Harvey Elliott finds himself in something of a quandary.
The talented young midfielder was a bit-part player for Liverpool and it was understandable that he would look for a move elsewhere in the summer transfer window.
Elliott was the star of the show at the UEFA U21 European Championships, scoring five goals as England lifted the trophy.
It seemed as if the footballing world was his oyster, but he had no desire, really, to leave Liverpool.
“Look, if I had it my way, I'd be here for the rest of my career, it's as simple as that, I love everything about the club,” he said in the summer. "But at the same time I kind of need to be selfish with myself and see what's best for me. I have big ambitions. I want to go to the World Cup. I want to keep being successful as a player.
So when Aston Villa came calling, he somewhat reluctantly made the move on loan for the season.
That loan move included an obligation to buy at the end of the season for around £30million, on the condition that he played ten matches. There is no guarantee of that, though, with the midfielder on five appearances so far, having not even made the matchday squad in any of the last three Premier League games.
Good decision?
Did he make the wrong choice, or will his time come?
Villa boss Unai Emery wanted Lucas Paqueta or Marco Asensio permanently in the summer, but got neither, with Elliott the option instead.
A hugely talented player, a spot in Thomas Tuchel’s World Cup 2026 squad looks way out of reach right now, with the former Liverpool player watching his U21 teammate Alex Scott move ahead of him in the pecking order, after some impressive displays for Bournemouth.
Elliott already had plenty of competition for a coveted spot in the squad, and his time at Villa will only have made things even harder.
There is no way out this season. The 22-year-old played for Liverpool, getting the last six minutes of injury-time in the 3-2 win over Newcastle before securing that transfer to Villa.
Premier League rules state that no player can play for more than three clubs in the competition in any one season, so if he wants to go and play elsewhere it will have to be abroad, and would rely on Liverpool and Villa coming up with some kind of deal to break the loan and obligation to buy.
There were other options for Elliott in the summer, although perhaps nothing concrete enough to change his mind. Hindsight is a wonderful thing though and Tottenham might well have been a better move for the midfielder.
Spurs move
Spurs were linked with a number of attacking players in the summer, with well-publicised moves for Morgan Gibbs-White and Eberechi Eze falling through, before Thomas Frank finally got an attacking midfield signing through the door in the shape of Xavi Simons.
Simons’ signing was seen as something of a coup for Spurs, with Chelsea heavily linked with a move for the RB Leipzig star, and there is plenty of expectation that he will be a fine signing. He has yet to pull up trees, however, with the diminutive star needing time to adapt to the pressures and physicality of the Premier League.
With long-term injuries to James Maddison and Dejan Kulusevski, creative signings were required, but ignoring Mohammed Kudus’ deal as a wide forward, Simons was the only central attacking signing that Tottenham made.
And that, in hindsight - and at the time - looks to have been a mistake, given Simons’ early struggles.
Elliott, with strong experience in the Premier League already, would have been a ready-made replacement and was fleetingly linked with a move to N17 as one of the options to fill the No.10 void. His ability to slot in as a ten, or even as an eight, would have been a real asset to Frank and Spurs. He would almost certainly have got more game-time in north London than he has in Birmingham and would have added to Tottenham’s homegrown roster, albeit not their club-trained quota for the Champions League.
Klopp regret
In 2024, just departed Liverpool boss Jurgen Klopp opened up on "regretting" not using Elliott more. He said: "If I regret one thing a little bit, it's that Harvey didn't play often enough, maybe. Because in a very important, intense period - January, with a lot of injuries – he played really well.
"He was probably our best player - right wing, right midfield, all these kinds of things. Then everybody came back, and he had minutes here, minutes there, and he didn't start anymore."
That versatility would certainly have come in handy for Frank at Spurs and he would have been the type of signing - alongside Simons - that the supporters could have taken to. Signing Elliott and only Elliott may have tipped some over the edge.
Spurs have already shown - this season and last - that they do not have the squad depth to cope with injuries that the likes of Manchester City, Liverpool and Arsenal do. A player of Elliott's calibre would certainly have come in handy and his performances for the U21s in the summer suggest he deserves better.
Tottenham certainly need better. Frank's side are second bottom in the Premier League for shot-creating actions this season, with just 16.82 per 90 minutes. Only Burnley produce fewer. The Lilywhites also have fewer shots per game than all but two of the other teams in the top flight - Wolves and Burnley - with 9.73 per game as per fbref.com. Elliott would surely have helped with that, given his position in the team and ability to break the lines.
Elliott must now wait until the summer to reboot his career, though, or hope that he can impress upon Emery in the second half of the campaign and kickstart his Villa career.