allani

1 minute ago, Jas10 said:

Not this one again… the lad’s seemingly always injured. Could be another Coutinho…

Regurgitated links… gonna see a lot of that (McKennie? )

Difficult to know what to believe… there’s gonna be so much shite again and the window isn’t even open yet… another 10 days to go.

Yep - I'd steer clear of Dybala.  Not sure he's an Premier League player.  I think Bailey and Rogers are better foils for Ollie.  I'm not sure we can buy players just to play in the Champions League matches (when fit).

1 hour ago, Philosopher said:

It would be a mistake to sell Konsa. While he is nor an ideal partner for Torres he is for Mings. He is also our best central defender when it comes to raw defending (aerial ability aside). If we sell him we need 2 quality centre backs, as Carlos isn't really upto it in the Premier league. When things are tough he seems intimidated. 

Luiz, if we had HAVE to sell a player makes the most sense. We have two players in the squad that can play his role, one just as good in Tielemens, and another on the way in Barkley who had outstanding stats. Plus he brings in twice the fee of any other player expect Watkins.

Hopefully we can get by by selling players like Digne, Carlos, Cash, Dendonker, and so on. Because I would hate to sell any one like Konsa or Luiz. I must say though 100 million for Luiz is more than he is worth. 60 million for Konsa is more than he is worth. An over the value bid is hard to turn down.

I'm not proposing selling Konsa.  I did say I'm not sure that he'll be happy being third choice - but he will get plenty of games and like you say he provides cover for Pau in terms of a ball playing defender.  The fact that he and Pau are both dodgy in the air does however cause us a headache.  My sense is that he'll play RB and we'll use McGinn as the width on that side.  I just hope we don't move him around too much as he needs to play more consistently in one place.

So although on paper Konsa at RCB is better than Cash at RB - I would prioritise signing a top class, aerially powerful but decent on the ground CB over a RB.  I think Konsa drifts wider (and gets better at that role by playing there more often) and we have Kosta as back-up or for when Konsa has to play more centrally.

59 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Except he doesn't. I do wonder why people post stuff that can be shown as false within a few seconds. 

Barkley is better in Aerials, Clearances, Interceptions and Ball Recoveries. Luiz better in Tackles and Blocks. 

I think "false" is a bit much.  Luiz wins more of his aerial challenges (58% v 55%) but admittedly doesn't make as many - I'm not sure which is more revealing - plus I assume that Aerial Challenges cover both attacking and defensive duels(? but may be wrong on that).  Clearances was the key stat where Barkley wins (51 v 18) and so was the reason for me saying "almost every" but maybe I should have called that out.  Interceptions was interesting as Barkley does lead that - but at 25 v 23 it wasn't a big differentiator and so I used the combined Tackles & Interceptions (81 v 72 in favour of Luiz - whose Tackles Won % is 47% compared to 23% for Barkley).  The one stat I am definitely missing though is Ball Recoveries - I'll DM you on that because I am very interested in that (for other analysis) so it would be useful to know where I can find that.

Clearly it is difficult to compare just from stats (especially given the fortunes of the two teams) but I don't think a Barkley / Luiz CM partnership would fix our defensive issues.  Although I do think that a Kamara, Luiz, Barkley trio would work really well.

1 hour ago, GlobalVillan said:

They are not even close to being in the same category in terms of likelihood of being sold as Luiz. 

I know it was likely tongue in cheek, but Luiz leaving is very possible. Although if he does, we should expect a replacement.

Barkley isn't it.

The players you mentioned won't be going anywhere.

But back on topic, I like this signing, 5mil for a proven PL midfielder is a shrewd deal and he will gives us that bit more strength in depth.

We have a tremendous habit of paying sod all for talented midfielders. Which other club has bought talent like Kamara, Tielemans, McGinn and Barkley for under 10mil for the lot?

Impressive.

And yet some people will still moan about our transfer business / success compared to other clubs.  The key difference between us and some of those clubs is that we've been able to retain those players and build our team around them.  Sure that doesn't show as a transfer profit (as we haven't sold them yet) but when you take say McGinn - signed when we were in the Championship and now our captain as we head into a UCL campaign - the success on the pitch is unreal, translate that into the overall "financial value" of the club and it would be 9 figures.  Obviously that's not all down to McGinn but pro-rata it across the most significant signings during that time and McGinn alone has got to have been worth close to £100m to us in terms of that value add.

7 hours ago, RicRic said:

Same Konsa that just started for England or?

As my comments said - I think Konsa is a very good player.  However, we have conceded a lot of goals from crosses / set pieces this season and Konsa's biggest weakness is in the air.  He's in the bottom 3% for aerial challenges won.  That's not necessarily an issue if he is playing alongside someone who is very good in the air (for example Mings) where the two players work as a partnership.  However, I can't see us dropping Torres because he's key to the way we play the ball out of defence.  But Torres has the same weakness (also in the bottom 3 for aerial challenges won).  My question therefore remains - how do you play Konsa and Torres in the same back line without conceding a lot of goals from balls played into the box?  That's not being dismissive of Konsa - it's flagging an issue with the Konsa / Torres partnership.  Moving to 3 CBs causes an issue as it kind of leaves McGinn as our RWB whereas we need him higher up the pitch in attack and defence.  Moving Torres to LB exposes him to quick wingers, makes it more difficult for him to control the ball from the back and impacts on our ability to create width down that flank through overlapping runs (as per Digne and Moreno).  Moving Konsa to RB is I suspect the answer but positionally he has been caught out quite a lot - although this is probably due to him playing RB one match, CB the next and then going back to RB.

2 minutes ago, Rightdm00 said:

How does one strengthen the squad by selling one of its best players. It took us almost 2 seasons to recover from selling Jack.  Any midfielder bought to replace luiz would have to hit the ground running or our champions league campaign is over before it ever starts.  Selling luiz, especially with kamara unavailable for the first half of the season is plain craziness. Luiz was top 3 in the minutes played this campaign. Selling him would leave a massive hole. We would be weaker for it, especially in the short term. 

The stats I posted on Luiz show how important he is for us - he touched the ball more than any other midfielder, made more passes, made more meters passing the ball forwards, etc.  That isn't to say that he is indispensible but selling him would probably have more potential impact on the way we play than selling any other player.  Certainly any other midfielder.  So it would be a big risk replacing him with someone else as if it doesn't work straight away then it could take a while for the team to start ticking again.

You only need to look at our PPG towards the end of the season when Luiz was struggling in the DCM position and compare that to our PPG earlier on the season when a lot of pundits were talking about him being one of the most influential midfielders in the PL.  The fact that Tielemans and McGinn did a number on Arsenal really doesn't mean that they'd do the same job over 30+ games in the season.

3 hours ago, CVByrne said:

I do believe he's better defensively than Luiz or McGinn in the central midfield role. He had excellent ball recovery numbers last season. He's also very good aerially so will add to that aspect for us

Not according to FBREF (and I know stats don't mean everything).  Luiz has better defensive stats in almost every area / category.

28 minutes ago, Czarnikjak said:

Or perhaps Luiz will be on his way out this summer.

Along with Emi, Pau, Bailey and Ollie.

2 hours ago, Philosopher said:

I have that feeling about Nedeljovic too. Hopefully he'll have been working hard on his spanglish, and ready to go full steam ahead in preseason.

I'd like Fofana as although he is as much an 8 as a 6, he is known for his positional sense, and athleticism (athleticism is something our midfield lacks), so he could play alongside a sitting DLP or a DM. 

I feel Luiz is up for sale, so if we get 80 million for him, and bring in Barkley,  Fofana, and Araujo for about the same money I'd be satisfied with that. Whether I'd happy or not depends on how they perform.

Alternatively if we can keep Luiz, and move on fringe players instead  (as well as bring in the aforementioned players), that would be even better.

My assessment of Mings is sensible considering it's he second ACL to that knee, plus there was cartilage damage. Throw in he is 30 and that it's inevitable that he will pick little niggling injuries on his way back to fitness I think my prognosis isn't pessimistic. We need a 5th cb.

I wasn't suggesting your assessment of Mings wasn't sensible.  I think the emphasis of "Even if your..." might accidentally suggest doubt on your assessment whereas I meant it more that if he surprised us and was fit earlier or even at the start of the season (unlikely).  Maybe I should have said "Even if your assessment proves..." 

6 minutes ago, Philosopher said:

I'd look at Konsa being the rotation option for RCB and RB, that should see him get plenty of games. All though Konsa is a solid defender at this level, but he is at best a support act. We need a genuine world class centre back. To be a title challenger and in contention in Europe this is a requirement. This needs to be the aim. But realistically we are going to struggle with this. 

Mings won't be anywhere near ready till January. He'll do well to be part of preseason training (I expect it'll be too intense for him). So fitness wise I don't think he'll ready for any kind of selection till September. Then he'll need to gradually build his match fitness, and get his touch back. That will take 3 to 6 months. Really and truly he won't be back to his best till 25 - 26 season.

If we really have any chance of Araujo, i believe we will jump at it, as the 50 - 60 million he'll cost could well be worth it. As potentially he is world class, and he ticks all the boxes for what we lack at right centre back. Quick, aggressive, good in the air. 

At right back Nedeljovic could be that guy we need. But he'll need time even if he is. Hopefully he can have a season as back up at right back, and develop well. If he is off on loan then we need to sign another RB.

 

The RCB is definitely where I would prioritise too (alongside the DCM position).  Even if your assessment of Mings return is pessimistic - there's no way that he will be fit enough to play 20 - 30 matches before the end of 2024.  So we absolutely need someone to play there.  I think that Konsa / Nedeljovic might be enough at RB (even if we sell Cash) although, like you say, it is hard to tell whether the jump to the Premier League is one that KN can make that quickly.  But I can't think we'd have spent that long in January finding him, signing him and pushing for the medical issue to be resolved if we weren't expecting him to be in the squad.  I get the sense he'll surprise people in the same way Rogers was starting to.

42 minutes ago, Philosopher said:

This is exactly what I and others have been banging on about. A DM that can actually defend and has aggression, as well as technical qualities. An RCB to replace Carlos who is dominant in the air, quick, and competent on the ball. Plus a RB that has pace, positions himself well and doesn't play opposition strikers onside all the time.

Yeah - but it's interesting that the stats really back this up as well.  The question marks for me are (a) how fit is Mings, (b) can Mings play as a RCB alongside Torres, (c) where does Konsa fit - he's a good player but I don't think he fits the brief above for either a RCB or a RB.  Can we play Konsa at RB with McGinn in front of him without compromising on getting the best out of SJM and / or unbalancing the side when we have possession?  I'm not sure that Konsa would be happy being our 3rd CB - even though he'd get plenty of games/

I've just been having a look at the stats and (whilst it is hard to make too many meaningful conclusions give 1 played for a team who finished 4th and the other in a team that got relegated) it does look like Ross's numbers last season are broadly similar to Luiz (i.e. he's really here to allow us to rotate Luiz more often and make it easier for him to stay fully fit all season).  However, for anyone thinking that Ross might be the DCM answer the stats show a big fat "no".  

https://fbref.com/en/stathead/player_comparison.cgi?show_form=1&request=1&sum=0&comp_type=by_type&dom_lg=1&player_id1=3a24769f&p1yrfrom=2023-2024&player_id2=6f7d826d&p2yrfrom=2023-2024

The key being this bit:

18 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

The gas lamp one was the best of the lot.

Come at me I don't care.

My issue with the gas lamp option last year was that it looked like a version that wasn't really produced to win the vote.  It didn't look complete and felt like a "well we gave you a choice" effort.  Conceptually I think it was far superior (unique, clear and obvious ties to our history, yet also a fresh, new twist).  I think there was a great badge / brand in there but it never quite got "finished" which is a real shame.

1 hour ago, striker said:

Good solid signing which increases squad quality for not a lot of money.

Emery will make him better positionally!

OK having given you a little bit of a kicking over the weekend - this is a very sensible post that I can fully agree with on every single aspect. 

1 hour ago, TRO said:

I think the big question is, does Unai want a CDM?

or does he just want better general midfielders, for the positions we already have.....I am genuinely unsure.

I don't really care how it does it....but we are conceding too many goals, and that needs fixing.

If he fixes that and we become harder to score against, I will be happy.

I know I'm a bit less concerned about clean sheets / goals against than you (a 2-1 is a just as good as a 1-0 win and all that) but I think there are probably three things that can be done that will reduce the number of goals we concede and NOT impact on the number of goals we score (at least not in a negative way).  All stats below from (or calculated from) fbref.com

(1) We need a CDM to replace / cover Kamara.  Our PPG with Kamara in the team last season was 2.05 and we conceded 22 goals whilst he was on the pitch (from 20 matches) - ignoring the minutes played element of that it averages out at 1.1 goals per game against.  At the same time we scored 36 goals in those 20 matches (1.8 goals per match).  In the 18 matches where he didn't play we gained 27 points (1.5 PPG), conceded 37 goals (2.05 goals per game) and scored 34 goals (1.88 goals per game).  Now it is overly simplistic to account for the big difference in those stats just by whether Kamara was playing - the team were shattered at the end of the season (although Kamara being available could have helped spread the load better), etc.

(2) We've conceded a lot of goals from set pieces / crosses as we've missed having someone like Mings who is competitive in the air and either wins a higher percentage of headers or at least reduces the number of second phases where the ball gets headed / passed back into the danger zone.  Although I like Konsa - one of his weaknesses is in the air (he only won 0.88 aerial challenges per 90 mins last season - putting him in the bottom 3 percentile and he made 2.14 clearances - also in the bottom 3%) compare that to Mings last season (71.8% aerial challenges won - over 2 per match, and 163 clearances in 35 matches (4.65 per match).

(3) I think we've allowed too many crosses (no stats to back this up) and that a key factor in this is down to positional issues particularly at RB.

PS - I appreciate that I haven't provided Torres's stats for issue 2 - but in my mind he's so critical to the way that we play when in possession that we have to work around his defensive frailties (for what it is worth though he matches Konsa exactly on aerial challenges won - 0.88 but makes 2.68 clearances per game so is slightly better there - but still bottom 9%).

I really hope this is guiding our transfer policy this season or (as a minimum) our training programme - i.e. potentially retraining Konsa as an out and out RB.

6 minutes ago, ThunderPower_14 said:

Every single previous badge that has said "Aston Villa" has been similarly off-centre.

And a lot of them have been off-centre by much more.  Just go back and look at the round badge from the early 80s - the gap in the lettering is awful (but it's still a badge that I hold dear for sentimental reasons).

40 minutes ago, picicata said:

Well you've argued your points which is fair enough. Not sure many would agree with you though

For what it's worth I'd like Gallagher as well as Luiz

I did a FBref comparison with Gallagher when I was there and their stats seemed to intertwine quite well.  Gallagher's defensive stats are much higher than both Luiz and McGinn but I still think we'd need a Kamara type player in there too.  However, Kamara-Luiz-McGinn-Gallagher on paper would look like a pretty impressive midfield with strength in winning the ball back, controlling possession and then attacking the opposition.  However, take Kamara out of the equation and we'd be pretty unbalanced again.

1 hour ago, CarryOnVilla said:

Fiddling around with the colour way and It's basically 5 options, that could have their own minor tweaks, such as E/F 

A. What we got
B. The logical fix
C. The other logical fix
D. Another Logical fix
E. People liked the Gold mono colour in the vid, so just wanted to see it on claret 
F. Blue mono colour to make it 6

For me,

C is in the bin for the wiff of wet Spam it has.
F is in the bin for being invisible
D is less invisible, but it might as well be.. in the bin 
E does look great and it really pops off the claret, but it really is a massive detour on our tradition colours, so in the bin... sorry
Now it's A or B
Hummmm has to be B, it doesn't pop as much a A, but it ties up nicely with our colour scheme and contrasts well



 

Interesting to see these options.  FWIW I agree with your conclusions on F and D.  There is a time and place for E but not as our main badge.  B is my least favourite.  So I'm down to A or C.  I think C is my favourite but the issue is the possible similarity to West Ham.  I think it highlights to me that I really like the yellow/gold lion a lot more than blue or claret.

1 hour ago, Captain_Townsend said:

The N in Aston....I mean, would it have been difficult to centre the name

Last year's round badge and our 1982 badge have the same issue.  Yet I can't recall the same outrage about them.  Aligning the two As is far more important and as Aston and Villa are different widths due to the shape of the letters - if the N and V are aligned to the centre then either the As won't be aligned or you have to increase the space between the letters in Villa - which would just look odd.

24 minutes ago, CarryOnVilla said:

my rough and ready solution to the scalability issue

and a desired version for some
  

I think this is exactly what will happen ultimately.  It is also a great example of why the round badge doesn't work because there's no obvious scale 5, even at 3 or 4 I think you'd be struggling to replicate what you've done above.  And finally the above is a great example of how you can you different colours, etc and yet every version still looks "Villa".

1 hour ago, CarryOnVilla said:

Tbf, I can’t see why there’s isn’t scalable versions. 
 

at that size, drop the double line for 1

smaller, drop the “Aston Villa” and reposition the lion

smaller than that, just have the lion or shield alone. 

I suspect that might be one of the evolutions that occur.  First off make sure that everyone is familiar with the main version and then once that's done have a closer look at specific issues (large and small scale) and adjust as required.  I wonder, if they had done what you suggest to start with, how many people might have said "ah look we've already got four different versions of the "badge".   I think it would have been neater to do what you suggest but can see why we might evolve there.

3 hours ago, Ingers said:

Is it therefore more disappointing that when football matters are the best for over a generation, the branding is (subjectively - as is the point of a forum!) so far below what this great club should demand going into its 150th year as founders of the whole league and back into the top tier of European Football?

This thread is for debate over the brand and crest - should we not want every aspect of our club to be the best it can be?  Should there not be posts elsewhere about the North Stand, GA+ pushing out 'regular' fans, the ticket selling issues etc?

Lets aim for excellence everywhere - Unai gets it, do Ben,Chris and Doris the designer?

I think the branding work is really good and I like the direction we are going in.  I like that there are multiple elements / components that can work independently of each other and yet still say "Aston Villa" when yoy see them.  I can't remember when we had such a wide range of brand components.  Gone are the days of just sticking the badge on something and that was pretty much it.  I really like a lot of the graphics from the branding video, I love the unique shape of the crest, I'm a big fan of the detailed lion and I like the way that the fonts are inspired by things connected to the club.  I don't buy the "reverse engineered" narrative - it would be significantly more work to try and find links to the club to justify a decision made in isolation than it would to say "oh I quite like this font because I think it looks a bit like the iron railings outside".

For what it is worth I don't particularly like the new badge itself - specifically the colours and the star (something that fans insisted had to be there) and personally I'd move the founding year and use it elsewhere within our branding (similar to Prepared).  I do, however, think the design and layout looks a lot better with many of the other colour palettes within the branding piece.  That said I can also appreciate that it's not a straightforward fix - without either adopting the colour palette too similar to another PL team or potentially causing heritage issues.

I think there's some really good work being done.  Can it be improved?  Sure.  But almost all brands evolve as some things work and others don't.  The point is that I think we've got a really solid starting point for that.  Maybe it is the equivalent of last season and finishing 7th in the league after almost being in the relegation battle seven or eight months previously.

I appreciate that other people disagree with my thoughts on this - although I have yet to hear a coherent, reasoned explanation for how the round badge provides a similar starting point for the wider branding work that is required and has been executed this time around.

54 minutes ago, Captain_Townsend said:

"It's here and it's here to stay for a fair few years but some of the stuff on here now is just repetitive whinging for moaning sake"

Fancy  that, Aston Villa fans having an opinion on their club's new crest, in their 150th season, railroaded through as an evolution of the crest they were meant to be moving away from and in place of the one they actually got a vote in. How very dare we.

Look, in the grand scheme of things, it is 'just a badge', of course and not a huge deal. It's just that for some of us that particular look is forever associated with the grim Lerner years that ended in humiliation and relegation. It was nice to think we would move on from it so it is just disappointing to some of us that we have gone back it.

Next year it will be on the shirts when we play in the UCL.  So that will quickly replace the association with relegation.