Dean Smith

[Merson08]

1 hour ago, Keyblade said:

The 11th place finish with a smaller team in the same league is actually directly comparable to Smith's situation. Let the man actually get on with his job before you decide where he'll finish. "He'll finish midtable because that's where he did with other teams under completely different circumstances" is just weak.

Its not weak. We can only go off his past finishes for a comparison and its pretty mediocre. We will also finish somewhere mediocre.

There is absolutely nothing in his past to suggest otherwise. He may finish next season top and he could also finish bottom. In likelihood we will probably finish 8th to 15th cause thats his current ball park. 

[Keyblade]

4 minutes ago, Merson08 said:

Its not weak. We can only go off his past finishes for a comparison and its pretty mediocre. We will also finish somewhere mediocre.

There is absolutely nothing in his past to suggest otherwise. He may finish next season top and he could also finish bottom. In likelihood we will probably finish 8th to 15th cause thats his current ball park. 

He wasn't managing Aston Villa, you can't just extrapolate like that.

Just like players, promising managers are given the chance to prove themselves at a bigger club. It may not work out, but by no means is it a forgone conclusion that he is going to have Villa hovering in midtable just because that's where he was with smaller clubs.

[Mark Albrighton]

5 hours ago, Genie said:

Would we be higher, lower or the same if we’d have kept Bruce?

I think we’d be (slightly) higher.

Not sure why this isn’t in the Bruce thread, but ok.

Probably slightly lower. Hull, Wigan (just about) and Rotherham were the wins from his 11 games. That’s still a poorer ratio than what Smith currently has. Maybe he’d have picked up a few more points in those sort of games (maybe). But I don’t see him winning a few of the games Smith did and I don’t see him winning games like Leeds, Norwich West Brom etc.

I’m almost 100% certain we’d still have Bolasie and that keeper on the wage bill though. And the Jedinak thread would have been a lot busier.

[Delphinho123]

9 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

He is doing as great as trumps making the states 'great' again.

Doing a poor job thus far. 

No, he’s doing a good job. Looking forward to what he can do given a proper transfer window. 

[Stevo985]

10 hours ago, Keyblade said:

Was this slaughtering you're referring to taking place this time 2017? If not, it's not comparable. The 'excuses' made for Bruce, 2 years and 4 transfer windows (ie: at the start of this season which I assume you're referring to) into his tenure aren't the same as the ones being made for Smith, 3 months and 1 Jan window into his.

If you're talking about this time 2 years ago, then that's insane. I don't remember there being much OTT criticism at that time but I was personally of the opinion that he needed a full season, even though he did splash the cash in January. There are still differences between the 2 tenures such as the rebuild job not being as big in 2017 but overall it's too early to call time on any manager just a few months into their reign imo, unless they're literally losing like every game.

There were plenty of people who were insistent that Bruce should have gotten us promotion in the first season. And those who claimed he needed a transfer window or two or a pre season were mocked.

A poster has admitted it already in this thread.

Hell, there was a poster at the time who said if we'd appointed Sherwood instead of Bruce we'd have got automatic promotion in that first season. 

No, seriously  

Edited February 26, 2019 by Stevo985

[Stevo985]

7 hours ago, Genie said:

Would we be higher, lower or the same if we’d have kept Bruce?

I think we’d be (slightly) higher.

I agree.

Hopefully Smith has the higher ceiling though, so long term we'll be better off.

[Merson08]

7 hours ago, Keyblade said:

He wasn't managing Aston Villa, you can't just extrapolate like that.

Just like players, promising managers are given the chance to prove themselves at a bigger club. It may not work out, but by no means is it a forgone conclusion that he is going to have Villa hovering in midtable just because that's where he was with smaller clubs.

His current games this season, managing a big club like Aston Villa also has a 1.36 PPG ratio. Puts us 12th over an entire season. He even stated that Villa have an embarrassment of quality when he first started, where did the quality disappear to? Or can we not use this information cause it doesn't fit the blind following of Dean Smith.

His previous record at "smaller clubs" and his time so far at Villa has been mid table. I can't believe in fantasy and if I use any information available about his previous results it all leads to the same place. Like it or not, its very mediocre. 

I don't want him sacked and I hope he turns it around. Imo we will finish mid table, for every Middlesbrough game there's a Wigan game. 

[sne]

I think if Bruce hadn't been sacked at the start of October he'd been sacked later in October, or at the start of November. Perhaps later in November, or maybe in December.

Thing is it clearly wasn't working, and the state he left the defense in would have continued to haunt him, just like it does Smith.

[praisedmambo]

24 minutes ago, sne said:

I think if Bruce hadn't been sacked at the start of October he'd been sacked later in October, or at the start of November. Perhaps later in November, or maybe in December.

Thing is it clearly wasn't working, and the state he left the defense in would have continued to haunt him, just like it does Smith.

This—I couldn't see Bruce beating Boro/Derby. He was long gone anyway.

I guess we all see things as we want to see them, but Bruce and Smith had basically the same team from the signing of Abraham to the injury to Grealish. The performances and results in that period were night and day.

Edited February 26, 2019 by praisedmambo

[NIVillan]

With Bruce we have seen how far we could go with him, and the type of football.  If we stuck with him he might have got us promotion (Not this season mind) but he has never shown an ability to really progress in the Premier League.  Also his football was dire.

Smith at the moment has an unknown upper level.  This may be it but we don't know.   And as people are using to bash him he was at smaller clubs previously.  He has to learn how to manage a club like Villa, the expectations and the quality of player we could attract.

The quality of football hasnt been great recently but pre christmas we had flashes with the Derby and Boro games of what could be in store.  Even with Brucie's greatest win we never saw that.  When we beat Wolves 4-1 you spent the first half thinking oh shite they are going to batter us.

Time will tell.

 

[DCJonah]

2 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

There were plenty of people who were insistent that Bruce should have gotten us promotion in the first season. And those who claimed he needed a transfer window or two or a pre season were mocked.

A poster has admitted it already in this thread.

Hell, there was a poster at the time who said if we'd appointed Sherwood instead of Bruce we'd have got automatic promotion in that first season. 

No, seriously  

I think part of the issue is it became pretty clear in that first season we would struggle to achieve promotion in a short spell under him. There was nothing being built, no real consistency and a reliance on kodjia to get us points. Ultimately those that had little faith in what they saw were proved correct. 

The expectation now is not to just have short term fixes and hope for the best. Its a different era, a different approach and that's going to cause it to be judged differently. 

 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

9 hours ago, Keyblade said:

He wasn't managing Aston Villa, you can't just extrapolate like that.

Just like players, promising managers are given the chance to prove themselves at a bigger club. It may not work out, but by no means is it a forgone conclusion that he is going to have Villa hovering in midtable just because that's where he was with smaller clubs.

Mate I genuinely think they already KNOW this, and the main issue is that Smiths name just isn't wasn't sexy enough for some.

If it was Deano Pochettino and he looked exotic you could almost guarantee they would be slagging off the players for "failing to adapt to the new methods" as opposed to the manager.

Fact is he is ginger with a twisted nose. lol

[Jay.P.A]

15 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Mate I genuinely think they already KNOW this, and the main issue is that Smiths name just isn't wasn't sexy enough for some.

If it was Deano Pochettino and he looked exotic you could almost guarantee they would be slagging off the players for "failing to adapt to the new methods" as opposed to the manager.

Fact is he is ginger with a twisted nose. lol

JV, completely agree. 

A lot of people in this thread will be eating a lot of humble pie next season. 

One particular poster in here is upset that he's only ever finished 'mid-table' - that in itself shows he or she is not capable of fore-seeing progression. If any of the so called 'big managers' in today's world weren't given a chance at some point of their careers to step up as Smith has, they wouldn't be where they are now.  We went down the 'tried and tested' route to immediate results - and that has led us to where we are now - no where. Bruce, RDM, etc. 

What we're doing now is building for the future and sustainability - as all big clubs are doing. Yes the results might be shitty now - but they won't be for long. And OK - if Smith doesn't do well, we're only going to bring in someone of a similar ilk, our fans need to realise what our club is at the moment - just another 'big' club in the Championship trying to get promoted. 

A lot of the criticism in this thread is a lot of conjuncture and short-sighted.  

[LakotaDakota]

1 hour ago, NIVillan said:

With Bruce we have seen how far we could go with him, and the type of football.  If we stuck with him he might have got us promotion (Not this season mind) but he has never shown an ability to really progress in the Premier League.  Also his football was dire.

Smith at the moment has an unknown upper level.  This may be it but we don't know.   And as people are using to bash him he was at smaller clubs previously.  He has to learn how to manage a club like Villa, the expectations and the quality of player we could attract

Look who he was managing in the premier league though. Generally teams expected to finish near the bottom yet he managed to get a stable lower mid table finish year one and improve all of them bar Hull to 10th/11thin the second season after taking over before things start to dip

His premier league finishes by year are :

B'ham - 13, 10, 12, 18, 15 (left after 13 games to join wigan)

Wigan - 14(took over with 25 games to go), 11

Sunderland - 13, 10, 16(left after 13 games)

Hull - 16, 18

Would you honestly expect any of these teams to be finishing much higher than 10th?

[sne]

30 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Mate I genuinely think they already KNOW this, and the main issue is that Smiths name just isn't wasn't sexy enough for some.

If it was Deano Pochettino and he looked exotic you could almost guarantee they would be slagging off the players for "failing to adapt to the new methods" as opposed to the manager.

Fact is he is ginger with a twisted nose. lol

Think that's a bit unfair tbh.

If he was named Deano Pochettino and was coming from a mid table Serie B side in Italy or a Segunda side in Spain I doubt people would be creaming their pants just because he was non British.

The fact that he's British and want's his teams to pass, move and press hardly makes him a revelation. He's not asking the players to do anything outlandish. It's just that they can't be arsed to do it.

[LakotaDakota]

Remi Garde(23 games in charge) , Roberto De Matteo(12 games in charge)...

Boring ginger name is nothing to do with it,  couldn't care less if he was called Steve Stevens.

Results & performances are shit and he has shown nothing to indicate that he can change things for the better

[MaVilla]

29 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

Remi Garde(23 games in charge) , Roberto De Matteo(12 games in charge)...

Boring ginger name is nothing to do with it,  couldn't care less if he was called Steve Stevens.

Results & performances are shit and he has shown nothing to indicate that he can change things for the better

So you didn't watch the games where our style and attacking play was as good as anything I have seen in the last 10 years?

Is that not potential to you??

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

32 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

Remi Garde(23 games in charge) , Roberto De Matteo(12 games in charge)...

Boring ginger name is nothing to do with it,  couldn't care less if he was called Steve Stevens.

Results & performances are shit and he has shown nothing to indicate that he can change things for the better

Must admit that name does roll off the tongue well though 

[DCJonah]

32 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

Remi Garde(23 games in charge) , Roberto De Matteo(12 games in charge)...

Boring ginger name is nothing to do with it,  couldn't care less if he was called Steve Stevens.

Results & performances are shit and he has shown nothing to indicate that he can change things for the better

Well compared to the start of the season under Bruce, we average more goals per game, we concede on average less a game. We have had some excellent performances and his signings in one window have been positive improvements. 

Apart from that, yeah nothing. 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

45 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

Look who he was managing in the premier league though. Generally teams expected to finish near the bottom yet he managed to get a stable lower mid table finish year one and improve all of them bar Hull to 10th/11thin the second season after taking over before things start to dip

His premier league finishes by year are :

B'ham - 13, 10, 12, 18, 15 (left after 13 games to join wigan)

Wigan - 14(took over with 25 games to go), 11

Sunderland - 13, 10, 16(left after 13 games)

Hull - 16, 18

Would you honestly expect any of these teams to be finishing much higher than 10th?

 

The irony of how you've countered your own and other doubters point.

So bar the 5th finish which was an anomaly, where would you honestly have expected Brentford to finish while he was there?

Again, I love how certain rules only apply when they suit a narrative.

Edited February 26, 2019 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN