The Europa League trophy has been painted on the walls of Aston Villa’s training ground.
It sits proudly next to the club’s previous silverware and has been admired by staff members who experienced that night in Istanbul just over a month ago. Deservedly, Villa rubber-stamped their astonishing transformation under Unai Emery with tangible success.
They will now compete in Europe for a fourth straight season, a second campaign in the Champions League and, having wedged themselves into the top six monopoly — on the pitch anyway — would love to push on further. In the latest UEFA club rankings, Villa were the biggest movers of any team in Europe, climbing 29 places to 17th.
The owners have repeatedly demonstrated they are willing to give Emery the keys to the castle and will always look to provide the requisite tools to enable Villa’s growth.
Emery religiously says he dares to dream, yet the start of this summer has been met with another serious dose of reality. He knew that Villa would have to follow a finance plan and, in order to sign new players, be prepared to lose current players.
They have their targets in place, with a priority position being at least one winger who runs in behind, though there is work to be done on formalising plans. The Athletic reported this morning that Villa have made their admiration known for West Ham United captain Jarrod Bowen and he is a key target, but much will depend on the transfer fee and how much room Villa have for manoeuvre.
So, for a fourth successive campaign, Villa’s transfer activity will be stymied by financial restrictions. To complicate matters, many of the departures are expected to be post-World Cup, reducing time, planning and generally making Villa’s life harder.
June 30, the end of the financial year, has been a key date in Villa’s recent history.
This time, and as The Athletic has explained here, they have to suffer no more than €60m (£52million) in losses at the end of the 2025-26 accounting year. Fail to do so and they would breach the settlement agreement established with UEFA, having previously breached the governing body’s Football Earnings Rule (FER) over a three-year period.
The agreement placed limits on future losses and Villa’s ability to register players for UEFA competitions.
Club sources, speaking on the condition of anonymity as they are not authorised to speak publicly, insist that while they have to sell to balance the squad, they are not beholden to the June 30 deadline. It is not the same frenzied situation as in 2024, when executives were chasing Douglas Luiz around Brazil’s Copa America pursuit in the United States, ensuring he left for Juventus before the end of the month.
Regardless, they do have to work carefully to meet the threshold, so a player sale, not necessarily of huge value, would alleviate any lingering fears.
Villa’s success is pushing and exposing the flaws of the various financial restrictions. It perhaps vindicates the feeling, both from Villa and other competitors not inside the inner circle, that the rules currently protect a closed shop.
Villa understandably want to build on their success in 2025-26 but it won’t be easy (Naomi Baker/Getty Images)
In some ways, Villa are a victim of their own success. Last season was their third in a row playing in Europe, meaning they had to adhere to Squad Cost Rules (SCR) and FER, which would be judged over a three-year period. This complicated how they dealt with various financial sanctions which do not particularly work in sync.
There is an acceptance that rules should be in place to protect sustainability, but when you have a club, such as Villa, actively breaking into the top six but remaining inhibited from pushing beyond, it seems a paradox. It has not been lost on senior figures that when Chelsea and Manchester City were transformed financially, more relaxed controls were in place.
All of which leaves Villa playing a waiting game. Recruitment will largely be shaped by who leaves. It is a source of frustration, which is only emphasised when they look elsewhere in the Premier League and those teams that have made regular mistakes retaining the power to strengthen.
One example is Manchester United last summer. They finished 15th yet spent around £230m on new signings. They can stockpile players in certain positions, whereas for Villa, it is a drain on their finances. Consequently, there is a growing sense that it is difficult to keep both of their two left backs, Lucas Digne and Ian Maatsen, who offer good balance and competition to each other. Digne and Maatsen’s wages are far higher than ideal for a team with tight SCR challenges.
As for Tottenham Hotspur, they have finished 17th in successive campaigns. In comparison, Villa have finished sixth and fourth. Since surviving on the final day, Spurs have recruited free agents Marcos Senesi and Andy Robertson, signed defender Jan Paul van Hecke for £52m and are now pushing to sign Sandro Tonali and Mateus Fernandes for sizeable fees. Villa are well aware that while they have targets of their own, they have no choice but to wait for others who have finished far lower but can pursue the best players of many Premier League clubs.
The counterpoint will undoubtedly centre on revenue. Manchester United and Spurs generate far more revenue than Villa. While this is true, an upwardly mobile side should not be penalised in the present for the consequence of other teams’ past success or their own past failures. They should have the capacity to build on and sustain the progress made in recent years.
It’s possible Villa could consider offers for both Tielemans and Martinez this summer (Stu Forster/Getty Images)
Villa will sign players and by the end of August, will likely achieve their ambition of improving the squad. Even then, everyone connected to the club will be aware of how challenging it has been to navigate the financial choppy waters once again.
Agents have long spoken about how, despite preliminary contract talks with several players — Lamare Bogarde, Youri Tielemans, Ross Barkley and Ezri Konsa — nothing could be signed before June 30 and, in truth, only once Villa know how the summer unfolds. Villa would like to extend Bogarde’s contract but if a sensible offer comes in, they will have to be open to his sale.
Tielemans is entering the final two years of his deal, though he has interest from elsewhere in the Premier League and Saudi Arabia, so nothing can yet be definitive either way.
The biggest story will be Morgan Rogers ‘ future. Villa are adamant they will not sell the 23-year-old but accept that every player has a price. They are determined not to be lowballed but in the eyes of rivals, Villa’s tussle with UEFA makes them vulnerable.
A similar situation is reflected in Emiliano Martinez. Juventus registered interest and felt Villa would accept a small fee as, after all, the Italian club would take on his high salary. Villa want to keep him and Emery believes he remains the world’s best goalkeeper, yet an offer upwards of £15m would be considered.
How can it be that Villa, Europa League winners and Champions League competitors for the second time in three years, are still talking about player sales? It is an irritating and illuminating blind spot of the sport’s financial regulations.
