Kingman Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Surely, instead of just thrusting names out, we should do what is not done when Villa actually discuss a new manager and think about where the club should be going and the ethos we would like to instill? Then select a manager based upon a long term plan for progression. Then when that manager leaves, choose another manager with a similar philosophy. You know, like the successful clubs do. This is Randy Lerner your talking about, We don't design and build… We build it then design! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 (edited) Surely, instead of just thrusting names out, we should do what is not done when Villa actually discuss a new manager and think about where the club should be going and the ethos we would like to instill? Then select a manager based upon a long term plan for progression. Then when that manager leaves, choose another manager with a similar philosophy. You know, like the successful clubs do. a] That's what we did with Lambert - "young and hungry" "long term approach", fans aren't happy and are wanting rid now. b] No, that's not what the successful clubs do. Most of them either stick with a manager for a long time or chop and change at the slightest inkling of decline - often throwing money at the issue. I can't think of any club outside of potentially Swansea/Barcelona who employ managers with a similar philosophy - and even then that's because they generally promote from within the club. The only ethos that anyone really cares about is winning football matches. If we wanted much else, we'd accept some lengthy squad building etc. Edited November 23, 2014 by bobzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 a] That's what we did with Lambert - "young and hungry" "long term approach", fans aren't happy and are wanting rid now. We did. It wasn't too bad a plan, the problem has been that the manager has failed to show improvement with this plan. He's failed to build something during his time here and now needs to be replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 a] That's what we did with Lambert - "young and hungry" "long term approach", fans aren't happy and are wanting rid now. We did. It wasn't too bad a plan, the problem has been that the manager has failed to show improvement with this plan. He's failed to build something during his time here and now needs to be replaced. Which you could certainly argue, but it's "only" been 2 and not-quite-a-half seasons since he took over. Given the overhaul that's been undertaken, I think it's pretty unrealistic to expect/assume we should be much higher up the table - especially given the lack of financial backing (we could get into another "£40m is sufficient!" debate; I think it's been done). The one thing that I, personally, would level against Lambert is that there hasn't been any significant improvement. The results have been largely as I'd expect (and good/disappointing in some cases), but there hasn't been any real progression on the pitch. Whilst 2 and not-quite-a-half seasons isn't a particularly long time in football, it should be sufficient to put some sort of stamp on the team. I'm not convinced Lambert has managed or is managing to do this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Agree with everything you've put there. I think if results were slightly better there'd be more support if we could see something being built, some sign that things will be good in the future. I thought the end of the first year was that sign but since then we've not come close to repeating that form. If anything we've looked like we've gone backwards from the end of that first season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Agree with everything you've put there. I think if results were slightly better there'd be more support if we could see something being built, some sign that things will be good in the future. I thought the end of the first year was that sign but since then we've not come close to repeating that form. If anything we've looked like we've gone backwards from the end of that first season. I'd use the word stagnant more than backwards. We're pretty much where we were 2 seasons ago. I think we've got a slightly stronger (albeit injury-hit) squad, though. Ironically, this is actually exactly the kind of situation where Martin O'Neill would be a good manager. He always seems to motivate a team to perform better than the sum of their parts. I almost feel that if you merged the player-finding ability/thick skinnedness of Lambert with the man-management skills of O'Neill, we'd have the perfect manager for our situation right now. (Answers on a postcard please...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingman Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 (edited) Sorry guys but Lambert was not the boards first choice, They wanted OGS!.. Lambert was chosen simply because most of the fans wanted him at the time and Lerner and Faulkner simply didn't want another Mcduff situation on their hands. Not really much of a vetting process, Probably just Faulkner telling Lerner the fans never stopped singing Lamberts name at the Norwich away game so he must be good boss! Edited November 23, 2014 by Kingman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Sorry guys but Lambert was not the boards first choice, They wanted OGS!.. Lambert was chosen simply because most of the fans wanted him at the time and Lerner and Faulkner simply didn't want another Mcduff situation on their hands. He obviously wasn't first choice, we interviewed Martinez first for example. However, all of Martinez/OGS/Lambert are young managers with a successful, winning background. I think the fans would've been happy with any of them if I'm honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingman Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Sorry guys but Lambert was not the boards first choice, They wanted OGS!.. Lambert was chosen simply because most of the fans wanted him at the time and Lerner and Faulkner simply didn't want another Mcduff situation on their hands. He obviously wasn't first choice, we interviewed Martinez first for example. However, all of Martinez/OGS/Lambert are young managers with a successful, winning background. I think the fans would've been happy with any of them if I'm honest. IIRC didn't Martinez blow us out the season before and we ended up with Mcduff? Don't think we approached him 2nd time round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 23, 2014 Author VT Supporter Share Posted November 23, 2014 Surely, instead of just thrusting names out, we should do what is not done when Villa actually discuss a new manager and think about where the club should be going and the ethos we would like to instill? Then select a manager based upon a long term plan for progression. Then when that manager leaves, choose another manager with a similar philosophy. You know, like the successful clubs do. The problem is, I think the only way Lambert is going to get sacked is if we are in serious serious trouble. And if that happens I don't think we'll gave the time or the luxury to choose a manager with the right philosophy. It'll be a case of choosing a manager who can scrape survival. So I don't disagree with you. That's exactly what we should do. I just don't think we'll be in a position to do it when the time comes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboyangel Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 (edited) reckon Brendan Rodgers will be available come January Edited November 23, 2014 by theboyangel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik986 Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Surely, instead of just thrusting names out, we should do what is not done when Villa actually discuss a new manager and think about where the club should be going and the ethos we would like to instill? Then select a manager based upon a long term plan for progression. Then when that manager leaves, choose another manager with a similar philosophy. You know, like the successful clubs do. a] That's what we did with Lambert - "young and hungry" "long term approach", fans aren't happy and are wanting rid now. b] No, that's not what the successful clubs do. Most of them either stick with a manager for a long time or chop and change at the slightest inkling of decline - often throwing money at the issue. I can't think of any club outside of potentially Swansea/Barcelona who employ managers with a similar philosophy - and even then that's because they generally promote from within the club. The only ethos that anyone really cares about is winning football matches. If we wanted much else, we'd accept some lengthy squad building etc. yes it is what successful clubs do. They have an ethos/mentality/philosophy and appoint based upon that. You can add southampton to that list. Any chairman with half a brain wants to recruit managers who have similar ideas, otherwise you have a constant chopping and changing in the playing staff. And you point on 'he's only had 30 months' - many managers get less and manage to achieve a whole lot more. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Surely, instead of just thrusting names out, we should do what is not done when Villa actually discuss a new manager and think about where the club should be going and the ethos we would like to instill? Then select a manager based upon a long term plan for progression. Then when that manager leaves, choose another manager with a similar philosophy. You know, like the successful clubs do. a] That's what we did with Lambert - "young and hungry" "long term approach", fans aren't happy and are wanting rid now. b] No, that's not what the successful clubs do. Most of them either stick with a manager for a long time or chop and change at the slightest inkling of decline - often throwing money at the issue. I can't think of any club outside of potentially Swansea/Barcelona who employ managers with a similar philosophy - and even then that's because they generally promote from within the club The only ethos that anyone really cares about is winning football matches. If we wanted much else, we'd accept some lengthy squad building etc. When managers take over a difficult job in any organisation.....they have a plan or a vision they present to the board....when it is not going to plan in the timescale, they usually raise mitigating circumstances or difficulties that were not factored in....the directors will then usually appraise the progress of individual criteria and will eventually draw a conclusion of despite the position not being ideal of whether the whole thing is feasible that given the right conditions it can move forward under this man. That's where most of us are at.... I think he should be gone......and yes I'm an advocate of giving a manager time I have never heard even one of his after match interviews where I have felt we are on the right track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 (edited) Cesare Prandelli has been sacked by Galatasary. Edited November 27, 2014 by Isa 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villaphan04 Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Beat me to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 I don't know anything about his management style or the circumstances around him getting sacked, but bring him in! He's not Lambert and he has a fancy name. He'll do. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 ......nobody that the fans choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 No one. Lambert is going nowhere 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 No one. Lambert is going nowhere Can't argue with that. Lambert is going nowhere fast. And so are we as long as we stick with him, The only way is down under Lambert and Lerner 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 McLeish to Lambert is pretty much the same as Deadly to Lerner - you feel the latter is better in some sort of way, though there's no real way to assertively quantify it, but the feel good factor has gone and the differences are already merging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts