Cjay

29 minutes ago, romavillan said:

1. No way, Jack's a big part of the brummy revolution that' happening, I can't see him wanting to go now either, even if we don't get up this year.

2. If your premise is true then that would be the kind of reckless bullshit the last regime went for and not at all like what this new regime is saying they are all about. So no not comfortable with more recklessness.

3. If Jack's included then no I'm not happy, or McGinn or any of the younger more talented parts of the squad. Richards will be going out to pasture this summer, some other big earners are near the end of contracts, there's other ways saving will be made. Selling older players that still have some value I wouldn't be against. I'd back the new regime + Smith to invest better in getting the tools together to build a long term project which would see us go up and stay up.

The defence and the keep might be sorted out by recalling Elphick, signing a good young CB which doesn't break the bank and ditto for a keeper. Improving what we have as cover is simple as we don't have cover, but even gettign players good enough for the first XI with decent scouting and safe in the knowledge that Smith improves players we shouldn't have to break the bank.

Lots of assumptions made about FFP, Purslow was part of bringing it in, I'm not sure why he is so confident about it, but he is and so far it doesn't appear that this lot are talking out of their arse. That said it would appear the board think we can spend in Jan (I doubt massively - but with decent scouting and Smith I don't think we need a massive outlay) without trying to flog Jack quite safely. So I don't think it looks like 1,2 and 3 are the only options.

True.

I honestly dont really understand it, i understand the premise and the basics but I'm no accountant and trying to dig deep is way beyond me.

My understanding of our ffp compliances and yours are mainly by reading what other far more aware people have written. 

There's quite a few on you written between May and September.

Think most were written based on some facts and some educated guess work but they all pointed to the same thing, a £30-40million gap that needed plugging regardless of new owners.

Whether that was wrong i dont know but on a personal level id ve quite annoyed if you and others were able to spend significant amounts in January.

I think there are clubs in this league that have been totally reckless with there spending in recent years, you, Birmingham, Derby, Wednesday to name a few.

And the bitter part of me i suppose wants to see those clubs that have lived beyond there means punished like we were.

Not because i dislike them, but i dislike whats happening to football.

I dislike that Manchester City can manipulate and play the system to get where they are.

I dislike that you can spend what was it £70million in 1 transfer period in the English 2nd tier. 

I dislike that clubs like Birmingham and Wednesday can piss away fortunes while other clubs like us for all our sins have been trying for years to run a tight ship.

There was an interview with the old Wigan chairman where he talked about how parachute payments were vital because they helped clubs make up the shortfall while adjusting there budgets for the lower league and without them many would go under.

But thats not what there used for,  there used by clubs that failed in previous years to try and buy there way back up and spend extortionate amounts of money totally unsustainable in the lower leagues and unaccessible to other clubs in the same league.

It creates a whole different market between the haves and have nots with parachute payment clubs pissing ridiculous amounts up the wall in desperation.

Its creating a mini Premier league where some teams have access to money that they dont deserve in truth, they only have it because they were crap the last year, and clubs who simply dont have it.

The counter is "yeah well just get promoted then". 

But that gets harder every year when more and more clubs come down with parachute payments. 

This has turned into a mini rant, my bad lol

Thanks for the response.

56 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

1) For £40m+ yes. I'd be gutted though.

2) Yeah because I trust the guy in charge. Probably unwise, but I'm feeling good about Aston Villa atm. We've got a lot of huge earners off the wage bill at the end of the season.

3) Don't see a question there. Sounds alright if we don't go up I suppose yeah. Don't want to sell Grealish though. I don't think he'll be itching to leave either, especially if we keep playing like this.

Sorry should have been clearer on 3.

Was basically is that scenario maybe the best aside from winning promotion and spending without sales.

Seems happier Grealish now he has found an end product.

I have a question for you

Nobody seems sure whats going on with FFP, most thought you were fooked without sales or promotion this season, that may still be the case (its hard to see how it isnt tbf) .

But your new people are making all the right noises and saying there will be funds in January, without really clarifying how all this FFP stuff has gone away.

Everyone seems very happy with the form under Dean Smith, the football is pleasing, everything is great, but lingering doubts about your defence and goalies seem to linger. 

But anyways, here are the questions.

The owners give Smith money to spend in January, say £15mil, he gets in decent defenders and a goalie (decent not worldbeaters), you are in the same position as you are now , same points to top and bottom etc. 

1) Would you be accepting if Jack Grealish was sold to fund these purchases? 

2) If nobody was sold would you be comfortable spending this money knowing that you really could be screwed massively at the end of the season? After all spending guarantees nothing as we both know and there is no guarantees Smith would get you up.

3) You dont spend and dont get promoted but you now have a clean FFP slate, a few players have to be sold including Grealish to balance the books but now you can spend again FFP free, as hard as that would be would that be the best case scenario under the circumstances? 

1 hour ago, villarocker said:

We'll just have to settle for a 7-5 victory then 

Sods law dictates that WBA vs Villa will now end 0-0 and will contain as much excitement as a Tony Pulis presentation titled "Football, how to suck the joy out of it in 10 steps".

25 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Apparently WBA fans are very worried about playing us.

I'm wondering if teams fearing us can only be a good thing - as in give us too much respect?

Or could it be bad in the sense that they find an extra gear?

That being said, how do WBA play under Moor? Pulis MK2 or Modern?

When we played them the WBA reaction was similar, they fully expected a battering.

Against us they sat deep and narrow and hit us on the break,  using long balls to get in behind the full backs/wing backs. 

They only had 28% possession and a 61% passing accuracy but they carved us open easily on the break.

They are extremely good on the break with Barnes, Rodriguez and Gayle all pacey and confident.

May be different against you because you have direct runners out wide and height and power in the box, we didnt.

But WBA are a massive team themselves so they may be happy battling you for crosses limiting space in the middle and looking for breaks in the wide areas behind hutton and Taylor.

Thats my opinion anyway lol.

57 minutes ago, Hitzlsperger_12 said:

Teams managed by Bielsa have a reputation of dropping off in the 2nd half of the season, it's happened everywhere he goes. He works the players too hard on/off the pitch and with the fact he likes to run a small squad, it's inevitable there will be a lull for Leeds at some point imo.

 

Bielsa Burnout is a bit more complicated then people think imo.

While there is evidence for it there is almost always a counter.

For example a lot of people point to Marseille and his 1st season at Bilbao.

While there was a dip they did win there last 4 games and his final points total of 69 was higher then in a number of recent seasons where they had finished higher.

First season at Bilbao was fairly consistent with Bilbao mainly staying mid table, although results dipped in there final games they had also played a 65 game season with a squad of 23.

Bielsa Burnout seems to have become an expected thing but it isnt as simple as people say imo.

55 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

I feel like Leeds are in this position every single year. They start well then they end up getting injuries and fall down the table.

Hopefully you can make it this year, as long as it's not at expense of us

It does seem like a possible deja vu.

Just got to hope, injurieshave slowed us down but not stopped us so far.

Pretty substantial injury problems we have had which people may not realise.

6 games without Hernandez and Roofe in September. 

No fit cbs vs Swansea earlier on. 

Berardi, Ayling, Jansson, Douglas, BPF, Blackman, Hernandez, Roofe, Pearce, Bamford, Dallas, Cooper all missed through injury so far.

Half of those are still out.

Considering the injuries we have had id say the rest of the league are quite lucky.

21 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Many things depends on what clubs do in the january transfer window. If we can sort out the keeper, and defence situation in January i can't see many teams stopping us.

Forest did kinda stop us but you have to keep in mind that they scored on every single shot they had in the game, that type of luck is like 1/100

If you can then i agree, your defence is so dodgy if you can fix that in January then you will be hard to stop.

Although how you can afford to fix that in January still baffles me tbh.

I'm hopeful for the Villa game.

Anyone can beat anyone so easier fixtures or not we have won 3 with 3 clean sheets. 

Our away form is the 2nd best in the league and we have beaten convincingly 2nd 3rd and 4th best teams at home (we are the best home side).

Think now till New Year will be interesting for both of us.

On paper we have aside from you away (thats up for debate) a fairly decent chance of taking maximum points from 4 of our next 5. 

Blackburn, QPR and Hull at home and Bolton away.

In comparison you have.

WBA , Swansea and Preston away and Stoke at home.

Important month for both of us, season isnt settled yet but very different set of fixtures for us both.

People talking about beating us to cut the gap to 5 points. 

We both got 2 games before we meet, gap could be gone you could be above us or 8 point gap could be 14 points.

Tiz very exciting imo, love the xmas fixtures time.

Edit . . Maths let me down, you could have cut the gap to 2 points before we meet.

On 12/10/2018 at 22:09, hooter said:

It's yer Bielsa burn out, intit ?

Dunna fret, the longer folk don't rate us despite 2 points a game, the better. 

Good ole Bielsa burn out 

Yesssssss, sneaking up on the outside to snatch the title  

West Brom have a top of the league attack but are bottom half defensively.

Not sure about WBA.

How would they cope if they lost Rodriguez, Gayle and Barnes for a spell, 5 games or so?

Thats what happened to us, Hernandez, Roofe and Bamford, there equivalent is Rodriguez,  Gayle and Barnes.

6 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Forget what the media say do you think we managed to arrange talks with , compensation etc from the few hours of the faria 'isn't interested' stories form the media??

This was done probably days ago and I'm sure terry was offered to smith as a part of his backroom team amd smith thought about it and accepted due to the massive impact terry had here

Be honest mate i havent followed, i dont know who turned down or did what when, just remember reading about Henry, Fonseca, Terry, Faria etc. 

Always thought Dean Smith was the best option (wrote as much the other day) not because i particularly like Villa just because i think he is a good manager who deserved a chance. 

Never really know what happened, maybe Terry was offered to Smith as you say and he had a think and decided ok, or maybe Smith was told Terry was joining regardless and the pull of his boyhood club and the money was to strong. 

But id happily have had Dean Smith at Leeds http://www.motforum.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35724&hilit=dean+smith

7 minutes ago, blandy said:

I suspect that the "presence" of John Terry last season, with all the stuff he did off the pitch, the benefits he clearly brought to the squad, the organisational side of him, the professionalism and all that left an impression with players, staff, and people like Brian Little etc. who the new owners would have talked to. Whether they wanted someone high profile or not, I'm confident they wanted JT involved for what he brings aside from his name.

You may be right, may just be the cynic in me whose used to seeing our managers undermined for years.

45 minutes ago, sne said:

Perhaps because Smith has no experience of top football, big clubs or handling big players and egos.

A few seasons managing in the Championship and playing in League 1 at Sheff W is world apart from where we are and especially from where we want to be in the upcoming years.

Think Terry can offer him/us a lot.

Fair point, just seems like a way to appease the fans to me, get there high profile person that they couldnt get as manager. 

Then again Terry seemed popular in the dressing room from what you all say, so makes sense in a way.

Shame you didnt appoint Smith sooner, like before we played Brentford 

25 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Yep do you know he was forced on him? You don't. They could havw just asked and he said yes that woukd be good as he has such a great relationship in that dressing room 

Could be right.

Or the owners wanted a "high profile" appointment which they apparently did, they didnt get one, so they got Terry in to appease the fans and to get there "high profile" person. 

Dean Smith was never going to turn the job down regardless. 

Good appointment Dean Smith.

The sensible one imo, surprised it wasn't done within a day or two. 

But why force John Terry on him?

No way was that Dean Smith's choice, he may have agreed to it but get the impression its more down to the owners. Kind of weird, Terry looming over his shoulder, and bet if he has a bad start the calls for Terry to takeover will start, just odd imo. 

d"Here i come Villa fans"

20 hours ago, brommy said:

I’d have said the same, right up until Terry joined us in the summer last year. After witnessing a season of leadership on the pitch, leadership off the pitch, 100% effort, great application and at least appearing to totally ‘buy in to our club’ (not always done by players despite being paid the money), I was forced to correct my opinion.

"Hes a clearing in the woods but hes one of our own" sort of thing 

Think he is probably the sort of player who you really want at your club when he arrives, but from the outside he comes across as a smug idiot (full kit for a trophy presentation you didnt play in John). 

" a clearing in the woods" 

20 hours ago, TRO said:

Gary Neville, may have been left out to dry wuth no support.

I think our new people will give TH all the support he needs ( assuming its happening)

Maybe, Valencia did spend big the summer before Neville arrived, there manager was Nuno interestingly. 

20 hours ago, TRO said:

As you say......no guarantee's in football.

but we have our dreams.

we haven't had any chips for folk to piss on.......now we might have some.

 

I can read between the lines 

You're really hoping for Dwight Yorke 

20 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

I doubt Henry would take the job without assurances of money to spend.

Fair point, but we thought the same about Bielsa and as of yet that hasnt really been the case. 

Would seem unlikely you would be able to spend big in January without sales anyways wouldn't it? 

1 hour ago, TRO said:

He is a good manager as you say.......thats why he is being touted.

I guess he is in the frame......I wouldn't be disappointed if it was him.

I just think we have an opportunity like Wolves, to transform the thinking at the club and pursue a new direction.

opportunities don't always present themselves like this.

I understand that.

Big owners, big money, but the rest is just speculation, no guarantee the owners will spend huge, they may, but they may not.

They may not have big plans, it could just be that Villa is just another asset to have in there portfolio and they will let it drift along and just hope for promotion to sell at a big profit, nobody knows. 

I just dont get the appeal of Henry or Terry.

I dont like Terry for a start, so that probably clouds my judgement, id rather step on lego then have him at Leeds at all. 

Henry was awesome as a player, worked with lots of great managers, comes across well on tele.

But so did Gary Neville.

Seen some dismiss Dean Smith on here, because of the size of Villa and how he wouldnt cope etc.

And also because he may not have the super structure that Brentford have created for themselves specially recruitment wise. 

Funnily enough, the 1st reason was the main one for some of our fans dismissing him when he was mentioned in our search for a manager.

He may not cope.

But he deserves a chance, and i think from what i saw yesterday your owners would be nothing but snobbish if they didnt atleast consider him.Henry, Terry, Faria, etc, they are names for one reason or another, but good managers? nobody knows, they may be awful, wouldnt be the first great players to be poor managers or the first good number 2 to suck as a number 1. 

Dean Smith came to Elland Road and did something that nobody has managed to do this season.

Yes teams have taken points of us, but they have done it by sitting behind the ball, conceding possession in huge amounts, taking advantage of every set piece they could, and hoping to nick a goal.

Thats sensible, i dont blame them for it no matter how frustrating it is, thats the best way to try and stop BielsaBall, especially at home in front of a feverish crowd. 

Brentford came yesterday.

Smith dropped a more creative midfielder for a more defensive one, they pressed us high at times, they dropped off at times and hit us on the break using the gaps we leave behind in the wide areas.

But they wernt defensive, more pragmatic then normal, sure, but they attacked, they had a decent amount of the ball, yes there is complaints about the ref, something us and Bees fans dont agree on, but they came to Elland Road, played us more at our own game and very much deserved there point. 

It was a superb show of tactical awareness and respect from Dean Smith, he showed respect for Bielsa by changing his approach slightly, but he also allowed his side to play there normal game when they could.  

There wont be many teams who come to Elland Road and take points of us in the manner Brentford did yesterday.

Dean Smith is a very good coach tactically, he has proven that he can consistently do a very solid job in the Championship while consistently losing key players, he plays great football, he gets the best out of his squad which was built on a budget far smaller then yours, and he is a Villa fan.

Seems the obvious choice really.