Dean Smith

[hippo]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

Its a tricky one.

I don't think its Dean Smith, put it that way.....If you listen to all the top managers, they all come back to the same conclusion, what ever they do.....they need to have the players to be able to do it.

Top managers only go to other top clubs for one reason, yes money, but to work with the elite.....I can't remember the last Top manager going to a lowly club to test himself..they go to the places where their philosophies are executed.

Managers have to basically get 2 things right.

• Player recruitment/ talent spotting
• Coaching

as the saying goes you can't make a silk purse our of a sows ear.

Dean has inherited another managers players, I will purposely avoid the word mess, because the summer was a car crash and losing Johnstone, Snoddy and Terry was a massive blow to the character of the team and the substance that we built on....the CLUB was then in no position to replace them.

I am not defending Steve Bruce unconditionally,  because I did not like the style of football we played and to be honest, some of his traits are still there, many of our players still stood off and failed to impose themselves, didn't close down often enough.

so yes, I do think its a player problem, in balance and attitude, not all but some and that some may be too many....any team can get away with a couple of iffy players, we have too many to cover...but i also thought that with Steve Bruce in charge, except he bought them.

Tammy, McGinn and Jack when he is playing are the only players you can hang your hat on....for any team with promotion ambitions that's simply not enough.

Mark has mooted in an earlier post, with the names we have in our squad, we should be storming it.....I think he is right, but we are getting out fought, out battled and overrun by players of a lesser quality in terms of talent, but a superior quality in terms of application and will to win.

The signs were there against the Blues....we haven't won at home since.

You can only take the horse to the water, you can't make him drink.

I think Dean needs his own type of player......as a reference : Neil Warnock was lucky when he went in to Cardiff in as much he had the right characters there already ,not great on talent, but effective in this league.... so he could make the difference with his traditional approach, it was a match made in heaven for him.

Dean is not so lucky, he has names, but very short on substance.....He has to build it himself, I hope he gets it right.

 

I disagree with most of that - if we were getting outfought we wouldn't recover from being behind so often - they would give up.

To me we play with the full backs to high - which put the cb's on tenterhooks and lacking in options.

 

[Mark Albrighton]

14 minutes ago, vreitti said:

Has DS start here really been that bad, or is it just that the expectations are way over the top? From what I could gather we've thus far played 16 games (in the championship), managing 7 wins, 6 draws and 3 losses. That's 27 points from a possible 48, and a win percentage of ~ 44 %. I'm not really into stats, but it does feel slightly above average to me, but obviously not good enough for where we want to be.

I've no idea how Bruce's stats looked after 16 games, but I'd imagine quite similar. What I do know is that we've played far better football under DS than we ever did under Bruce, and that in itself is good enough for me for the time being.

There's no question about it though, we need to see an improvement in the coming months. Perhaps promotion just was a task too big this season, considering the mess Bruce left us in. Fwiw I still maintain we have a good enough squad for promotion, we're just severely missing Jack & Axel at the moment.

Just league matches -

It’s 6 wins out of 16, 6 draws and 4 losses for Smith.

I believe Bruce’s first 16 matches yielded 7 wins, 5 draws and 4 losses. 

So the starts are quite similar, the problem with comparing is how difficult the opposition was and how decent the squads each inherited.

[Dave-R]

7 minutes ago, vreitti said:

Has DS start here really been that bad, or is it just that the expectations are way over the top? From what I could gather we've thus far played 16 games (in the championship), managing 7 wins, 6 draws and 3 losses. That's 27 points from a possible 48, and a win percentage of ~ 44 %. I'm not really into stats, but it does feel slightly above average to me, but obviously not good enough for where we want to be.

I've no idea how Bruce's stats looked after 16 games, but I'd imagine quite similar. What I do know is that we've played far better football under DS than we ever did under Bruce, and that in itself is good enough for me for the time being.

There's no question about it though, we need to see an improvement in the coming months. Perhaps promotion just was a task too big this season, considering the mess Bruce left us in. Fwiw I still maintain we have a good enough squad for promotion, we're just severely missing Jack & Axel at the moment.

Id say were missing more than axel and jack, were actually for this build and when it was going on it run last season missing the likes of snoddy, terry, grabban and forester.

As it stands this squad has already had bits torn out of it and it is failing. The fact more contracts are up this season always made me realise that asking for promotion was to much. For promotion we need players who care, we havnt got that because we have so many who just have not a clue where they will be next season. Sorry to say as well but if that is what our players are thinking then forget them like they seem to be doing with our club. If they are not certain about there contract, and are choosing to not go out and play there hearts out for villa, then I want them gone and replacements bought in place, they dont deserve the wage weve given them and the job that was placed on there shoulders. Rite now our players have the worst mentality and approach I've seen from any of our squads since the early 2000s.

If they had any self respect they would really go out there and prove there worth and cement victorys, instead of being out played. This is why I think our players and squad are way over rated, we still have players that are with us from a relegated side, to me that spells trouble rite there and with most clubs and fans it usually does, but not ours for some reason, strange.. 

[hippo]

22 minutes ago, vreitti said:

Has DS start here really been that bad, or is it just that the expectations are way over the top? From what I could gather we've thus far played 16 games (in the championship), managing 7 wins, 6 draws and 3 losses. That's 27 points from a possible 48, and a win percentage of ~ 44 %. I'm not really into stats, but it does feel slightly above average to me, but obviously not good enough for where we want to be.

I've no idea how Bruce's stats looked after 16 games, but I'd imagine quite similar. What I do know is that we've played far better football under DS than we ever did under Bruce, and that in itself is good enough for me for the time being.

There's no question about it though, we need to see an improvement in the coming months. Perhaps promotion just was a task too big this season, considering the mess Bruce left us in. Fwiw I still maintain we have a good enough squad for promotion, we're just severely missing Jack & Axel at the moment.

I think it is the ease and amount of goals we concede - with very little progress in this area. He has brought in a new keeper, recalled Elphick, and has yet to blood his other defensive signing. True he lost Axel - but we were leaking goals even before that.

Looking back at DS earlier clubs leaking goals have always hampered him - so you see why people are getting jumpy.

Sure someone can find a stat - saying the defence was poor under Bruce - and maybe it was, but that isn't the point.

[sheepyvillian]

One thing the player's aren't ? Consistently good. That vital ingredient, " constancy ", without that we will continue to fall short, and we have been doing just that, since, I really struggle to remember . The only thing consistent about us is our inconsistency. 

[hippo]

1 minute ago, sheepyvillian said:

One thing the player's aren't ? Consistently good. That vital ingredient, " constancy ", without that we will continue to fall short, and we have been doing just that, since, I really struggle to remember . The only thing consistent about us is our inconsistency. 

At championship level - with one or two exceptions they won't be consistently good. JK perfect example has skill and eye for a goal - but consistency - if he was consistent he would be at a PL club by now.

Bear in mind that most clubs we play won't be consistent either - 

[TRO]

2 hours ago, hippo said:

I disagree with most of that - if we were getting outfought we wouldn't recover from being behind so often - they would give up.

To me we play with the full backs to high - which put the cb's on tenterhooks and lacking in options.

 

well against Swansea and Wigan, I think they did....maybe Sheff Utd wasn't far off either.

Its fine if you disagree....But I think your rationale for doing so is questionable.

The fact that we are behind so often, is probably the essence of the claim....we then get a bollocking and raise our game to get back in to it.

The fact that we HAVE to go behind in order to come back, tells me what the intrinsic default position (in some of the players)really is.....I guess we just look at it differently.

Its like being late for work every day, but work over to catch up to make up your 40 Hrs.....I guess the boss would still question your attitude.I wouldn't imagine he would say " good lad him, always works over to catch up"

I am basing my comments on watching our players reluctant to get close or combative, unless they really have to, it doesn't appear to be a natural trait to me... except John McGinn , who seems to love it.....We make it far too easy for the opposition to flourish, we don't make them have to work hard enough for what they get.

with regard to your point about the full backs playing high, but surely if that is the case other players i.e wingers, midfielders cover for them.

Edited January 22, 2019 by TRO

[TRO]

19 hours ago, sheepyvillian said:

One thing the player's aren't ? Consistently good. That vital ingredient, " constancy ", without that we will continue to fall short, and we have been doing just that, since, I really struggle to remember . The only thing consistent about us is our inconsistency. 

for sure.

we even have the nickname now.......The Desmonds.

(Tu Tu).

Edited January 23, 2019 by TRO

[hippo]

12 minutes ago, TRO said:

well against Swansea and Wigan, I think they did....maybe Sheff Utd wasn't far off either.

Its fine if you disagree....But I think your rationale for doing so is questionable.

The fact that we are behind so often, is probably the essence of the claim....we then get a bollocking and raise our game to get back in to it.

The fact that we HAVE to go behind in order to come back, tells me what the intrinsic default position really is.....I guess we just look at it differently.

Its like being late for work every day, but work over to catch up to make up your 40 Hrs.....I guess the boss would still question your attitude.

I am basing my comments on watching our players reluctant to get close or combative, unless they really have to, it doesn't appear to be a natural trait to me... except John McGinn , who seems to love it.

with regard to your point about the full backs playing high, but surely if that is the case other players i.e wingers, midfielders cover for them.

Not all players are combative though - whilst that is an attribute it is only one of many that a player can have.  look at most successful teams do they have 11 combative players ?  - Our best performances this IMO was when we seen fast passes through the pitch and the pace of our front men. Sure Mcginn makes those tackle and pass all in one's which are great - but you wouldn't assemble a team based entirely on that.

I think you're over complicating it - the 'intrinsic default position'   is that even a thing ?

I still believe the bost up in the dressing room rumour to me that would explain a lot - hopefully the 2nd half performance v Hull is sign that those issues are blowing over.

We have tried a few combos of full backs - yet the problem appears identical - even with the youthful Bree in the side.  

[TRO]

28 minutes ago, hippo said:

Not all players are combative though - whilst that is an attribute it is only one of many that a player can have.  look at most successful teams do they have 11 combative players ?  - Our best performances this IMO was when we seen fast passes through the pitch and the pace of our front men. Sure Mcginn makes those tackle and pass all in one's which are great - but you wouldn't assemble a team based entirely on that.

I think you're over complicating it - the 'intrinsic default position'   is that even a thing ?

I still believe the bost up in the dressing room rumour to me that would explain a lot - hopefully the 2nd half performance v Hull is sign that those issues are blowing over.

We have tried a few combos of full backs - yet the problem appears identical - even with the youthful Bree in the side.  

Hippo.....come on mate, do you think I am so single dimensional in my thinking to suggest that?....Of course they aren't....but the more you have the less work load for the others. Look at Man city...tell me the flowery show pony in that Man City team or Liverpool team or Utd or Spurs....they all graft and fight for possession...they turn the ball over, go after you, close you down, hunt in packs to do it sometimes.

We are talking about 1 issue of our play, which I think is crucial.....but its not the only one, problems rarely are one issue.

Snoddy was a winger, who would get in physically.....Milner is a winger, who just recently got sent off for 2 yellows.....my point is you can't have too many standing off watching events either.....you can get away with odd one, but when a team like Hull etc all graft you have to compete... even Leeds Grafted their way back in to the game.

Tammy, is an all action guy, who works his opposite number, not waits for a mistake and pick pockets a moment of ease.....Andy Gray made things happen through his physical involvement and made defenders make mistakes.

You cannot have 11 McGinns anymore than you can have 11 Hourihanes or ElGhazi's

You talk about " fast passes through the pitch" but when teams stop you,by closing down, you have to battle back to win the initiative and try again.

These teams with less technical prowess than us ....Have stopped us doing it.....We now have to find a way of stopping them, stopping us....it doesn't mean everyone of our players has to be a "dog of war"....but 1 x McGinn is not enough and not fair on him.

Just one other point alone.....when the play does get a bit scrappy and dogged.....who wins headers in the midfield to win territory?....when we win throw ins, how many headers do we win then?   ..all this adds up to seizing the initiative....Its anything but complicated, its so bloomin' basic its untrue.

 

Edited January 22, 2019 by TRO

[Dave-R]

1 hour ago, hippo said:

At championship level - with one or two exceptions they won't be consistently good. JK perfect example has skill and eye for a goal - but consistency - if he was consistent he would be at a PL club by now.

Bear in mind that most clubs we play won't be consistent either - 

They're being way more consistent than what we are, that is the word around here consistent, tell that to our players and they will be clueless as to what the word means.

[TRO]

4 hours ago, markavfc40 said:

If we are as I suspect we are going to go down the route of a mixture of the best of players that have come through our youth system and bringing in younger players then the last thing they will need is us as fans getting on their backs. One of the reasons Bruce cited for bringing in the likes of Terry, Whelan, Snodgrass, Elmo is that had the experience and they could handle that pressure and expectation that comes with playing for Aston Villa in the Championship.

I actually think as supporters if we do see a much younger team on the pitch we will naturally allow them far more slack than we do seeing the old guard in Hutton, Taylor, Whelan, Bjarnason, Adomah, Jedinak,Chester etc churning out the same old crap. 

We start getting on the back of younger players then you risk them going into their shells and the ball becoming a hot potato something we have seen at this club before. We have to be patient.

Problem is Mark...The experienced players at times treat the ball like a hot potato....o we are as best burn't as scolded.

The experienced bit has not worked for me.

I would sooner give young players their wings.....and like you say back them.

[DaveAV1]

4 hours ago, Lerner's Driver said:

Disagree, in the sense that at this level, they are all capable of playing well, they just don't do it nearly enough.

Poor to me, implies incapable of quality.

I also think Hourihane is a special case... he isn't physical enough, so often doesn't 'do enough' in games, but his crossing and shooting capabilities help him to keep his place and elevate him well above poor.

I understand what you mean about ability and inability. However a player is poor if he doesn’t consistently play well, the reason for his poor performance isn’t necessarily lack of ability, it could be lack of application. This is of course with the caveat that they are in an environment where they can play well. In other words is the team well coached, are there other good players around him etc, etc? 

Thinking about it the reason players play well or not is pretty complicated. If it was simple we could all do it!

[DaveAV1]

22 minutes ago, TRO said:

Problem is Mark...The experienced players at times treat the ball like a hot potato....o we are as best burn't as scolded.

The experienced bit has not worked for me.

I would sooner give young players their wings.....and like you say back them.

I think we need a mix and we have clearly got the mix wrong at the moment. Youthful energy and desire is clearly lacking, but we shouldn’t just write off the advantages of experience. We need the right balance. 

[Reivax_Villa]

Very interesting comment about our team spirit.

I cannot wait for the summer as someone alluded to, there are some bad eggs in the squad at the moment.

 

 

[Dave J]

21 hours ago, Tommo_b said:

Christ that was a truly awful first team? Bar Benteke I think our current team is better.

Lambert really was hung out to dry by Lerner, I know many disagree but Lambert did pretty well with what he had.

Totally agree - I have said this myself many times. He arrived at Villa as a young attacking minded manager.

Lerner left him a shell of a manager - unfortunately never to be seen again imo 

[AvfcRigo82]

13 minutes ago, Reivax_Villa said:

Very interesting comment about our team spirit.

I cannot wait for the summer as someone alluded to, there are some bad eggs in the squad at the moment.

 

 

This sums up what many of us thought  after mistakenly blaming Smith and stupidly questioned 'him' rather than 'them'.

I'l be the first to put my hand up in that one. Silly me. 

- Good to see he is cracking the whip and showing them who's boss.

My take, if many of these 'out of contracters' actually bust a gut and fought harder for our promotion push, then a few might have been rewarded with a one year extension (good enough or not) out of gratitude for this seasons effort.

#modern day divas.

Edited January 22, 2019 by AvfcRigo82

[hippo]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

Hippo.....come on mate, do you think I am so single dimensional in my thinking to suggest that?....Of course they aren't....but the more you have the less work load for the others. Look at Man city...tell me the flowery show pony in that Man City team or Liverpool team or Utd or Spurs....they all graft and fight for possession...they turn the ball over, go after you, close you down, hunt in packs to do it sometimes.

We are talking about 1 issue of our play, which I think is crucial.....but its not the only one, problems rarely are one issue.

Snoddy was a winger, who would get in physically.....Milner is a winger, who just recently got sent off for 2 yellows.....my point is you can't have too many standing off watching events either.....you can get away with odd one, but when a team like Hull etc all graft you have to compete... even Leeds Grafted their way back in to the game.

Tammy, is an all action guy, who works his opposite number, not waits for a mistake and pick pockets a moment of ease.....Andy Gray made things happen through his physical involvement and made defenders make mistakes.

You cannot have 11 McGinns anymore than you can have 11 Hourihanes or ElGhazi's

You talk about " fast passes through the pitch" but when teams stop you,by closing down, you have to battle back to win the initiative and try again.

These teams with less technical prowess than us ....Have stopped us doing it.....We now have to find a way of stopping them, stopping us....it doesn't mean everyone of our players has to be a "dog of war"....but 1 x McGinn is not enough and not fair on him.

Just one other point alone.....when the play does get a bit scrappy and dogged.....who wins headers in the midfield to win territory?....when we win throw ins, how many headers do we win then?   ..all this adds up to seizing the initiative....Its anything but complicated, its so bloomin' basic its untrue.

 

Ok....so why arent we doing that ?

why are players strolling through our defence ...even in smiths better patch ?

what you are asking doesnt sound unreasonable . ...so why doesnt it happen ?

[Reivax_Villa]

18 hours ago, briny_ear said:

Unfortunately we only won 9 other games that season and finished 5 points off relegation with a goal difference of -22.

So maybe not the best advert for “young and hungry” after all?

I did mention the deficiencies that our team had also.

The point that I was trying to make was that we produced players for our academy that were good enough to play Premier League football at that time & keep us up.

 

[hippo]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

Problem is Mark...The experienced players at times treat the ball like a hot potato....o we are as best burn't as scolded.

The experienced bit has not worked for me.

I would sooner give young players their wings.....and like you say back them.

The thought of DS , our u23's no Grealish , sends a shiver down my spine to be honest.

I would be very dissapointed if the club let that happen.