Dean Smith

[TRO]

1 hour ago, M_Afro said:

I like your posts Nick. You are one of the more measured posters but what is this track record? Prior to coming to villa he has no track record. At Villa he got an relatively extremely talented bunch of players promoted via the play offs. I encourage you to watch the play off games again. We were lucky in all 3 matches. Yes we did win 10 on the bounce which is impressive but his record without Jack was woeful.

I definitely think he should be replaced but only if we can get a definite improvement. Dean does bring a lot of other advantages. His local status and support of the club does bring the support together. I do think he is learning too. Tough one really.

Not trying to be facetious, but what do you think he has learnt?

I think winning football brings us together.....and avoiding poor runs of results, which attracts doubt.

I think he looked much more confident in himself in the early exchanges of the season.....I have not seen anything to suggest a better Dean Smith, next season, sorry.

I think 21 defeats and 66 goals against has taken its toll on him.....If he can dust himself down and put that out of his mind ,who knows.....I have my doubts.

Edited July 18, 2020 by TRO

[jackbauer24]

Do you think Smith is good enough to manage in the Premier League? That's the only real question.

If yes, then you keep him on. You put this season down to other factors/learning experience and you maintain some stability.

If no, then however good he may be in the Championship, you get rid as you're just guaranteeing an endless cycle or definitely having to change the manager on any promotion. Get someone else who can build AND lead us in the Premier League.

Me? I think whether by hook or by crook he manages to keep us up he stays. If he doesn't he goes. It's a results business. And seeing as we're 99.9% likely to be relegated in the next few days, I'd be drawing up the short list pronto - and Terry wouldn't be on it!

Edited July 18, 2020 by jackbauer24

[Nabby]

45 minutes ago, TRO said:

a quick tot up.....those players mentioned accrue to c £77 million......Imo only Hause was value for money.....the rest over priced.

why were they signed if they wasn't good enough to stay up.....where is the nous in the club.

I saw we paid little in agent fee's compared to others which on face of it looks a positive but  perhaps if we had paid agents more we may have sourced better players at better prices ..case in point Wolves recruitment 

Other is is one of having known rich owners , whilst we spent alot we also turned down numerous deals as they wanted too much ..ie Maupay. Mings took a large amount of budget as Bournouth knew we wanted him for continuity and set a high price we ended up paying.

The purchasing of players is a 10-15 year issue at this point.I'm sure other clubs have made mistakes but we seem top of the pile in poor purchasing.The current concept of young players only needs to be torn up completely.The idea that a player over 29 or so is waste of money as he has no re-sale is ludicrous.You can't base every signing on how much the player can be sold for.Case in point Luiz at Arsenal 33 years old and given a new deal was an absolute rock   against City.Sometimes you need exp and you need a mix.

Story goes we could of had Cahill if we had gone for a 2 year deal .Yes he is old and yes costly on wages but 100% with him in team we concede less goals and his exp makes Mings a better CB.

[TRO]

37 minutes ago, jackbauer24 said:

Do you think Smith is good enough to manage in the Premier League? That's the only real question.

If yes, then you keep him on. You put this season down to other factors/learning experience and you maintain some stability.

If no, then however good he may be in the Championship, you get rid as you're just guaranteeing an endless cycle or definitely having to change the manager on any promotion. Get someone else who can build AND lead us in the Premier League.

Me? I think whether by hook or by crook he manages to keep us up he stays. If he doesn't he goes. It's a results business. And seeing as we're 99.9% likely to be relegated in the next few days, I'd be drawing up the short list pronto - and Terry wouldn't be on it!

well, that question has been answered, in our results, with a 22% win ratio, in the Prem.

see, I don't understand this.

stability only kicks in with gradual progression......we have been on some poor runs and its arguable if any of our players have got actually better as the season has progressed.....just one for me Luiz and maybe Reina has ditched his collywobbles.

I am not sure what stability, we think we have.....sure they all know where the toilets are, thats about it for me.

Edited July 19, 2020 by TRO

[TRO]

21 minutes ago, Nabby said:

I saw we paid little in agent fee's compared to others which on face of it looks a positive but  perhaps if we had paid agents more we may have sourced better players at better prices ..case in point Wolves recruitment 

Other is is one of having known rich owners , whilst we spent alot we also turned down numerous deals as they wanted too much ..ie Maupay. Mings took a large amount of budget as Bournouth knew we wanted him for continuity and set a high price we ended up paying.

The purchasing of players is a 10-15 year issue at this point.I'm sure other clubs have made mistakes but we seem top of the pile in poor purchasing.The current concept of young players only needs to be torn up completely.The idea that a player over 29 or so is waste of money as he has no re-sale is ludicrous.You can't base every signing on how much the player can be sold for.Case in point Luiz at Arsenal 33 years old and given a new deal was an absolute rock   against City.Sometimes you need exp and you need a mix.

Story goes we could of had Cahill if we had gone for a 2 year deal .Yes he is old and yes costly on wages but 100% with him in team we concede less goals and his exp makes Mings a better CB.

Bang on

That is a knee-jerk reaction to having our fingers burnt too many times.....you wouldn't want too many granted, but the player has to fit the vision, irrespective of his age.

I can understand it, but its geared to protecting us against poor signings, in short, we have lost confidence in ourselves in the transfer market.....how many have we had to fully amortise, through poor judgment.

I still see a policy geared to recovering funds on player misses.....we seem to build a policy for damage limitation.............not giving a manager players to build a rounded squad, with a correct mix, is folly.

Edited July 19, 2020 by TRO

[Nabby]

7 minutes ago, TRO said:

see, I don't understand this.

stability only kicks in with gradual progression......we have been on some poor runs and its arguable if any of our players have got actually better as the season has progressed.....just one for me Luiz and maybe Reina has ditched his collywobbles.

I am not sure what stability, we think we have.....sure they all know where the toilets are, thats about it for me.

Perhaps a gut reaction to recent matches but if you look at Arsenal under Arteta there is a clear improvement and certainly they are more resilient with their defending.I really don't see any improvement with us like this under Smith. 

[TRO]

2 minutes ago, Nabby said:

Perhaps a gut reaction to recent matches but if you look at Arsenal under Arteta there is a clear improvement and certainly they are more resilient with their defending.I really don't see any improvement with us like this under Smith. 

absolutely on the money.

but the critics of this point will just blame the players.....which does have some credence to be fair....its many factors.

Edited July 19, 2020 by TRO

[Nabby]

3 minutes ago, TRO said:

That is a knee-jerk reaction to having our fingers burnt too many times.

I can understand it, but its geared to protect us against poor signings, in short, we have lost confidence in ourselves.

I still see a policy geared to recovering funds on player misses.....we seem to build a policy for damage limitation.............not giving a manager players to build a rounded squad, with a correct mix.

You make the decision not to get exp in summer then in Winter you go and get Reina and Drinkwater in for their exp !!   

On Cahill , we brought in 4 cbs all of them little to no exp in PL.How does no one in this descion making look at the options and thinks well if we get 3 young guys and 1 exp in Cahill thats the best option.3 young guys to learn off a player who in an ex International player with numerous titles to his name.

[the_eristic]

Same. I feel like even if we'd kept Whelan or Jedi on the books, as limited as they were, to come on at 75 minutes when we're leading just to pick up fouls and run down the clock, we'd have more points. Sorely lacking a couple guys who've been around and know the tricks to seeing a game out.

[sharkyvilla]

4 hours ago, Nabby said:

You make the decision not to get exp in summer then in Winter you go and get Reina and Drinkwater in for their exp !!   

On Cahill , we brought in 4 cbs all of them little to no exp in PL.How does no one in this descion making look at the options and thinks well if we get 3 young guys and 1 exp in Cahill thats the best option.3 young guys to learn off a player who in an ex International player with numerous titles to his name.

Again, why would Cahill come here?

[M_Afro]

7 hours ago, TRO said:

Not trying to be facetious, but what do you think he has learnt?

I think winning football brings us together.....and avoiding poor runs of results, which attracts doubt.

I think he looked much more confident in himself in the early exchanges of the season.....I have not seen anything to suggest a better Dean Smith, next season, sorry.

I think 21 defeats and 66 goals against has taken its toll on him.....If he can dust himself down and put that out of his mind ,who knows.....I have my doubts.

I think he has improved the way we are set up. I think we have a better plan now for PL survival. We are defensively stronger. Sadly it is too late.

He was so green at the start of the season. We were way too easy to score against and he didn’t seem to understand that we, as a newly promoted team, need to be stubborn, hard to beat, good at set pieces and generally solid. 

If you look at my posts, I never wanted Dean at Villa. He was always too big a risk due to his lack of experience. He had a learning curve to go on before getting a job as big as this. I think this has been proven in the time he has been here. The conundrum is what to do now? He is much further along his learning curve now and he is more capable of galvanising the support than many other managers that we have had. That has to be worth something.

For what it’s worth I would still get rid of him but for the first time he is starting to make me doubt that and I would only replace him if we can get a significant improvement. Get Rafa or someone of that ilk and I wouldn’t think twice but if the owners do decide to change things they need to think much bigger than Dean Smith this time.

[Laughable Chimp]

2 hours ago, sharkyvilla said:

Again, why would Cahill come here?

Money. 

[VillaCas]

7 hours ago, TRO said:

absolutely on the money.

but the critics of this point will just blame the players.....which does have some credence to be fair....its many factors.

The situation at Arsenal and at Villa are worlds apart and of course the biggest part of that is the playing squad

You are right that very many factors have been going wrong for the last ten years - it will be slow, stuttering progress to put them right

[VillaCas]

12 minutes ago, M_Afro said:

I think he has improved the way we are set up. I think we have a better plan now for PL survival. We are defensively stronger. Sadly it is too late.

He was so green at the start of the season. We were way too easy to score against and he didn’t seem to understand that we, as a newly promoted team, need to be stubborn, hard to beat, good at set pieces and generally solid. 

If you look at my posts, I never wanted Dean at Villa. He was always too big a risk due to his lack of experience. He had a learning curve to go on before getting a job as big as this. I think this has been proven in the time he has been here. The conundrum is what to do now? He is much further along his learning curve now and he is more capable of galvanising the support than many other managers that we have had. That has to be worth something.

For what it’s worth I would still get rid of him but for the first time he is starting to make me doubt that and I would only replace him if we can get a significant improvement. Get Rafa or someone of that ilk and I wouldn’t think twice but if the owners do decide to change things they need to think much bigger than Dean Smith this time.

I agree. We were too open at the start and seem more organised. It was always going to be difficult and many here have expectations that couldn’t be met with the current squad 

Smith is a better manager now than when he arrived but If a real top class coach was available, great.  if not, it would be a be a backward step to bring in someone who is similar and who doesn’t know the players 

 

[QldVilla]

Some interesting comments in the last few posts regarding Smith.

There were problems with out performances going back as far as early November. I think Smith went into his first PL season with a little naively and this was highlighted in some of the performances early on in the season and probably cost us 5-6 points. And as much as the League Cup run was great, how many points did that possibly cost us 2,3,4 points?

im of the opinion that the club wasn’t ready for promotion, but I want to know more about the transfer strategy and whether the Manager got his players, or sacrifices were made to get so many players in? Because of this, I believe the whole club is at fault, if we go down I’m still willing to give Smith the opportunity to set things right and by that, automatic promotion. 

[Tomaszk]

5 hours ago, the_eristic said:

Same. I feel like even if we'd kept Whelan or Jedi on the books, as limited as they were, to come on at 75 minutes when we're leading just to pick up fouls and run down the clock, we'd have more points. Sorely lacking a couple guys who've been around and know the tricks to seeing a game out.

A guy who couldn't find a contract so retired and a guy who got bombed out the SPL to take a deal in league one.

Experience was probably needed elsewhere.

Edited July 19, 2020 by Tomaszk

[sharkyvilla]

2 hours ago, Laughable Chimp said:

Money. 

What he is on at Palace would make him our highest paid player I believe. I think we would have had to go a lot higher than that to get him to uproot his family or commute at the same time as being a lot less stable a club than Palace. 

[Nabby]

3 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

What he is on at Palace would make him our highest paid player I believe. I think we would have had to go a lot higher than that to get him to uproot his family or commute at the same time as being a lot less stable a club than Palace. 

As far as I have read it wasn't the wages that were an issue it was that we would only offer a 1 year deal.I'm all for long term thinking but to me it seems we took our eye off the ball in terms of the short term strategy - staying in the PL 

Now we go down and face a rebuild and readjustment 

Simply put staying in PL and adding to Grealish ,McGinn is an easier  job than going down possibly selling those 2 and Mings and having to buy a whole new Spine to the side .Newcastle are often mentioned as a team that bounced back as if it was a relatively simply process.It started that they had Rafa who came in late as  they were relegated which gave him the summer to rebuild , and it was a big rebuild they sold all majority of their best players.Yes they won league and were easily promoted but they won by a point over a Brighton team who spent nothing and lost 10 games along the way.

 

[nick76]

13 hours ago, M_Afro said:

I like your posts Nick. You are one of the more measured posters but what is this track record? Prior to coming to villa he has no track record. At Villa he got an relatively extremely talented bunch of players promoted via the play offs. I encourage you to watch the play off games again. We were lucky in all 3 matches. Yes we did win 10 on the bounce which is impressive but his record without Jack was woeful.

I definitely think he should be replaced but only if we can get a definite improvement. Dean does bring a lot of other advantages. His local status and support of the club does bring the support together. I do think he is learning too. Tough one really.

I meant a track record of getting promotion even if that is just with us.  Yes the Villa bunch were an extremely talented bunch but he still had to do it and the previous two seasons werent able to do it with other managers, and Steve Bruce got sacked with mostly the same squad earlier in the season before Smith took over.  Yes we did win 10 on the bounce with Jack.  At what point does Dean get some credit.  He's getting blamed for this probable relegation but the promotion is down to Jack coming back.  

My issue with most of the posts on this website is that it is so imbalanced.  If we do get relegated, yes of course Smith gets a lot of blame but in the same manner he must get a lot of the credit for the promotion....he cant just get the downside and not the benefit.  I mean in the other direction I would never say that the promotion was because of Jack and the relegation is now because of Jack.....if only he had performed post the restart then we would be safe.  That's a nonsensical argument isnt it? because it just is.....

I just dont see really a viable alternative to Smith in our range........I mean look at the managers out there.  Our competitors have Moyes, Pearson, Howe and Farke....I really see none of them better than Smith.  yes they may save their teams and we may get relegated but the difference is such fine margins of difference that is it worth the change.  Look at West Ham's squad, established and full of investment year over year, they should never be here.  Watford are in their fifth season and consistently higher than where they are now.   Then Championships top managers.....Bielsa.....woohoo, yet had longer at Leeds, Smith got promoted before him and is only getting up Leeds now.  What was thrown back at me was Leeds will be in the PL next season and Villa wont......so that makes Bielsa better? not really, we knew we got up too early and Leeds will be one of the favourites to come straight back down.  Bilic is no better than Smith....and you can go on and on through the championship managers.

So i agree if we could get a definite improvement then maybe there is a discussion for replacing Smith but I dont see where that is coming from.  Some have said Rafa but he's getting 12m a year at Dalian for at least another 18 months.  I just dont see an alternative. 

Then it means installing a new manager, the manager to assess, change players, instilling new methods......and the new season starts in about 5 weeks.......things could start off great but such a risk and that's if things go really well but we havent got much time.  Smith, for me, has his team, has done well in the championship, has a settled squad who while not good enough for the premiership will be one of the best teams in the Championship easily after a few in's and out's of players.  Yes Jack will go, most likely MIngs might go....McGinn unlikely because how long he was out, I dont think Luiz will go anywhere, I hope Heaton stays.....so with another few outs, we'll probably have around 100m...worst case would be 75m to buy players.  That's a huge war chest.

It makes no sense to me to sack Smith if we get relegated because the alternative in my eyes is no better.

 

 

No if we stay up, and the board are ambitious then bizarrely replacing Smith makes more sense to me.  Go and get a great manager, unlikely but might convince Jack we are serious and then go and buy some quality additions.  If we stay up and arent as ambitious as the board seem to indicate then Smith deserves a second season.

[nick76]

12 hours ago, TRO said:

Its a gamble any way you look at it.

I say if something is not working, change it.

but the burning question is on the face of it, can we get someone better.......for me other clubs, smaller than ours get managers as good or better, I think we sell oursleves short or aim too low.

Having said all that, the previous managers we have had, have not covered us in glory, so the attraction is waning, unless a rabbit can be plucked from the hat.....we are gradually becoming less and less attractive to would be managers.

We need someone with boat loads of confidence in himself and a management team to back him, with owners willing to back him too.....many ducks to get in a row.

Personally, I have seen things, that I don't see changing all season ,so I would make a change in manager.

and it would be a Manager, not a head coach.

I love your theory but I just dont see who this person is that you are picturing.  It's like those women who are waiting for the perfect man to be their perfect boyfriend/husband and will accept nothing less.......it doesnt exist.