FLVillan

2 hours ago, MellbergsBeard said:

I’d take Foster on a free over signing Olson 

I agree with this.  Question is whether Foster would want to be a number two.  He's still a good goalkeeper and would probably start for most clubs in the lower half of the table..... Olsen doesn't inspire any confidence for me, but if he's the best we can get we just keep our fingers crossed that Emi stays fit.... 

I've said for years that when everything aligns at Villa, we have more potential than any other club in Britain.  The ground has always been revered, the training facilities always up with the best (except when Ellis refused to spend on improvements in the late 90's), the history is in the top 6-10 clubs all-time, and the fanbase enormous with even more potential for growth.  The missing piece over the past 40 years has been the lack of a high profile manager.  Going all the way back to the appointment of Graham Turner in 1984 we have short-changed ourselves with these "up and coming" appointments instead of giving the club a manager who fits the profile and can handle the pressure of an expectant and demanding fan base.  The closest we've had to a manager who can raise the profile and handle the pressure - Atkinson and O'Neill.  No coincidence that this coincided with us finishing high in the league and attracting top-name players.  Little and Gregory were a close second and I think Gregory had the ego as a manager in a similar way to Atkinson.  Sherwood and O'Leary had the ego, just not the ability.  Houllier was ten years too late.  Little, Gregory and Smith had success because the pressure for them was dampened due to their Villa roots and they understood the club and the fans. 

The second city is the most lopsided of any in England in terms of football.  Villa dominate and have dominated through it's entire history.  London, Manchester, Liverpool and even Sheffield and the northeast are smaller populations with far more clubs on an equal or close-to-equal footing.  

5 hours ago, nick76 said:

at least we know he won’t score unlike other ex Villa players, that’s the upside!

He'll score three goals a season and two will be against us.  The new Shane Long.... 

11 minutes ago, WallisFrizz said:

Not sure about this. He has a bit part role at Liverpool. If he moves it’s because he wants to play regularly. He won’t get that here so I doubt we’d be in for him. More likely to go to Leeds.

Depends where he (and others) sees his level.  At Leeds he could probably play more, but be fighting relegation with a novice manager and surround by poor players. With us he'd be (hopefully) be challenging in the top half and with better players.  Also the "Stevie G" factor to consider....

I wouldn't be in the slightest bit surprised to see Mings sold and possibly at a marginal profit.  I know he was brilliant for us in the championship, but I also don't think he's all that and a bag of chips in the premier league.  I could see him going.  People talk about his "leadership" but to me you have to be excellent at your own job before anything else.  He came into a very quiet team and played with inexperienced and quiet players around him when he first arrived - he's now going to be surrounded by better and more experienced players and isn't as influential as he once was (by default).  He's certainly not going to be (happy) on the bench and if we bring in another centre-back he'll be the first out the door imho.  

8 minutes ago, est1874 said:

Thanks for sharing this. Doesn't surprise me in the least - both of them always struck me as gents, and two ex-Villans of recent times whose hands I'd still care to shake.

I know that it was a footballing decision, but it always broke my heart a little that we didn't keep Stan Petrov around on a short-term/part-time deal when he came back to train with us and wanted to play again.

He'd likely have never played more than 30 minutes of football that season, if any, but it would have been a nice touch from the club still. Obviously a Di Matteo decision, and the less said about that the better.

Have bags of time for both Petrov and Milner, always will.

I'll never forgive DiMatteo and Xia for that decision.  Not only did Stan deserve that opportunity, but I bet my bottom dollar that he would have added great value to that team.  He never relied on pace or exceptional athleticism as a player and could easily have played 50% of championship games.... 

13 minutes ago, PieFacE said:

hmmm Milner? Dunno about that one really. Big fat meh. Can understand why we'd want him tho. 

Squad player.  Bags and bags of experience. Model pro.  Would be fine with a bit-part role. Great role model for younger players.

In terms of squad depth, it's difficult to find an elite-level player who is/would be content to be a backup.  I'd rather have a James Milner or an Ashley Young than pay silly money for a younger (mid-20s) player who would be unhappy and who's value would decrease if not getting significant playing time.  We only have to look at Targett as an example of the type of player who'd not be content in such a role.  It's all well and good having depth, but if 5/6 members of the squad are unhappy that's not good. 

Let's not forget we have an assistant manager that was playing in a very good Dippers team at the age of 38 and I see Milner as a similar type as Gary Mac in terms of still being supremely fit......  Lampard played an important/similar role at Citeh for a season at a similar age..... 

5 minutes ago, CarryOnVilla said:

I have the foggiest to what people are seeing when they talk about KD’s potential. It all reeks of Villa bias… It’s nice that he’s one of our own and we treat him like that. However, the lad is 24 and he hasn’t really improved since We came up. 
 

It’s best for both Him and Villa if he try else where. 
 

good luck fella. 

Agree with all of this, although we signed him from a non-league club at 19.  To me, 'one of our own' should surely be a local lad who has come through the academy....? 

1 hour ago, His Name Is Death said:

I know there are bigger things to be worrying about, but why does our blue have to be so pale these days? (Arguably, we no longer play in 'proper' claret either, more like magenta in some lights.)

 

The blue in this kit is just lush.

I wonder what the reasons have been for the colour changes over the years. Are they decisions meant to accommodate broadcasters, making sure that the kits produce enough contrast for the cameras filming from the gantry?

I always enjoy the kit debates.  I (am old enough to) remember when this kit came out everyone said the blue was too dark and hated the blue side panels... 

Personally, I prefer the simplicity of claret body and blue sleeves, with a few tweaks to the collar and cuffs to keep it interesting.  They can do what they like with the away kit as long as it's not any shade of dark blue.  This year's Kappa third kit and the Reebok navy blue from the 90's should never have been produced.  Other than that, I couldn't really care what they come up with.... 

I see Danny Drinkwater has apologized to the Chelsea fans as he leaves for essentially being completely for his five years there….. 

The article on the bbc site mentioned him head butting Jota while he was here….

On 26/05/2022 at 03:55, Mic09 said:

You don't get any awards for the youngest team. You get points for a winning team.

Give me a team of solid 29/30 year olds over possibly successful 22 year olds. 

But the right way to do it is to mix it - Coutinho is what, just short of 30? Is he not a better option than Bailey? 

You wrote five different sentences there and I agree wholeheartedly with each of them.... 

Our best premier league season (the first one) under BFR contained Houghton, Richardson, McGrath, Spink, Saunders (29+), then Barrett, Teale, Atkinson, Parker (24+) and Staunton, Daley, Yorke (20+).  

1 hour ago, DaveAV1 said:

So he’s right footed, which side does he play?

He plays where he wants, he plays where he waaaaannnnts, Diego Carlos, he plays where he wants…… 

3 minutes ago, Talldarkandransome said:

Even the greatest ever made mistakes.

Coventry away. Let Mickey Quinn score a hat-trick.  

I think there is a clear difference between talent and mentality.  Our current squad has plenty of talent and is comparable or better than any squad outside of the top six.  However, the mentality of our squad is weak. It’s not measurable in stats or visible performance.  But inconsistency is the hallmark of a talented squad with a substandard mentality. Gerrard knows this and has set about trying to fix it by bringing in players (and staff) who have played and won at the highest levels.  If he gets it right then there is no reason why we shouldn’t be pushing up the league next season. 

2 hours ago, ozvillafan said:

 

We start the next season as we do every season: On zero points and in 2nd place.

We need to not make it worse

We really need Arsenal to get relegated so we can start a season in first.  And make certain that Aldershot and Accrington don't move up the divisions.... 

2 hours ago, sparrow1988 said:

Yes, we have... Ross McCormack, Marcus Allback, Gilles De Bilde (Loan), Mustapha Hadji, Mark Kinsellla, Drinkwater (Loan), Kieran Richardson

And I bet you could find twice as many "young and hungry" disastrous signings too.   The point I was making was to show that it is flawed thinking to write off a potential signing because he's the wrong side of 26.  In that quick list I came up with, all provided 4+ years of excellent service to the club and played in teams that won major trophies for us.  Two were captains of league cup winning sides, two played in our best-ever Premier League team, two won the league and European Cup while one was PFA footballer of the year, played six seasons with "dodgy knees" and an addiction, and is rightly seen as perhaps the best defender in the history of the club. 

(In my humble opinion Hadji was a decent player and Allback gets a pass because he scored the goal that kept us in the league in 2003...)

1 hour ago, rjw63 said:

His mom has a decent set of pipes on her

Shirley you can't be serious..... 

Decent championship player for us, but another one of those that “looks the part” but sadly lacking in key areas of an elite footballer. Notably his turning radius of a cruise ship… 

3 hours ago, Adam2003 said:

All a great argument for why we were correct to bin off serial future trophy winner Gary Cahill to bring in Zat Knight for more immediate solidity

I'm not following you here or how that equates to my original post... Cahill had played in our first team and shown he was good enough, and he was sold because he wanted to leave when Martin O'Neill told him he wasn't going to be a first choice (in a top-six team chasing a champions league spot).  Our first-choice pairing at the time was Mellberg/Laursen.  He wanted to go to Bolton to get playing time because he didn't want to stay at Villa and bide his time.  His choice and the right choice if you look at the sum of his career. 

14 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

The best way is for archer to get games not play second fiddle to a 35 year old hasbeen that will be a stop gap. Im not in favour of this signing at all. 5 years too late

Archer "getting games" shouldn't be a priority. Archer proving himself to be good enough to get games, yes I'm all for that.  MissIng out on a higher placed finish because we prioritized giving someone a chance rather than playing a proven scorer is simply not the way the club should be thinking.  

Our highest ever premier league finish (under BFR) was with a core of proven experienced players who had won things (Staunton, Houghton, Saunders, Richardson, McGrath, complemented by the odd homegrown player who had proven themselves over the past 2/3 seasons (Daley).  Nobody complained about that team, that finish, or that kids weren't being given games.... Yorke was dipped in and out and earned more minutes as he began to show he could do it.  But I'd argue that without the mentorship of the likes of Cyrille Regis, Yorke likely would have taken far longer to come good.

If Suarez can make us better, even for three months, then he absolutely should be brought in. 

38 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

 im surprised they could afford a bag of crisps.

Hence why they signed Anwar and Delle Alli.... 

36 minutes ago, TomC said:

That's in part because half (or more) of defending is positioning, and you get better and better with time and experience...

Exactly.  Experience and the ability to read the game in that position far outweighs energy/mobility. 

5 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

I don't think he's a bad player I just think this will be the contract he retires on and at some point the decline will kick in, we could be lumbered with him as 4th choice for 2 or 3 years whilst he's very well paid 

If it's a 5 year contract then I don't think the wage will befit the role come the last years of it 

And we won't shift him because no one else will pick that wage up 

I think centre-backs are more than capable of playing at a high level well into their mid-30's  They don't have quite the shelf-life of goalkeepers, but I actually think they peak much later than in other positions.... Signing a 29 year-old centre-back on a 4 year deal isn't much of a risk for me.  Mellberg left us at 33 and played another 3 years in Serie A.  God was 29 when he signed and 35 when he left (still did the business at Derby/Sheffield for two more seasons).  Look at players like Evans at Leicester, Dawson at Wet Spam - both peaked after 30.  Silva still doing the business at Chelski at 37, Kompany was a similar age when he left Citeh. Van Dijk will be 31 next month.

4 minutes ago, MNVillan said:

Don’t forget their idea for “Manchester Mondays” a few years ago where NBC Sports would just replay old ManUre and £iteh matches

Glad I missed that!  I've noticed that Higginbotham hasn't been on the air much recently.  Was he sidelined because he didn't gush over the Sky Six?  What really does my head in is that Earle and Mustoe never played for the so-called elite clubs, so you'd expect them to have a bit more balance.  But they stick to the NBC script and make sure the pay checks keep coming....