Jump to content

Dean Smith


Demitri_C
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • VT Supporter
27 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Over the course of several years the same names have been repeated as good examples of DMs. Names like Bissouma, Billing, McTominay, Anguissa etc. Not one of these is a DM, yet they constantly get lauded as players who will improve our defensive solidity.

This is a perfect example of how the harrying is largely done further up the pitch nowadays.  Most of the intense pressing and committing to tackles is done in front of the DM, with the deepest player having to have great positioning and intelligence to cut off attacks and close spaces. The last thing you need is someone like Nakamba who will constantly commit and, when they miss, leave an enormous hole.

I do wonder if everyone watched the game at the weekend as, particularly in the first half, Luiz bailed us out on several occasions by stopping a counter purely from clever positioning.

I accept your reasoning....I too thought Dougie had a decent game and played a bit further forward.

but the bottom line is results.

it doesn't matter how you plough the field as long as you get a good harvest...but when you don't, thats when the Farmer has to address how he did it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TRO said:

I accept your reasoning....I too thought Dougie had a decent game and played a bit further forward.

but the bottom line is results.

it doesn't matter how you plough the field as long as you get a good harvest...but when you don't, thats when the Farmer has to address how he did it.

 

Point is some think we do not have a fundamental problem in midfield. Others think the addition of this new great midfielder would change everything.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
8 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Point is some think we do not have a fundamental problem in midfield. Others think the addition of this new great midfielder would change everything.  

but many, many others do......I still think we do.

but I accept, that Dean is going to play it the way some have described on here....and I will just hope it works.

Its opinions VLV we will see how it pans out.....I am not interested in being right.....I just want Villa to win and progress.

but at least I now understand thanks to a couple of posters explaining it.....what the difference of opinion was.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TRO said:

It doesn't suggest anything, as the sample is too small....just like if everyone agreed with me, it would be the same.....I may not be correct, but so far the contrary explanations have not convinced me., they seem woolly to me.

you have to bear in mind Nick, its just on here.....and it has been mentioned many times by the Villa Podcasters that callers have voiced their concern of Centre Mid and I have had discussions inside the ground too....in fact moments in the game against Brentford a guy behind me was screaming tighten up the middle as they came forward on a raid.

We have to be careful, we are not saying the same thing, but in a different context.

Lets just say you are right, for a minute......who do you see as the main players for stopping the opposition from running through the middle of the park?.....based on a full side.

We all accept the full backs take care of the wings, so who is responsible for the middle of the pitch?

maybe when you explain that, we might get somewhere.

You’ve gone off on a different topic.  I’m talking about using a win ratio stat over his tenure as a basis to discuss Dean.  I think that stat over tenure doesn’t work for teams that yo-yo divisions.  This is nothing to do with midfielders or DMs or anything, it’s about using a stat/calculation in a nonsensical way.

P.s. I agree about the midfield by the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


30 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

I really like him, he's great.

He's not perfect because who is. There's lots I think he can improve on.

The whining every time we don't win a match and the blame being laid at his door from some Villa fans and some wind-ups is genuinely incredible.

I've learned that people just always find the littlest thing(Even if they come off to most everybody else as delusional) to fit their narrative. That not only pertains to Dean but just Villa in general from my perspective.

Yes he makes the decision about who starts, who gets subbed on/off etc. But this is a team game and he can't make the players get stuck in when they need to, run their asses off when they need to, etc.

He is doing just fine this season imo and I have faith that he will continue to do so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, TRO said:

respectfully Nick, I don't agree with you....its as good a measure as it gets.

The Thomas Frank study is inaccurate....if he turned out to be unsuccessful, that would be reflective in his ratio's, its only because he has been successful you question it.....I accept to a degree, what you are saying, but its still a popular benchmark to glean from.

There are teams that come up from the championship like a steam train as in Nuno's & Biesla's case and give themselves a better chance of securing good ratio's, but you can't be making cases for every one, when it suits.

Like all measurements, they can be challenged.....but they are usually conducted as a guideline, you can either use them or discard them....I don't think the industry would be interested in producing them, if they thought as you have proposed....there is no caveate to say across leagues or not counting abroad...that is not in the spirit of the representation.

I would hazard a guess if Dean was between 45-50% he would be looking for a  pay rise, and I wouldn't blame him either.

One season my Sunday league team won every game and romped the league. It was the first season our new manager was in charge, giving him a 100% win ratio. Given the importance of this and the apparent irrelevance of what division its attained in I'm shocked none of the elite clubs snapped him up that year.

We actually got 4 consecutive promotions so his win % was probably somewhere in the 70% mark after 4 years. Does that make him a better manager than Dean Smith? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
On 02/09/2021 at 23:05, The Fun Factory said:

Er even Ron Saunders only just got above 45% (45.6%) with Villa. If Deano gets  a 50% win percentage I would be staggered.  Graham Taylor first era was 45.77.

Big Ron and John Gregory got 43% odd, with O'Neill at 42% and Little at 41.5%. I couldn't be bothered to look at the rest as I suspect they would be deeply mediocre.

If Smith gets about a 42-43% win percentage that would be very good and we would be looking at being a top 6-8 side again.

 

 

shows the inconsistency, doesn't it?

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • VT Supporter
38 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

I think it shows just how hard it is to achieve a 50% win percentage. There's almost nobody that does it, even those who lead their clubs to glory. 

Winning games is hard, who is under estimating that?

There are currently 7 managers who exceed a 50% win ratio in the Premier league at their respective clubs, since they've been there....and 3 are currently in the bottom half of the league.

2 exceed 60%.

so we know what we are up against.

Edited by TRO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
6 minutes ago, MessiWillSignForVilla said:

A 50% win percentage would mean at least 57 points per season (plus however many for draws), which in the 20 team Premier League era we have achieved just 7 times, and the lowest we finished in those seasons was 7th, but typically was 6th. In fact, in that time, we have never even won 19 games in a season. If you add in the typical 6-10 points you'd expect from draws, that's a 63-67 point season, comfortably enough for 5th, very occasionally 4th at the top end. As much as I think that's where we should aim to be, it's insane to expect that of a manager who has spent most of his games as a newly promoted manager.

Even at 45%, that's 17 wins, something we've only done 5 times in the 20 team Premier League, and we got 16 last season.

 

I understand a draw is divided up as half a win.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MessiWillSignForVilla said:

A 50% win percentage would mean at least 57 points per season (plus however many for draws), which in the 20 team Premier League era we have achieved just 7 times, and the lowest we finished in those seasons was 7th, but typically was 6th. In fact, in that time, we have never even won 19 games in a season. If you add in the typical 6-10 points you'd expect from draws, that's a 63-67 point season, comfortably enough for 5th, very occasionally 4th at the top end. As much as I think that's where we should aim to be, it's insane to expect that of a manager who has spent most of his games as a newly promoted manager.

Even at 45%, that's 17 wins, something we've only done 5 times in the 20 team Premier League, and we got 16 last season.

Edit: Just looked up the last 50 years, we've only had 50% in the league 5 times in that time.

Before they say it:

Have any of the previous managers spent 300m? 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Before they say it:

Have any of the previous managers spent 300m? 

I know you are joking but the spend is a relevant factor. We have never had ownership anywhere near as good. It’s not just the spend on players, it’s everything. Infrastructure, expert analysis, youth. We are not just spending money, because we have the right people making the decisions (including Dean of course) we are, for the first time in my time as a supporter, spending money well. 
Dean is the most blessed manager in my time as a supporter, simply because he works for NSWE and they give him the tools to do his job. Whether he is/isn’t doing a good job is open to debate but wherever you stand on that, you cannot ignore the fact that he has been better supported than any manager before him.

I am going to sit on the fence. I think he has done ok. In my eyes he is a really good run away from being a legend and a really bad run away from the sack. I obviously hope it’s the former, that things will click and we never look back. I don’t think NSWE will put up with another prolonged period of poor form like we have seen in each of his three previous seasons (unless we have a total injury crisis). Even if it is the latter, I genuinely think that not a single fan would fail to be a bit sad to see him go. That says a lot in itself. Whatever happens over the season, Dean will forever be one of us and a top bloke to boot.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites


7 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Before they say it:

Have any of the previous managers spent 300m? 

Lot of you like to dismiss Guardiolas qualities as a manager because he has spent a lot of money at different clubs. 

But there is a different line for Smith? 

Generally money talks. Just a stone cold fact. 

Just have to look at last seasons table. If you look at that table it's a very good reflection in how much money you spend is a direct indication to where you are likely to end up in the table. 

Obviously Leicester and Arsenal being the exception to the rule. With Leicester being  overachievers and Arsenal underachievers.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â