Sulberto21 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Mantis said: He's also too slow to make changes when it's 0-0 as well. He's simply not proactive. Yesterday was a perfect example. We were on top and Wolves made adjustments in positioning and the way they are going to attack. From there on in we failed to adjust and eventually lost. Edited June 28, 2020 by Sulberto21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, imavillan said: As much as i would like to see a change, i think you are right, we will stick with Dean regardless. You don't give a manager a new 4 year contract and the dump him. One thing for sure is we are going to be in the Championship next season. Dean may well be the man to get us back in the Prem at the first time of asking who knows. But what i do know, in my mind anyhow, is he is not the right person to take us forward to where we all want to be. Dean is a nice guy. One day he will get the sack, it's inevitable, and when he does he will probably get another crack at management at the likes of Preston, Huddersfield, Reading etc (no disrespect). It's unlikely he'll be offered a job at any of the top Prem clubs. I have said previousley all of the top clubs have top managers. Thats one of the reasons they are top clubs. All of the new money clubs were ruthless in getting top managers. If it did'nt work they were shipped out and replaced. Until we get a high claibre manager that can come in with a blueprint we will be forever on the merry-go-round. Whenever it is, the next managerial appointment will define our owners intent and path. It is probably our most crucial decision in ages. There is no blueprint.....They are just serial winners.....They have developed the art of knowing how to win.....and set up their journey of doing so......If that is a blueprint you mean, then Yeah.....This of course has to be tempered with how good the players are, all the top serial winners can dictate where they go so naturally, go to the teams with the best players and add to them......The serial winners of the lesser clubs are looking for bigger clubs to go to, to make winning a tad easier........i.e Mourinho, when he moved from Porto....Wenger when he moved from Grampus 8 They know what ingredients need to be heavily focused on and what ingredients can wait, they know the key elements to win games.....They don't try to "boil the Ocean", they prioritise those key elements and buy time in securing wins along the way, that gives them credibility to build on, and then set about adding detail to make things even better.....its a gradual process and the progress is identifiable, as small as it might be, but it is consistent. If you sign a manager, with a poor win ratio at any level, it is unlikely that sequence is going to change. Dean has already declared...." I am not really a results man".....Look, I know what he means, but its not a cool thing to say.....Its the sort of thing losers say or managers who have not grasped its a results business, despite him admitting that. Dean says "The team mirrors the manager" once again very noble and honest assessment, but really....does a serial winner say that when he is losing games? Edited June 28, 2020 by TRO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, Sulberto21 said: Yesterday was a perfect example. We were on top and Wolves made adjustments in positioning and the way they are going to attack. From there on in we failed to adjust and eventually lost. Was like the Chelsea game , in that we barely had the ball but flucked a goal but still we should of made changes - nope sat on his hands they make changes and score then we change Yesterday I don't know how you watch that FH and especially with Targett off don' t think you need to do something to get some width to a team who has 2 strikers up front.Hourihane on the right of a 3 man midfield is nuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 1 minute ago, Nabby said: Was like the Chelsea game , in that we barely had the ball but flucked a goal but still we should of made changes - nope sat on his hands they make changes and score then we change Yesterday I don't know how you watch that FH and especially with Targett off don' t think you need to do something to get some width to a team who has 2 strikers up front.Hourihane on the right of a 3 man midfield is nuts If we have 2 up top and width we're playing an old fashioned 4-4-2. Do any teams really play that anymore? It also leaves a lot of space in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 (edited) But he made attacking changes to try force it yesterday then Wolves scored immediately His subs Wednesday got us a point Edited June 28, 2020 by Zatman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, DCJonah said: If we have 2 up top and width we're playing an old fashioned 4-4-2. Do any teams really play that anymore? It also leaves a lot of space in the middle. Doesn't Burnley play that way? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 Just now, villalad21 said: Doesn't Burnley play that way? Not sure. I don't think we've got two cm good enough to play it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted June 28, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted June 28, 2020 5 minutes ago, Zatman said: But he made attacking changes to try force it yesterday then Wolves scored immediately His subs Wednesday got us a point They did but that was such a soft goal. We got lucky there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 1 minute ago, DCJonah said: If we have 2 up top and width we're playing an old fashioned 4-4-2. Do any teams really play that anymore? It also leaves a lot of space in the middle. The width in the modern game comes from the fullbacks so putting a CB there puts you at a disadvantage to start with but its made worse when you put a player like CH who is not going to provide any width on his weaker side.Against Newcastle he was on the left and we moved the ball for him to whip it in.Yesterday ont he right side he offered nothing apart from one blocked shot , which he should of passed back to Jack.There was one point where Jack put a ball into space for CH to run on to and he lack of pace allowed the defender to get back. Teams with 2 upfront seems to play 3-5-2 to use the wingbcks as width whilst maintaining 2 backs of 3 in the middle 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, villalad21 said: Doesn't Burnley play that way? They do yes simple 4-4-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 9 minutes ago, Sulberto21 said: Yesterday was a perfect example. We were on top and Wolves made adjustments in positioning and the way they are going to attack. From there on in we failed to adjust and eventually lost. I honestly don't think he has the contrast in personnel, to make changes that make much difference or matter. He has to rely on one player being off form and another being on form to bring on, but they are much the same....the squad for me is far too samey. I am being honest, when I say, I wouldn't have a clue who to pick, such is the up and own nature of them. I am not defending Dean now, because he is supposed to have an input in to who comes in, but for me the squad lacks balance and he is partly to blame for that....he is the architect of his own problems. such is the nature of our season, they all know stop Jack, and the rest are Jack Shit, doing nothing.....one of the reasons it has got gradually worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 1 minute ago, Nabby said: The width in the modern game comes from the fullbacks so putting a CB there puts you at a disadvantage to start with but its made worse when you put a player like CH who is not going to provide any width on his weaker side.Against Newcastle he was on the left and we moved the ball for him to whip it in.Yesterday ont he right side he offered nothing apart from one blocked shot , which he should of passed back to Jack.There was one point where Jack put a ball into space for CH to run on to and he lack of pace allowed the defender to get back. Teams with 2 upfront seems to play 3-5-2 to use the wingbcks as width whilst maintaining 2 backs of 3 in the middle If we were going 2 up top, I'd like to switch to 3-5-2. I think it would be better. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: They did but that was such a soft goal. We got lucky there But then surely you could say we got unlucky to concede. Both soft goals from individual errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 You get more width from 4-4-2 3-5-2 will require a lot from the fullbacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 2 minutes ago, TRO said: I honestly don't think he has the contrast in personnel, to make changes that make much difference or matter. He has to rely on one player being off form and another being on form to bring on, but they are much the same....the squad for me is far too samey. I am being honest, when I say, I wouldn't have a clue who to pick, such is the up and own nature of them. I am not defending Dean now, because he is supposed to have an input in to who comes in, but for me the squad lacks balance and he is partly to blame for that....he is the architect of his own problems. such is the nature of our season, they all know stop Jack, and the rest are Jack Shit, doing nothing.....one of the reasons it has got gradually worse. I agree with lots of this. We just don't have options and squad depth to bring people on and make proper changes. Like you say, everyone is similar. El Ghazi and Trezeguet play the same, just one is shit and one is average. Nakamba offers nothing new in midfield. Our strikers are already weak for this level and Baston would offer nothing So many weaknesses all over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 442 is a dead formation. You get overrun in midfield We dont have quality for 2 strikers anyway 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 2 minutes ago, villalad21 said: You get more width from 4-4-2 3-5-2 will require a lot from the fullbacks. I think with 4-4-2 we'd lose width because grealish is not a hug the line type of winger. I also think any combination of cm we play would be completely overrun. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, Nabby said: The width in the modern game comes from the fullbacks so putting a CB there puts you at a disadvantage to start with but its made worse when you put a player like CH who is not going to provide any width on his weaker side.Against Newcastle he was on the left and we moved the ball for him to whip it in.Yesterday ont he right side he offered nothing apart from one blocked shot , which he should of passed back to Jack.There was one point where Jack put a ball into space for CH to run on to and he lack of pace allowed the defender to get back. Teams with 2 upfront seems to play 3-5-2 to use the wingbcks as width whilst maintaining 2 backs of 3 in the middle It does. Gidman used to be at odds with Saunders of having to run the whole length of the pitch, back and forth.....Thes full backs need a very good ability to read the game to preserve energy and a good midfield to cover. It doesn't matter what formation a team uses, there are fors & Againsts, winners and losers in deployment.....i.e if a winger fails to get in threatening crosses, he becomes a passenger......if a full back can't stop crossess coming in, he too is a passenger. formations can only do so much.....the players have to be effective and do their job. Edited June 28, 2020 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 4 minutes ago, DCJonah said: I think with 4-4-2 we'd lose width because grealish is not a hug the line type of winger. I also think any combination of cm we play would be completely overrun. Don't disagreeing with that and i'm not suggesting we should play 4-4-2 I'd prefer Smith to stick with 4-3-3. Or probably better 4-2-3-1 so we can move Jack into the number 10 role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaCas Posted June 28, 2020 Share Posted June 28, 2020 1 hour ago, briny_ear said: The idea that a tweeter Called Villa Analytics is talking about the team being “unlucky” is also odd. I don’t think that statistical analysis deals in luck, good or bad. Across a large enough sample of data expected goals will be approximately equal to actual goals. But when you look at the data from only a single game or in this case four games it is very likely that the data will deviate widely from what is expected It is chance or luck whether that deviation is in your favour or against you Across a whole season it is likely (although not certain) that this will even itself out, but in the short term it is entirely valid to talk about luck I feel that with only two points from four games Villa have been unlucky As the original poster noted, others with a different agenda will no doubt hate on the metric 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts