Peter Griffin

43 minutes ago, Jas10 said:

“Yes, yes! I would love to manage Villa! I am on my way!”

Oh Aston Villa, sorry, I thought you meant Villa-real 

7 minutes ago, Aston_Villan4 said:

If true, I’m very curious to know why they waited until the final hours to make a move for him.

Maybe we may have thought we could get him on the cheap with only hours to go. It is not completely uncommon. It appears Arsenal tried to do that with Doug

On 03/09/2022 at 14:55, messi11 said:

rather than 30 year old such as Digne, Coutinho and Diego Carlos. 

Is arithmetic the issue or maybe poor research skills or is it just plain old changing the facts to suit the narrative?

1 minute ago, Jas10 said:

I can maybe see what you’re saying but can’t fully agree with you…

Where did Little come form again? Managerial background/record? Leicester?

Would you not say John Gregory was a risk? Largely paid off but he didn’t get the backing… from Wycombe to Villa?

How would you, for instance, categorise the likes of Lambert, Sherwood, Garde, Di Matteo? I wouldn’t call any of them predictable or top shelf - all risks and misguided appointments imo.

McLeish??!!!!

Maybe Bruce was predictable but at the same time shit and underwhelming, if not disappointing.

MON was probably predictable but a lot of people were excited about it at the time… almost as though it was a coup for us…

 

The ex Villa players are a little too predictable. Lambert's record and performances at Norwich made him a predictable choice for a PL club. Garde and DiMatteo, yes, I will take that on the chin, they were not predictable. Garde needed more time, we turfed him out too soon. 

6 minutes ago, Jas10 said:

It would be nothing like the Brighton job. Again, it’s a risk, can he handle the pressure and expectation? Will he be overwhelmed? Can he deal with higher profile players, egos, higher wages, demands, disputes etc?

No one can say for sure…

We could end up repeating the same mistakes of old…

We need someone who knows what it takes and what is required to elevate a team and consistently have us competing and becoming a force in the league… someone with the nous and knowledge rather than someone facing new and unexpected challenges… no more learning on the job please…

Eventually, we want to be competing regularly in Europe… these are the stated ambitions of the board… let’s back those words up with actions then instead of continually wasting time and money…

 

I feel that if we got Poch, he could be our manager for many many years. I think he could build a legacy at Villa and in 20 years time when Poch's name is mentioned the instant association would be with Villa and not Spurs or PSG or Saints or Espanyol. He would be a Villa man and the man that brought European glory back to our club. (Yes, I do like him )

1 minute ago, Jas10 said:

Agreed… just look at the list of shite managers we’ve had… the main problem has been how poor our decision making has been and not giving the backing to the right people… I think it’s used as more of an excuse when it should really be more of an indictment of past regimes…

In the last 40 years we have never taken a risk or gone top shelf. We go for predictable. I didn't want SG as manager but I do like that we tried to change the usual type of appointment and take a risk. But my preference is for top shelf and I have dreamed of Poch at Villa from the days he was at Saints. There is no manager in the world I would take ahead of Poch today. 

1 minute ago, Jas10 said:

 

I wouldn’t exactly complain… but we’ve seen what happens in this kind of scenario before…

Many a man has wilted under the pressure here and not been the same since… I’d prefer someone with a bit of “been there, done that”… who was the last guy we had like that?

Tired of the risks, let’s actually move forwards now instead of pissing about and struggling…

I think Villa fans would turn on Potter quite quickly and wouldn't give him the time he needs. To me, Potter appears to be a slow build type of guy and would take a long time to get Villa to where we want to be. They have gone through quite a long time without a striker that can score goals and spent a long time passing the ball to each and dropping points. That would not be tolerated at Villa Park

3 hours ago, Jas10 said:

We are known as the “managerial graveyard” but it’s arguable that instead of that, we’ve just appointed the wrong people and not backed them.

I have absolutely no doubt that the problem is the managers we employ. We keep getting it wrong. Deano was the right manager at the time and that was to get us promoted to the Premier League and it is no surprise he is doing that job again. Besides that, none of our managers go on to any success and I believe that is on them and not us

1 minute ago, Jas10 said:

Not at all what I said

Poch for me

Potter for you 

Poch for me is the standout too. However, I wouldn't lose too much sleep if we got Potter

3 minutes ago, nick76 said:

No twisting, you are just proving the point.  I’m not saying your wrong in having that view but the other poster said nobody has said it and you have just said again that we appear to have started and we need to continue therefore saying the turning point was potentially the Man City if SG follows it up.  If we beat the next couple of teams then rightly you will say Man City was the turning point, if we lose then it won’t.  This goes to your point earlier that people are seeing things black or white and no in between.  There is nothing wrong with it, some think this could be a turning point, some don’t.  There was no twisting, you were just the comment above the other poster who said nobody said that City game could be a turning point but whether you like it or not, you did like others.  Your caveat was that SG has to follow it up, you still pointed that City was a start of it.

It is twisting. You said people are putting Saturdays result down as a sign that things have changed. Absolutely nobody has said this. If the next 10 games are W7D3 then yes, we will reflect on previous games and correctly say that the Man City point was a turning point. But we do not have the benefit of knowing the results of the next 10 games. The poster said we need to start, as in start to get some points and start to show improvement. It is a fact that we improved on Saturday and got a point. It is not an opinion. All I did was highlight that we appeared to start on Saturday. It is no ways says we have turned a corner

18 minutes ago, romavillan said:

Well, he's earned a stay of execution with the organised hard earned defensive display against a very good team. It think his problem now though is that if he goes back to the normal system and personnel and the team plays as badly as it mostly has done for 30ish games then he's right back in the shit.

So, best case, he changes things for the better and it clicks and we go on a run and it's only up from here. I'm not sure I can muster up any kind of belief that will happen though, not after so many terrible performances.

I agree, if he can't demonstrate that he can learn and improve he will be a goner 

25 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

That's good.

I like people who can accept different opinions for their merits, as well as alter opinions and stances based on information, as well as taking account of mitigating factors and circumstances etc.

Being steadfast to one position no matter what is what creates the most head bopping.

I often agree with points from all angles.

Naturally,  we have a plethora of personalities here and we'll never all agree on anything.

Some people naturally lean positive, some negative, some balanced, some analytical, some emotional etc.

How come u have stuck around here so long? 

4 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

I mean obviously we should try and set any release clause as high as possible. But as with Delph (a better example) take whatever you can at this stage. 

I think we rejected the take whatever u can get stage. If Doug wants a pay rise we should be doing it on our terms as much as possible. But 25m release clause would be a poor deal for us, we would be under constant threat of him leaving in every window, that't not the sort of position we would want to be in with a key member of staff

Just now, Made In Aston said:

How much interest is he paying on the overdraft? I think it's one of those where you try and clear it but, as the charges are so high, you can never pay it back. 

Yes, it may be a PayDay loan style overdraft but I just can't see him going after Leicester game. The next 4 games should give a decent haul of points, I think he will be given this opportunity and if it is poor then I can see him getting the axe. 

1 minute ago, CVByrne said:

Nah surely a £25m release clause and a signing on bonus, plus big pay bump

25m release clause is not enough commitment imo and wouldn't warrant a signing bonus and pay bump. It would need to be at least 50m. If Arsenal rate him at 25m with 12 months left on his contract then with 4 years left he must be worth in excess of that. 

Just now, Delphinho123 said:

He really is. 

He has zero credit in the bank and it's come down to a game by game basis. He has to turn results around now. 

I think he may have a small overdraft facility. Next 4 games are his to prove himself I think

Just now, DakotaVilla said:

The performance against city showed that the players are still with him. They could easily have downed tools if they had wanted him sacked. 
 

The manager deserves praise for the performance, as much as he deserved criticism for the performances before that.

Let’s just hope that he takes the opportunity this week to build on a more pragmatic approach vs city as opposed to opening the team up too much again. 

Just compare the way our players reacted and played as a team compared to Leicester against Brighton. Chalk and cheese. Emi1 epitomised the full team effort on Sat with the way he worked up the crowd and played a real captain's role on the pitch. I have been worried about Emi1's performances over the last while but on Sat I saw the old Emi1 back. I am not keen on GKs as captains but I would love to see him given the job. 

5 minutes ago, nick76 said:

 

But can you not concede they had a poor game for them.  Just because it was arguably their best side doesn’t mean it wasn’t a disappointing performance by them…you can see the difference can’t you!

Yes, I can see the difference Nick. And a poor game for them is still right up there with a top 4 performance. Do Villa get any credit for influencing how City played or is our performance all down to Pep's team having a bad day at the office?

4 minutes ago, nick76 said:

 

Context to the original post please Nick, I thought tabloid style twisting of comments was below u.  The post said we 'need to start now' and I pointed out that we appear to have started on Sat and we need to continue and build on it. 

Interpreting football results, sequences of results, scores and games etc does not only yield two outcomes. It is not a case of one outcome proves SG is the right man or otherwise SG should be sacked. There are so many factors that, quite rightly, influence the resulting opinion. Too much of the debate on here is centred around result X means such a thing or comment X means u want nobody but SG and all u can see is a future with SG. If you post something on here you are categorised into one of two groups and are then subjected to a litany of snide and sarcastic comments. Not every opinion or outcome is mutually exclusive of the other. 

1 minute ago, Zhan_Zhuang said:

I'm not buying this "poor Man. City performance" either, they are one of the best teams in the World.

It's just another fabricated argument to ridicule and criticise Gerrard despite a good performance from Villa.

In the pre match thread it was commented that the City starting 11 was probably their strongest starting 11 possible too 

Just on the chances of a Villa relegation this season. The bookies have 8 teams (40% of the league) as shorter odds than Villa for the drop: Leeds, Wolves, Saints, Fulham, Everton, Leicester, Forest and Bournemouth. 

51 minutes ago, PussEKatt said:

After our really bad start to the season.if we are going to finish top half ( and that is the remit for SG ) then we need to start now.

It does appear we did start on Saturday, it is now up to SG to show he can continue on from Sat and push forward

2 minutes ago, villabromsgrove said:

I agree with most of your posts Peter and I'm an optimist by nature, but I disagree with you when you say that we "are at no risk of relegation". You say if things don't improve we will replace Gerrard and I agree with that, but the rest is supposition. We don't know at what stage this may or may not happen and we don't know how successful our search for a better manager might be.

Until this transfer window I would have happily put my trust in NSWE to recognise the moment and the manager to put things right (because things are very wrong currently despite one battling performance against City). The fact that Purslow may have a vested interest in terms of his reputation in allowing Gerrard extra time to make positive changes, begs the question as to whether NSWE will over rule him quickly enough in the event of positive changes being delayed.

If we continue to play the same tippy tappy possession style in front of organised low block defences against so called lesser teams, we will be beaten on a regular basis by goals against us from quick breaks into space behind absent full backs. Our defence isn't strong enough or organised enough to play "Gerrard" football imo, and our attackers are ineffective playing in front of low block defences. Changes need to be made quickly to our shape and tactics or we are going to fail to get the points we need to move away from the relegation zone.

In my opinion we are at risk of going down this season until the changes that have to be made are successfully implemented. 

Okay, maybe no risk of relegation is not correct, there is always some risk as we don't know what will happen and we could sack SG and replace him with worse. My assertion that we are at no risk of relegation is that I don't believe there is any likelihood will will go down just as I don't believe there is any chance I will fall and break my arm today albeit that could happen. I am not a gambler but I would be happy to bet that we don't get relegated this season as I think it would be money in the bank. The last line of your comment adds to why I can't see us going down. Purslow won't let us, he will sack SG first and the changes that have to be made would be made.

1 minute ago, El Segundo said:

The problem with your stance is it ignores the fact he's already had 30+ games to try and prove he can do the job.  All he's shown in that time is that he can't, not to the standard required.  He's also shown he hasn't learned, and we have been in near-relegation or relegation form for the bulk of his time in charge.  Basing your case on the fact we're only 6 games into the season is rather blinkered bearing in mind the trajectory,  performances and results under the whole of Gerrard's reign.  What do you think is going to change, after 30 odd games?

The squad should be good enough to stay up, sure, but then they should have been good enough for top 10 last season, but under Gerrard they failed miserably to get near that.   I do wonder if you and others would be so generous with Villa's time and future for a lower profile Manager.  

It is not blinkered nor ignoring the fact that he has been manager for 32 games and what the results have been like. There are two discussion points at the moment 1) Suggestion we will be relegated and 2) Is SG good enough

1) I believe there is no chance we will be relegated and as I have said in the last few pages, it is because we are only 6 games into this season. We can only be relegated on points for a given season, hence it is futile to include last season's games. With 32 games to play we have lots of time to improve. Yes, the current run rate is not good enough and when u include last season's run rate (valid to include now), it doesn't look like we are improving. Even at that, we are still on about a point per game which would normally be enough to avoid relegation. So our current and previous season's run rate has us at the borderline and not being cut adrift. Just about everyone agrees that the squad is better than its performance and that SG is the problem. On that basis and considering we are currently on a point per game, I see no risk of relegation as Purslow can sack SG and bring in a new manager.

2) I don't know whether SG is good enough or not but I do know he is a novice manager and has only managed 32 games in the PL. I don't want the club to waste the last 10 months investment in him and replace him without giving him a chance this season. We could live to regret that. I want to see SG staying with us for the next 5 or 6 weeks to see if he can demonstrate improvement. If he can't then he should be fired.