Peter Griffin

43 minutes ago, messi11 said:

He reminds me so much of Dixie Dean in the way he runs and dribbles

I hope I have a memory like you if I am lucky enough to reach your age. Fair play to you

On 07/09/2022 at 13:39, WakefieldVillan said:

This is Villa though, and if there's one team you want to face....

 

Pep says Hi

On 05/09/2022 at 15:23, Made In Aston said:

I'd take that bet

I will give u better than odds on. I will give u evens. £100 bet and the loser pays £100 to Acorns and posts the receipt on here.

39 minutes ago, Lord Willard said:

Poch is a big name aswell to help get other players through the door. 

Poch would be a massive statement signing. One way to judge how a manager would be perceived is to look at a Baggies or SHA forum. They think we are delusional to suggest Poch as our manager, that's because the fear we could actually pull it off as it would increase the already huge gap between us and our Sunday league neighbours

4 minutes ago, Jas10 said:

There’s only one guy for me…

Dream appointment, perfect fit

The thing that excites me most about Poch is that every time I assess his potential appointment I always come to the same conclusion: better football, Villa moving higher up the league and building a strong foundation for the future. I can't find any negative with his appointment

3 minutes ago, duke313 said:

The price levels have been overinflated by teams like City, United and Chelsea.

I think the price inflation is not down to individual teams, it is down to the money that the Premier League is able to sell broadcasting rights for. This is in turn passed out in prize money and the level of prize money helps a player to determine his own value. A proven goal scorer will know how much leverage he has when negotiating wages and a club will know the value of a player when they are selling him and what that means to the buying club. Brentford paid Hull City 17m for a player in the window just gone. The bigger and more wealthy clubs can afford to pay higher but it is the entire league that drive prices up and not the top few teams imo

5 minutes ago, paul514 said:

I kind of agree, he could be worth 1m he could be worth 100m in a few years.

Personally I see transfers as bets, where some players have more attractive odds than others.

Yep, and if I was a betting man I would bet that Chuk's value will be more than 20m in the coming years.

Young player transfers are definitely bets, I think older players are more about their immediate value to the team. And the value will depend hugely on how much the player is needed by the club. For example, if Mings and Chambers both get serious injuries in Dec then the value of a new CB to Villa would be huge. This would be reflected in the price we have to pay. 

3 minutes ago, Jas10 said:

Did he?

 

That middle pic of JT directing RDM's head is brilliant, I haven't seen that before 

1 minute ago, Jas10 said:

And no, I’m not saying appoint JT!

NO WAY!

You got your disclaimer in just as I was going to post asking if that was your suggestion 

6 minutes ago, duke313 said:

Roberto Di Matteo had a 57% win ratio a Chelsea and also won the CL 

Not saying Tuchel is as bad a coach as Di Matteo, but win % aren't a good judge of how good a manager is. 

I agree, no single factor is a good judge of how good the manager is. There are so many other things to consider

Its a bit daft to say a player is or is not worth a certain amount of money. The market dictates the prices and the market dictated Chuk's value at 20m. Whether he goes on to provide value for the 20m investment will only be known in time.

17 minutes ago, Made In Aston said:

Apart from the fact he chooses the manager and tells lange what the transfer policy should be. 

Selecting the manager is clearly his responsibility as the CEO as the manager needs to report into the CEO, this is the same at every football club. Deciding the transfer policy is a strategic decision by the club. Strategic decisions are agreed a board level and are not by just the CEO. It is the CEO's job to deliver on the strategy as set out and agreed with the BOD. 

54 minutes ago, Pissflaps said:

We need to do exactly what Chelsea did. The reason why we are struggling is Purslow is too involved in football stuff.

There is nothing to support that claim other than conjecture 

45 minutes ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

That was his main objective and he did sell it, job done. But the fact he made a number of dubious football related decisions along the way at Liverpool doesn't fill me with confidence, since he's making football decisions all the time at Villa.

What football decisions did he make at Liverpool or at Villa. He is the CEO, he does not select the players to buy etc. He approves the budget and tasks the people that report to him to deliver on the footballing side.

2 hours ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

Hodgson was given a three-year contract at Liverpool but got sacked after six months so not an obvious success? Benitez was sacked with four years left on his contract, then came Hodgson (and then Dalglish, who was given a three-year contract but sacked within a year). A mess.

CP was also behind some odd player transfers like the signing of Joe Cole and he definitely had ideas about how the manager should act.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/dec/11/roy-hodgson-liverpool-nesv

Purslow got the Chelsea job for his financial and commercial expertise, he was kept away from football issues so his time there was a success.

 

 

Purslow's objective was to sell Liverpool. He delivered on his objective so therefore it was a success. Its irrelevant when Hodgson was sacked or what happened after he sold the club. 

50 minutes ago, ozvilla28 said:

Purslow for me needs to stick with what's his best at the business and commercial side he should have no input in football.

Okay, u may not like SG which is fair enough but what about all the other aspects of AVFC? The youth setup is amazing and looking like one of the best in England. The facilities are world class. The expansion of the ground is really exciting. Doesn't Purslow drive all of these initiatives?

3 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

He also took Hodgson to Liverpool and pretty much anyone could have told you that was an awful fit that would end badly. 

Hodgson was a perfect fit for Liverpool. Purslow's job was to sell Liverpool FC, it was not to win the league nor build a team for the future. He sacked Rafa who wanted to spend money and employed a safe pair of hands in Hodgson in July 2010. In Oct 2010. Hodgson after Hodgson only spent 15m on transfers, Purslow successfully sold Liverpool to their current owners. Purslow played a blinder at Liverpool which led him to getting jobs at Chelsea and Villa 

27 minutes ago, Indigo said:

Didn't think I'd ever read someone suggesting that they wouldn't be happy about the hypothetical event of Tuchel becoming Villa manager.  Just a league, cup and Champions League winning coach being compared to Scott Parker. This thread has indeed gone mental (no offence intended to Scott Parker mind).

I agree, but in fairness he since deleted the comment, it only survives in a 'reply to quoted comment'. Nothing wrong with having a few pints and posting shyte, we have all done it, well, maybe not all of us but certainly I have 

2 minutes ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

Most likely it’s a draw, they both get sacked and Rodgers comes here while Leicester appoints some trendy bloke from Europe.

Don't say that please 

4 minutes ago, messi11 said:

Thankyou!!!!! Finally someone admits it. The rest want it too but just wont admit it.
I would take the loss too if it means we get Poch, Potter or Tuchel. 
Losing on the weekend and gerrard going could mean we fight for European Football. Gerrard scrapping a 1-0 win at Leicester with a poor performance means it could be a long season.

Football Gods please be kind, Come on urrrm Leic....

It could have the unintended consequence of saving BR's job and I feel that BR is as bad for Leicester as you feel SG is bad for Villa. So keeping BR in the job could condemn Leicester to a very disappointing season

2 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

I dunno about you lads, but I'm gunna be fuming with Purslow if we stick with Gerrard only to see more loses and the available managers have signed elsewhere.

It's time!

I do get where u are coming from 

2 minutes ago, thunderball said:

I have always advocated stability and patience however I think Gerrard had to be an upgrade on Smith - he clearly isn’t on lots of levels, I even think he is inferior. I am not a big fan of his detached management, he comes across as entitled and destined for bigger things, he actually comes across as an old school attitude Management dinosaur. He might make it as a manager but we don’t have time to let him learn his trade, this club needs a solid, experienced manager, Poch and Tuchel, and possibly soon, Rogers all fit this bill. I think we have seen enough, some of our outings this term have been shambolic, however vs Man City was excellent. I just think it’s too late given what’s possibly on offer.

I get u completely, when we sacked Deano and were linked with Gerrard, I was clear on here that he was not the manager I wanted. But, as the club appointed him there is nothing I nor anyone else can do about that. So given the cards we are dealt I am just looking to how we can play our hand the best. To me, that means he needs a few more games

45 minutes ago, messi11 said:

Do you want us to lose on Saturday @thunderball if it means Gerrard going and Poch coming in?
 

I would take a loss on Saturday and the next few Saturdays if it guaranteed Poch as manager

6 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

This is pure evidence of a manager under pressure. I guarantee he's been told by Purslow, via Edens and co, he needs results, or he may be up for the chop, an Purslow's hands are tied on the decision.

I don't think he will even need to be told, I am sure he is well aware he is under huge pressure

4 minutes ago, viivvaa66 said:

What can we learn in 6 games, that we don’t already know.

• He is bad at selecting the right players
• He insists on using a tactic that don’t work, and result in loss after loss.
• He refuse to give our youngsters any chance in the first team.
• He only sign older players that have limit or no resell value.
• He is not capably to make the right changes during a match by either changing tactics or players.

Those problem would still be there in 6 games times, either he wins them all or loses them all.

tbh, I don't think that is all accurate 

- He showed against City he can pick the right player: both Emi2 and Phil on the bench. But yes, he gets it wrong too but it is only 6 games in

- again City game, he used the correct tactics

- I would love to see Archer get a game but he is playing JJ and some people think too much

- Only signing older player is just wrong: Kamara is 22, Chambers was 26. Loans don't count re age and neither does a backup GK imo. Carlos, Digne and Phil were 28/29 when signed. We need some experience in the team

- In game tactics haven't been great but he needs to show he can do it