Dean Smith

[Rolta]

4 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said:

Does anyone have access to The Athletic? I’d like to read that article 

Me too.

[AvfcRigo82]

48 minutes ago, Zatman said:

 

Some interesting names in there in terms of filling the striker void when building this season.

It's a shame we couldn't lure Giroud in January and that he said no. He is just what we needed in terms of a Premier League striker.

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by AvfcRigo82

[VillaCas]

1 hour ago, villalad21 said:

Do you really think the owners will accept finishing 19th when they gave him 150 mill? 

1 hour ago, Reivax_Villa said:

He will be gone if we are relegated, there are no ifs and buts.

There could be a few people surprised / disappointed 

[DCJonah]

1 hour ago, useless said:

People will convince themselves that what they want to happen is what will happen. If Smith wasn't a Villa fan but some random manager from Scotland but that had done the same job as Smith has done, then pretty much everyone would be convinced that he must leave at the end of the season regardless of whether we're relegated or not.

What might save him his job regardless of whether people want him to stay or not, is the fact that there will be only seven weeks until the start of the new season, with corona virus and the threat of a second wave, we might also be limited in choices to replace him as well, as you might some managers based on the continent reluctant to move country away from their families at the moment.

 

The fact he is a villa fan makes no difference to me at all. 

What might save his job, could be that the owners and purslow can see how poor the recruitment has been. I've got no doubt if he does keep his job there will be some conspiracy theories thrown out there. 

[DCJonah]

10 minutes ago, Rolta said:

Me too.

It mentions that we felt maupay and benrahama were too expensive. Ineacho was offered to us, rather than us scouting him so we backed off. Giroud wasn't interested, neither was Batshuyi. We wanted Slimani but he had no interest in joining a relegation battle. 

[useless]

Smith has played his part in the recruitment, he turned down the chance to sign Maupay and scouted the likes of Trezeguet and Nakamba at the AFONs, not sure why peopel keep ignoring that. if he keeps his job I suspect part of the deal will be that he gets less of say in recruitment, being as though he's partly to blame for this season's squad.

[Rolta]

3 minutes ago, useless said:

Smith has played his part in the recruitment, he turned down the chance to sign Maupay and scouted the likes of Trezeguet and Nakamba at the AFONs, not sure why peopel keep ignoring that. if he keeps his job I suspect part of the deal will be that he gets less of say in recruitment, being as though he's partly to blame for this season's squad.

You don't know what number choice Nakamba and Trezeguet were. Just because he saw them doesn't necessarily mean they are on him (also never saw mention he went and watched Nakamba).

[useless]

It doesn't really matter which players he chose or didn't, frankly it's a ridiculous excuse, his job primarily is to coach the players and set up the team in order to win football matches, as is the role for managers at every club, if he doesn't manage that to a satisfying degree then he will eventually lose his job. You can't even use the excuse that the squad isn't good enough, as they've shown earlier in the season and in the last two games that they're much better than they've shown since January.

No  excuses for one win in fourteen.

Edited July 18, 2020 by useless

[VillaCas]

2 minutes ago, useless said:

Smith has played his part in the recruitment, he turned down the chance to sign Maupay and scouted the likes of Trezeguet and Nakamba at the AFONs, not sure why peopel keep ignoring that. if he keeps his job I suspect part of the deal will be that he gets less of say in recruitment, being as though he's partly to blame for this season's squad.

My understanding was he desperately wanted Maupay but Villa wouldn’t pay the price wanted (not Smiths decision).

Nakamba and Trez were Suso signings - At most he will have seen one game of Nakamba and Trezeguet against random opposition and I’m sure they looked gangbusters against Malawi and Chad.

I imagine he will have more of a say this summer not less

[useless]

Can't remember one person ever blaming Steve Round for our poor form under Steve Bruce, they were both being blamed for their share of the blame and rightly so. And so it should be the case with Smith and Suso, they're both responsible.

[Rolta]

2 minutes ago, useless said:

It doesn't really matter which players he chose or didn't, frankly it's a ridiculous excuse, his job primarily is to coach the players and set up the team in order to win football matches, as is the role for managers at every club, if he doesn't manage that to a satisfying degree then he will eventually lose his job. You can't even use the excuse that the squad isn't good enough, as they've shown earlier in the season and in the last two games that they're much better than they've shown since January.

No  excuses for one win in fourteen.

What I said wasn't an excuse. I was just pointing out you didn't know for sure what you sounded so sure about. As for excuses, how about us not having strikers who can score?

[useless]

It was Smith's decision not to sign Maupay he's said so himself

"He's a good lad who I get on really well with, a good player but, again, the market value of the players was growing and growing.

"I felt we had to walk (away) as a football club at the stage it got to. He ended up going to Brighton and good luck to him. He's scored a few goals already, he's a good kid and hopefully he has a dry spell on Saturday."

 

Birmingham Mail

[Rolta]

1 minute ago, useless said:

Can't remember one person ever blaming Steve Round for our poor form under Steve Bruce, they were both being blamed for their share of the blame and rightly so. And so it should be the case with Smith and Suso, they're both responsible.

One person was in the Championship with Grealish and Abraham and the likes. It's crazy how toothless we looked.

The other is in the Prem with Grealish, sure, but also no strikers who can score. We also did a complete rebuild. Tougher league.

It's not the same thing.

 

[Zatman]

22 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

It mentions that we felt maupay and benrahama were too expensive. Ineacho was offered to us, rather than us scouting him so we backed off. Giroud wasn't interested, neither was Batshuyi. We wanted Slimani but he had no interest in joining a relegation battle. 

Thats the problem I think some people didnt really get, you can chase any striker you want but they have to want to join us and thats why we have Samatta and Baston they were the only ones interested.

On Maupay and Benrahma, I could imagine the complaints on here if we were in a relegation battle after signing them 2 and we gave Brentford 60 million last summer for them 2 plus Konsa

[VillaCas]

9 minutes ago, useless said:

Can't remember one person ever blaming Steve Round for our poor form under Steve Bruce, they were both being blamed for their share of the blame and rightly so. And so it should be the case with Smith and Suso, they're both responsible.

The issue with Bruce was that he underperformed with the squad he had. They were 14th when he was sacked and it was clear that they could do much better. Smith took the same squad to promotion.

The issue now is the the squad is weak and the big issue is recruitment. It is right that the person, Suso, whose whole job is recruitment should carry the overwhelming share of responsibility for this

[DCJonah]

15 minutes ago, useless said:

Can't remember one person ever blaming Steve Round for our poor form under Steve Bruce, they were both being blamed for their share of the blame and rightly so. And so it should be the case with Smith and Suso, they're both responsible.

The recruitment wasn't an issue, that's why. 

We all knew the squad was clearly capable of more so why would we focus on who signed the players as a problem?

Edited July 18, 2020 by DCJonah

[VillaCas]

12 minutes ago, useless said:

It was Smith's decision not to sign Maupay he's said so himself

"He's a good lad who I get on really well with, a good player but, again, the market value of the players was growing and growing.

"I felt we had to walk (away) as a football club at the stage it got to. He ended up going to Brighton and good luck to him. He's scored a few goals already, he's a good kid and hopefully he has a dry spell on Saturday."

 

Birmingham Mail

Purslow and Suso wouldn’t pay what Brentford wanted - Smith is sticking with the party line. What else could he have said

[DCJonah]

18 minutes ago, useless said:

It doesn't really matter which players he chose or didn't, frankly it's a ridiculous excuse, his job primarily is to coach the players and set up the team in order to win football matches, as is the role for managers at every club, if he doesn't manage that to a satisfying degree then he will eventually lose his job. You can't even use the excuse that the squad isn't good enough, as they've shown earlier in the season and in the last two games that they're much better than they've shown since January.

No  excuses for one win in fourteen.

the quality of players is a ridiculous excuse?

Very strange, of course it isn't. 

[NSmith22]

42 minutes ago, Rolta said:

Me too.

Iheanacho was floated to us and we apparently turned it down. That is one name I’m confused about to say the least. He’s miles better than all the names that were floated bar maybe Giroud who is 33. Also says Smith himself turned down Maupay alluding to his price tag. Slimani flat out rejected us and Giroud was given a second chance by Lampard. I would love to know who specifically turned down Iheanacho because that was a criminal decision. 
 

EDIT: Also Evans follows up the article with that tweet about chances created and that pretty much tells you that if we had a half decent striker we could easily have been Sheffield United this season and that’s with the worst wingers in the PL. Boggles the mind that people don’t see that Smith’s tactics were forward thinking but we were insanely let down by our awful offensive options. 

Edited July 18, 2020 by NSmith22

[Zatman]

3 minutes ago, NSmith22 said:

Iheanacho was floated to us and we apparently turned it down. That is one name I’m confused about to say the least. He’s miles better than all the names that were floated bar maybe Giroud who is 33. Also says Smith himself turned down Maupay alluding to his price tag. Slimani flat out rejected us and Giroud was given a second chance by Lampard. I would love to know who specifically turned down Iheanacho because that was a criminal decision. 
 

I think Iheanacho had a dreadful season last year for Leicester so I could see why the club would be reluctant especially as Leicester probably looking for big money.