Godders

33% possession vs their 66%

2 shots on target vs their 7

227 total passes vs their 451

62% pass completion vs their 80%

Not good enough at all. 

2 minutes ago, BG_Villa_Fan said:

Why weren't there 11 Villa players all over the referee after that blatant handball? Put some pressure of the idiot ffs.

Is the ref going to change his decision? No. Of course he's not. This sort of behaviour will only get us a fine. 

Controversially, I've said Smith was poor today. Mainly because we relied too much on speculative balls forward. The last few weeks we've been very good at short, accurate passes. 80% of the game today we were playing a pseudo hoofball type game. The 20% we played those short passes we carved out decent chances, including that Abraham sitter. We'd have won comfortably if we hadn't had tried to force the ball forward, regardless of that bullshit at the end. 

7 minutes ago, djdabush said:

As much as I like Smith, he needs to be able to get the players to shut up shop and see games out.

It's trying to see the game out that cost us. After we went ahead, the passing slowed considerably and we went backwards. We let them back into it.

Never sit back when 1 up. Always be looking for a 2nd. Don't give them even a sniff of drawing level. 

Not at the game, but let me guess: route 1 out from Tuanzebe direct to Abraham? 

1 hour ago, TrentVilla said:

Feb 1995 we beat Wimbledon 7-1 

I was a wee kid back then, but remember seeing the result on teletext. Seem to remember they had to type the word 'seven' lest folks thought it was a mistake! 

23 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

There is a lot of talk about people being worried he is only a 'small cog in a bigger machine' but I think that is missing the bigger picture.

He has been brought here precisely because we want a larger philosophy for the club and a head coach who will be a component in that. We want to set up that larger 'machine' here at Villa rather than a cult of personality approach built around the manager of the day.

The very thing that people are saying is a potential weakness is actually one of the main advantages of his signing.   

I'm one of those that have some concerns around this. If the intention is to use him to build the club philosophy, why didn't we go instead for one of the strategy guys at, Brentford who actually built their philosophy? DS, from what I understand, was not the architect of the Brentford setup. 

Fwiw, I really hope he does bring copious knowledge that we can tap into to build a sustainable football club here. 

Welcome Dean! I look forward to having my scepticism thrown back in my face 

Well, guess we're going to find out now how much of a role that backroom staff at Brentford play. 

18 minutes ago, Jareth said:

This is a thin defence.

Managers discuss with their assistant(s) what's a good plan for a game - then the manager has final decision - at every club.

Tactics - are now nothing to do with the manager - even though the manager has final say on the team? Tactics are not relevant to who plays?

Adapted tactics? see previous example by @Johnnyp

Mentoring is 'keeping the morale up'? 

 

I posted an article earlier in the thread that looks at Brentfords setup. This is what is said of Smith:

"You want to win the game on Saturday, but you can't have someone who makes all the important decisions, and spends the money, with a time horizon of one week. That doesn't make sense," he explains. "You have a manager that's basically in charge of both short-term and long-term football strategy—in some clubs, even responsible for all transfers, finances."

Ankersen likens Brentford's model to a clock: the head coach responsible for the second hand (day-to-day strategy); the directors of football—Ankersen and Phil Giles, who has a Ph.D. in statistics—responsible for the minute hand (medium-term strategy, focused on transfers and succession planning); and the board, including Benham, responsible for the hour hand (long-term strategy and objectives).

"Most clubs who have a managerial structure end up living in the second," Ankersen says.

At Brentford, Smith "doesn't have all these other responsibilities like doing deals, setting out the long-term football strategy—things like that. In that respect, he's got more focused responsibility here than he probably has in other clubs."

Smith was recruited because he was viewed as a head coach who could adapt to Brentford's methods.

"The philosophy of the club remains in place, and then we recruit a coach we think fits into that," Ankersen says. "When we interviewed Dean, we went through all this stuff again and again. We don't think that we have the perfect formula—we are open to his ideas—but generally speaking, he has to execute the club's strategy, and he has to add his way of doing that to it. He's an open-minded guy. That's why he's the head coach."

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2718752-brentfords-moneyball-way-to-beat-football-teams-with-huge-budgets.amp.html

5 minutes ago, AlwaysAVFC said:

Brentford appear to have a very good system that works well but I also think their reputation goes a bit over the top, as though they are doing nothing that anyone else is. These miracle workers would be snapped up by one the top clubs if that was the case. Not plying their trade at a middle of the table championship club.

I understand the sentiment, but I disagree. The top clubs need big name players and big name managers to sell shirts, get the sponsorship and endorsement deals, ensure tv time etc. While they may be able to build (eventually) a title winning side while spending less than top dollar, I can imagine there's very little appetite to do so. After all, would Pep want to manage a club who are going to be targeting young foreigners from lesser clubs, or would he rather be managing the best players money can buy? What about the fans, at home and abroad? There's no need for the top teams to do what Brentford are doing, so there's no appetite as it would be more trouble than it's worth to them. 

For lower PL clubs, survival is key. Again, there's probably very little appetite to willingly drop out of the PL and forgo the riches while the club is rebuilt. Even the risk of relegation would likely be too much to stomach. 

Like the age old adage on Wall Street "no one got sacked buying IBM", it's far easier to follow the herd, especially when there's so much at stake. 

5 minutes ago, Reivax_Villa said:

DS knows the process Brentford if he can somehow try to replicate that structure I will back him.

I agree. I suspect he'll be NDA'd to the hilt though, as I expect any new manager leaving a club would be. 

5 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Oh ok, so he has been told how they are supposed to play, and just coaches it.

So once he leaves Brentford they wipe his brain clean with the Men in Black thingy and he forgets how to do it?

Am I missing something or is that the most integral part?

DS wasn't the architect of the Brentford way. No doubt he plays his role, but there are others behind the scenes at the club that have major roles in defining Brentford Football Club. He also doesn't set or control their transfer activity. Again, he has a role to play, but stats and data analysts play a massive role in who they decide to look at and how those players will fit into the club's philosophy, and transfers are done by committee.

To think Dean Smith plays a significant role in defining the way Brentford play and who they sign is incorrect, and I worry that because he didn't design the system at Brentford, and won't have the support network here that he has at Brentford, he won't be able to emulate what he's done with them.

13 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Watch this and you will feel good about DS

 

I'd feel good if he was the architect. I don't believe he is. I think he's been told how he's expected to play, and he coaches that. I don't believe he decides how they play, I don't believe he identifies or decides who they buy to fit into their system. No doubt he's a very good coach, and no doubt Brentford play some nice football. I worry though that there's no experience there of giving a team an identity and there's no experience there of having significant control over transfer policy.

The jury is out for me. If he comes in, I hope he proves me wrong. 

3 minutes ago, A'Villan said:

Interesting read.

I've been saying for years that our approach should be tailored relevant to the challenges we face instead of throwing cash around like it alone can remedy our trials.

Ingenuity, analysis and problem solving as a means to solutions and progress instead of reverting to type and simply accepting the well worn path as the way.

Here's a cringeworthy snippet from the article:

 

They also note the Hogan transfer as an example of success for their recruitment policy. 

I've long considered data analytics to be the future of the sport. 

I can understand it would be extremely difficult for fans to get on board though if we sell Grealish and replace him with a 5 ft 2 german 2nd division player whose averaged 2.2 xGA over the last 40 games. That would be an incredibly difficult sell to the fans at most clubs. 

1 minute ago, MikeAVFC said:

A lot of coaches have that title though. Nuno is 'head coach' at Wolves, so by that logic Wolves are having success despite him. Same with Fulham, Jokanovic is also 'head coach'. 

All I can say is read the article. I'm not aware of Wolves or Fulham taking the same approach as described in the article, regardless of whether they call their manager head coach or not. 

1 hour ago, DaveAV1 said:

I still don’t really understand this system thing. Firstly did he have it at Walsall?

Secondly why can’t we replicate it?

And thirdly if it’s all down to this system and it can’t be replicated, is Smith going to spend his entire career at Brentford?

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2718752

There's a long article that summarises Brentford's setup. A very interesting few paragraphs on Smith's role as well. He's a "head coach" as it's a conscious decision to limit the scope of his role at the club. 

6 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

 

Nice one. Henry odds on now most places. Best you can get is 2-1

Ladbrokes clearly hedging their bets: have both henry and faria odds on

31 minutes ago, PieFacE said:

Betting market is stupid. I got Sousa for 26 about an hour ago

That's why he's down to 6's now! 

Rodgers or Sanchez Flores for me. I'd take a fair amount of convincing if it was Smith. He's a small tooth in a big cog at Brentford from what I understand. 

19 hours ago, Tony said:

Theres 2 scenarios in my opinion: 

1) Xia exaggerated the FFP problems to cover his own back, plus new owners have been given a bit of leniency to get finances in order. 

2) They have seen other fines handed out and decided to chance it and have another go, and take the consequences if and when. 

In reality its probably a little bit of all of those things. 

A third option: their lawyers/accountants believe there is a loophole(s) they can exploit to get money into the club without falling foul of FFP. 

10 minutes ago, osmark86 said:

we're so screwed 

We're really not. Most, if not all clubs in this league will be looking at out squad with a mixture of jealousy and envy. 

18 minutes ago, AlwaysAVFC said:

Was he there when they spent all that money on the likes of Carroll and Downing? That’ll be why if so.

That was Damon Comolli if I'm not mistaken

6 minutes ago, striker said:

Really poor result

FTFY. 

Doesn't matter what Leeds do, we have no control over them. We can control our own results though. 

14 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Look we were 2 minutes and an idiotic challenge away from 3 points. It’s disappointing but no need for hysterics.

Others have pointed it out as well, but Reading are widely tipped as struggling this season. We really should have been out of sight against this lot at home if we have any designs on promotion this season. This result is nowhere near good enough.