clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Aston Villa paid far more for Libor Kozak than anticipated

New, comments

The Libor Kozak move seems to have cost a fair bit more than would seem justified.

Paolo Bruno

A few minutes ago, when the Libor Kozak move was made official, I wrote this about the transfer:

Nevertheless, Kozak is hardly going to be an expensive buy, despite his torrid goal-scoring pace in the Europa League last year. It's hard to really justify this move, but thanks to the low cost it's equally hard to be enraged by it.

Good news! We've got cause to be irritated on an otherwise quiet transfer deadline day. It turns out that Kozak is not a cheap transfer. The number differs depending on who you listen to, but no matter how you slice it, it's too much for a striker who scored no goals in 19 Serie A appearances last year. Mat Kendrick said the fee was £6 million, and James Nursey (almost simultaneously) threw out £7 million.

Granted, Kozak scored 10 times in Europa League play last year, but on a team that could use some creative midfield help or another defender, spending even £6 million on a sixth striker - one who will likely not even start most of the time - seems ludicrous. Of course, Kozak could prove me wrong. He may become the next Benteke even. But nothing in his history suggests that he's got that type of talent in him.

What was a perplexing move has become a pretty dumb one. I sure hope I'm wrong, but I really don't see what Paul Lambert was thinking on this move. I've certainly got nothing against Kozak, by the way. I think he can play a role. I'm just not sure it's a £6 million one.

More from 7500 To Holte: