Dale Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 3 hours ago, Tomaszk said: He wants to sign players and make football decisions when he has no credentials at all. I don't think that was the case by and large... I think feasibly there are only one or two that might be levelled at him (Ings?) even then we don't know that... But I doubt he personally chose Wesley, Nakamba, Luiz, Kamara etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 2 minutes ago, MrBlack said: His comments to the villa fans in a pub in London don't really seem like the kind of thing he'd say for the sake of it. If true, and i tend to believe they are, they are genuinely concerning regarding what our plans are for the North stand. What did he say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Just now, Tomaszk said: What did he say? According to @Dale who spoke to him there, he apparently said this on the not buying the excuses given for the North stand delays: On 15/01/2024 at 16:54, Dale said: No, not at all. Genuinely thinks the thing should be condemned. As a building asset it is at the end of its functional life, the longer it stays up, the more chance that the club has hand forced due to ongoing costs of maintenance or safety issues. And the demand is there 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 11 minutes ago, Dale said: I don't think that was the case by and large... I think feasibly there are only one or two that might be levelled at him (Ings?) even then we don't know that... But I doubt he personally chose Wesley, Nakamba, Luiz, Kamara etc. To be fair, players that we've signed during his timeframe were by and large very good anyway. So whether he was responsible or not probably isn't something to criticise him for. It's the manager shenanigans that were the main issue. Yes, the owners would have agreed to SG coming in, but he was no doubt the instigator of the action, and very much finger on the button for firing him (and had to have the big bosses pull the trigger for him). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tommo_b Posted March 2 Popular Post Share Posted March 2 My thoughts on Purslow…. I feel he did a lot of good work in laying the foundations to getting Villa to where we are today, he made a decision that in hindsight he regrets but overall he did a good job and probably was what we needed at that time in that role. 9 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Platt Posted March 2 VT Supporter Share Posted March 2 2 hours ago, Tommo_b said: My thoughts on Purslow…. I feel he did a lot of good work in laying the foundations to getting Villa to where we are today, he made a decision that in hindsight he regrets but overall he did a good job and probably was what we needed at that time in that role. If he had got someone competent we would never have got Unai. Sliding doors moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hornso Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 On 02/03/2024 at 01:16, Dale said: I don't think that was the case by and large... I think feasibly there are only one or two that might be levelled at him (Ings?) even then we don't know that... But I doubt he personally chose Wesley, Nakamba, Luiz, Kamara etc. This was a criticism of him during his time at Liverpool. Getting involved in football decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Maybe he should be taking some of the blame for these financial results since it seems the wage bill issue is from 2022/23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted March 5 VT Supporter Share Posted March 5 Out of interest, does he take any of the credit for taking part in the negotiating the (relatively) inexpensive deals for Konsa, Watkins, Martinez, Kamara…? Or is it just the bad deals he’s responsible for? I guess it’s like how he’s to blame for the Gerrard appointment but Smith’s hiring doesn’t count in his favour for some reason. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 26 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: Out of interest, does he take any of the credit for taking part in the negotiating the (relatively) inexpensive deals for Konsa, Watkins, Martinez, Kamara…? Or is it just the bad deals he’s responsible for? I guess it’s like how he’s to blame for the Gerrard appointment but Smith’s hiring doesn’t count in his favour for some reason. Now you're getting it. Konsa and Watkins (and Engels ) obviously came from Smith fwiw. He can have some credit for signing a clearly very very good Kamara on £150k a week if you like, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 32 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: Out of interest, does he take any of the credit for taking part in the negotiating the (relatively) inexpensive deals for Konsa, Watkins, Martinez, Kamara…? Or is it just the bad deals he’s responsible for? I guess it’s like how he’s to blame for the Gerrard appointment but Smith’s hiring doesn’t count in his favour for some reason. Just the bad ones. Thank you good night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted March 5 VT Supporter Share Posted March 5 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Tomaszk said: Now you're getting it. Konsa and Watkins (and Engels ) obviously came from Smith fwiw. He can have some credit for signing a clearly very very good Kamara on £150k a week if you like, yes. But, Purslow gets blame for Coutinho via the Gerrard appointment. Setting up the scene for a Liverpool reunion. Does he not receive credit for Smith bringing in Konsa and Watkins? Setting up the scene for a Brentford reunion? Seems a very similar dynamic to me. The difference is the one didn’t work and the other two did so that would require some acknowledgment that he might have done ok in the latter case(s). Edit - just to clarify further, he was definitely involved in taking a wheelbarrow full of money round to Coutinho’s place, but he definitely wasn’t involved in the negotiation for the transfer fee for Konsa? Do I have that correct? Edited March 5 by Mark Albrighton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 hour ago, Mark Albrighton said: But, Purslow gets blame for Coutinho via the Gerrard appointment. Setting up the scene for a Liverpool reunion. Does he not receive credit for Smith bringing in Konsa and Watkins? Setting up the scene for a Brentford reunion? Seems a very similar dynamic to me. The difference is the one didn’t work and the other two did so that would require some acknowledgment that he might have done ok in the latter case(s). Edit - just to clarify further, he was definitely involved in taking a wheelbarrow full of money round to Coutinho’s place, but he definitely wasn’t involved in the negotiation for the transfer fee for Konsa? Do I have that correct? I think the difference is Purslow was clearly the driving force behind hiring Gerrard. I'm not sure it was solely him for Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted March 5 VT Supporter Share Posted March 5 2 minutes ago, DCJonah said: I think the difference is Purslow was clearly the driving force behind hiring Gerrard. I'm not sure it was solely him for Smith. But this is guesswork, isn’t it? I don’t think Dean Smith was SOLELY down to Purslow, but he would have played his part. He would have played his part in negotiating some of the deals like Douglas Luiz for a relative pittance. But **** all that because we gave Coutinho a lot of money. We don’t like the Terrace view thing “Oh what was Purslow thinking?!?” But the same people will say “Well Heck must have the backing of the owners to do this…” And it goes the other way too, in the case of Heck, I know. There’s just zero ****ing nuance from some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJBOB Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 He did a pretty good job until the Grealish sale. That interjection, which I think is clear since he made the whole sum of parts video, is what ultimately led to his downfall as others have alluded, got him too involved with the footballing decisions. That summer transfer, Gerrard hire, winter transfer sequence ultimately lost him his job - which is about fair. Equally fair that he did a decent job prior to that with Deano, a lot of the astute signings that he may or may not have been involved with and then our promotion and survival. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 15 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: But this is guesswork, isn’t it? I don’t think Dean Smith was SOLELY down to Purslow, but he would have played his part. He would have played his part in negotiating some of the deals like Douglas Luiz for a relative pittance. But **** all that because we gave Coutinho a lot of money. We don’t like the Terrace view thing “Oh what was Purslow thinking?!?” But the same people will say “Well Heck must have the backing of the owners to do this…” And it goes the other way too, in the case of Heck, I know. There’s just zero ****ing nuance from some. He was praised when did good deals but his last 2 seasons were awful and well that's what is mainly remembered. Also Suso was more involved in likes of Luiz and Konsa deals before Purslow apparently forced him out(Suso words) He was the CEO while our FFP finances crumbled if these reports are true especially when he loved telling that he knows FFP inside out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted March 5 VT Supporter Share Posted March 5 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Zatman said: He was praised when did good deals but his last 2 seasons were awful and well that's what is mainly remembered. Also Suso was more involved in likes of Luiz and Konsa deals before Purslow apparently forced him out(Suso words) He was the CEO while our FFP finances crumbled if these reports are true especially when he loved telling that he knows FFP inside out His last season, the 22/23 season. What in particular did he do awfully? Gerrard is already there, so I guess not sacking Gerrard before the season started, that could count. What did he do exceptionally wrong? Are you including the confirmation of Coutino in that season? I remember it being confirmed at the end of season awards. Edit - and the last two years mainly being remembered…that’s down to the individual. I’m sure there are some people who will remember Dean Smith’s final six months as being the “true” face of his tenure than the previous couple of seasons. I wouldn’t be among them, but you know full well that those people exist. I try and keep his whole time here in consideration when weighing up the pros and cons. Edited March 5 by Mark Albrighton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 36 minutes ago, Mark Albrighton said: His last season, the 22/23 season. What in particular did he do awfully? Gerrard is already there, so I guess not sacking Gerrard before the season started, that could count. What did he do exceptionally wrong? Are you including the confirmation of Coutino in that season? I remember it being confirmed at the end of season awards. Edit - and the last two years mainly being remembered…that’s down to the individual. I’m sure there are some people who will remember Dean Smith’s final six months as being the “true” face of his tenure than the previous couple of seasons. I wouldn’t be among them, but you know full well that those people exist. I try and keep his whole time here in consideration when weighing up the pros and cons. Have you not read the financials. He was Ceo that season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted March 5 VT Supporter Share Posted March 5 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Zatman said: Have you not read the financials. He was Ceo that season What I have read in the financial thread is a few people (who I accept know a lot more about these things than me) debate and go round and round in increasingly tedious circles as to what the numbers mean. The fact that there seems to be a debate at all suggests that things aren’t necessarily ****ed. And that the club have suggested they’re falling in line. As I have said, you can level the bad deals at him and then bemoan the financial state we (possibly) are in. But people can also point to some rather good players that have come in while he was here for not excessive amounts, which he would have at least played a part in too in the negotiation side of things (I simply can’t think why a slighted Suso would paint a different picture, no reason whatsoever why he would do so…). Edited March 5 by Mark Albrighton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWARLEY2 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 9 hours ago, Zatman said: Maybe he should be taking some of the blame for these financial results since it seems the wage bill issue is from 2022/23 We are yet to know whether any blame needs to be apportioned. Whether this was a board decision to spend right up to the maximum in order to move us forward. In my opinion it is this. NWSE are not here to post healthy profits. If you dont win things then theres very little point in owning us. They could invest in many other things that make huge profits . But they are here to go for glory and be excited. Its a good thing rather than bad if we have managed to stay the right side of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts