere. It potentially unlocks considerably more spending power,” sports finance expert Professor Rob Wilson tells The i Paper.
“I would though expect Villa to be more selective or creative with the structure of any late deals.”
A “selective or creative” approach appears to be the case as Villa search for a defender to replace Ezri Konsa, as well as another forward, with AC Milan’s Rafael Leao recently linked and a bid for Crystal Palace’s Jean Philippe-Mateta rejected.
Villa want Leao on an initial loan move with an obligation to buy, according to , while their cautious pursuit of a centre-back has resulted in a loan for Club Brugge’s Joel Ordonez breaking down and two bids for Taylor Harwood-Bellis being rejected by Southampton.
The arrival of Goretzka is another example of Villa getting creative. Though no fee, the former Bayern Munich midfielder’s wages add to squad costs, a tightrope Villa must walk carefully.
Why selling Martinez could be key
Chelsea’s late move for Martinez could have a significant say on Villa’s transfer activity.
Martinez was contracted until 2029, but Chelsea’s approach means Villa are set to sell their joint-highest earner having already bought a new No 1 in Japan international Zion Suzuki.
Selling Leon Bailey would also be a boost in this regard, and getting both the winger and Martinez off the books could tempt Villa to meet Southampton’s reported £25m asking price for Harwood-Bellis, and may also give them financial wiggle room to convince Leao to join as well.
The big question: Could Villa breach SCR?
It is impossible to put an exact number on Villa’s remaining transfer budget this summer, not merely because of the multiple moving parts, but because of the financial rules in place.
Villa were fined £19.4m by Uefa in June for a “significant breach” of their squad cost ratio (SCR) rules, with £12.9m of that amount suspended provided the club worked on bringing down their ratio.
The Premier League is also implementing SCR this season, and after years of careful spending Villa are among “the more interesting clubs to watch” according to Wilson.
“Current modelling has them around 97 per cent against the Premier League’s 85 per cent limit,” Wilson says. “That’s above the target, but still below the 115 per cent level where the most serious sporting sanctions come into play.
“I’d describe them as under pressure rather than in immediate danger. They’re probably among the bigger Premier League clubs that need to manage SCR quite actively, which helps explain the willingness to sell valuable players despite Champions League qualification.
“Uefa is another consideration because its squad-cost limit is tighter at 70 per cent.”
Read more
Wilson estimates Villa have around £80-85m of SCR headroom before reaching the Premier League’s 115 per cent threshold, but that amount does not equate to a £80-85m transfer budget given their need to comply with Uefa.
That is why the structure of Villa’s remaining deals matters so much, and why loan deals with obligations to buy are in play.
“That looks like Villa deliberately pushing the permanent cost into the next accounting period rather than using more of this season’s headroom,” Wilson adds.