Dean Smith

[dudevillaisnice]

51 minutes ago, screwdriver said:

My veiw is We should have avoided these carlos kickabouts and sign some good solid english under 21 players. like target.

I’m not sure if this is a parody post or not but it would be completely beyond our budget and reckless. Wan Bissaka for example went for £50m. It’s not feasible.

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 hour ago, screwdriver said:

This summer reminds me of the 2015 summer with all the french guys with big reputations walking out of arrivals at bhx. Most of these signings are unproven in the prem.

Smith has spent big money more than O'neill in the whole of his tenure with this outlay I expect nothing else but to come out of the traps flying and get 6 points from the opening 3 games.

 

My veiw is We should have avoided these carlos kickabouts and sign some good solid english under 21 players. like target.

The biggest issue is where are the 20 goals going to come from?

I would be ringing fat frank.   every day asking to speak to Kevin... Lampard is a rookie manager, he won't even know who we're trying to buy....... get him tapped up. surely smith can get hold of him do a number on him and get the deal over the line. where's jesus when you want a miracle

Good to have you back!

edit: take it not much going on across the road?

Edited July 29, 2019 by Vive_La_Villa

[Vive_La_Villa]

33 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

And been given the number 9 shirt I think........though could be wrong.

 

I think he'll have a great season there, 20+ goals IMO.

Really? I think they are going to struggle. Still a lot of egos at the club and expectation is high. I don’t think Lampard will last the season. 

This is a year for teams to break in to the top 6 or top 4 or in my opinion. 

Edited July 29, 2019 by Vive_La_Villa

[sheepyvillian]

3 hours ago, romavillan said:

Smith and Jesus (not the dead palestinian one) must take credit for that, I think between them they've got a good understanding of what they want, how Smith works and where we're headed. Exciting stuff, keep this backroom staff together for a good few years and we'll lay some solid foundations for a while to come yet. Considering the omnishambolic hideousness of the previous 10 years I could sh*t I'm so happy.

And I always thought Jesus was a penny chew.

[sheepyvillian]

On 27/07/2019 at 14:39, foreveryoung said:

It's all about beating Wolves for me. They are the epitome of what we are trying to achieve, beating them will prove we are on the right track.

I feel exactly that way.  Wolves are our barometer. I certainly don't think us staying up is a big if.

[bannedfromHandV]

6 hours ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Really? I think they are going to struggle. Still a lot of egos at the club and expectation is high. I don’t think Lampard will last the season. 

This is a year for teams to break in to the top 6 or top 4 or in my opinion. 

Lampard’s a smart cookie and it’s timed well (what with their transfer embargo) for him to reinvent Chelsea.

I think the likes of Hudson-Odoi, Mount and Abraham will have excellent seasons if they can stay injury free etc.

I don’t know if I’d go as far as to say they’ll win the league but I think they’ll be in the top 3 or 4.

[Tomaszk]

1 minute ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Lampard’s a smart cookie and it’s timed well (what with their transfer embargo) for him to reinvent Chelsea.

I think the likes of Hudson-Odoi, Mount and Abraham will have excellent seasons if they can stay injury free etc.

I don’t know if I’d go as far as to say they’ll win the league but I think they’ll be in the top 3 or 4.

Mount didn't show top 4 quality for me last season. Neither did Tammy. Not seen much of Hudson-Odoi, he's certainly got the hype.

[KentVillan]

Re: the 3 at the back option. There's no point working on Plan B until you're happy with Plan A.

Four at the back still allows us to play with one DM and one striker (4-1-4-1, 4-3-3), two pivots and a striker (4-2-3-1) or two box-to-box CMs and two strikers (4-4-2). And you can vary what types of wingers you use - Jota will tuck in and do more defensively than the other wingers.

That's plenty of variation to worry about already. With so many new players joining, I don't see the benefit of playing around with the defensive line on top of that. Especially since Mings is the only player who was here last season.

So that's why I think Smith might look a bit inflexible at the moment, but the way he talks about football suggests he's more than happy to try new things when it makes sense.

Also, formations are how know-nothing journalists like Henry Winter think about football. Anyone who's played football knows that two teams can play the same formation and have completely different tactics.

Edited July 29, 2019 by KentVillan

[dont_do_it_doug.]

1 hour ago, KentVillan said:

Re: the 3 at the back option. There's no point working on Plan B until you're happy with Plan A.

Four at the back still allows us to play with one DM and one striker (4-1-4-1, 4-3-3), two pivots and a striker (4-2-3-1) or two box-to-box CMs and two strikers (4-4-2). And you can vary what types of wingers you use - Jota will tuck in and do more defensively than the other wingers.

That's plenty of variation to worry about already. With so many new players joining, I don't see the benefit of playing around with the defensive line on top of that. Especially since Mings is the only player who was here last season.

So that's why I think Smith might look a bit inflexible at the moment, but the way he talks about football suggests he's more than happy to try new things when it makes sense.

Also, formations are how know-nothing journalists like Henry Winter think about football. Anyone who's played football knows that two teams can play the same formation and have completely different tactics.

Good post. We must have used at least 4/5 formations this pre-season already. 

Jota has positioned at inside forward, allowing Guilbert space to operate as more of a wing-back. We had, I think against Shrewsbury, a front three of Davis, Wesley and Hogan, with Wesley dropping into the hole as Hogan and Davis worked the channels. In fact Charlton was legitimately the first time we utilised a more traditional winged system and even then El Ghazi and Trezeguet had clearly been instructed to roam inside whenever they fancy it. 

Dean Smith has been nothing if not flexible in pre-season. 

[KMitch]

5 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Lampard’s a smart cookie and it’s timed well (what with their transfer embargo) for him to reinvent Chelsea.

I think the likes of Hudson-Odoi, Mount and Abraham will have excellent seasons if they can stay injury free etc.

I don’t know if I’d go as far as to say they’ll win the league but I think they’ll be in the top 3 or 4.

I think those three can have great seasons, but at the same time I think Chelsea will struggle to break into the top 7 this season.  They may start the season strong, but Deano showed just how tactically naive Lampard is in our games against him.  He's going to get trounced by most top half managers and when the Chelsea prodigies struggle, they may find it tough to string some wins together.

[A'Villan]

22 hours ago, KentVillan said:

Re: the 3 at the back option. There's no point working on Plan B until you're happy with Plan A.

Four at the back still allows us to play with one DM and one striker (4-1-4-1, 4-3-3), two pivots and a striker (4-2-3-1) or two box-to-box CMs and two strikers (4-4-2). And you can vary what types of wingers you use - Jota will tuck in and do more defensively than the other wingers.

That's plenty of variation to worry about already. With so many new players joining, I don't see the benefit of playing around with the defensive line on top of that. Especially since Mings is the only player who was here last season.

So that's why I think Smith might look a bit inflexible at the moment, but the way he talks about football suggests he's more than happy to try new things when it makes sense.

Also, formations are how know-nothing journalists like Henry Winter think about football. Anyone who's played football knows that two teams can play the same formation and have completely different tactics.

Great post, especially the line I've made bold.

[A'Villan]

On 30/07/2019 at 08:09, bannedfromHandV said:

Lampard’s a smart cookie and it’s timed well (what with their transfer embargo) for him to reinvent Chelsea.

I think the likes of Hudson-Odoi, Mount and Abraham will have excellent seasons if they can stay injury free etc.

I don’t know if I’d go as far as to say they’ll win the league but I think they’ll be in the top 3 or 4.

Let's not forget Chelsea have a lot of talent at their disposal. Lampard's reinvention of Chelsea doesn't have to be replacing personnel.

People who are suggesting he will flop and take Chelsea outside of European placing, what makes you think this?

He is one of the greats, nearly won the Ballon d'Or and has so many accolades to his name. He has a phenomenal understanding of the game.

How do we know he won't be similar to what Cruyff, Rijkaard and Guardiola were to Barcelona?

Edit: Perhaps a discussion for the Premier League Thread

Edited July 30, 2019 by A'Villan

[LakotaDakota]

On 27/07/2019 at 14:39, foreveryoung said:

It's all about beating Wolves for me. They are the epitome of what we are trying to achieve, beating them will prove we are on the right track.

Huddersfield beat wolves twice last season, Just sayin....

[abdulaziz1]

44 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

Huddersfield beat wolves twice last season, Just sayin....

Depends on how far are we from them then lol.

[Thats2]

2 hours ago, A'Villan said:

Let's not forget Chelsea have a lot of talent at their disposal. Lampard's reinvention of Chelsea doesn't have to be replacing personnel.

People who are suggesting he will flop and take Chelsea outside of European placing, what makes you think this?

He is one of the greats, nearly won the Ballon d'Or and has so many accolades to his name. He has a phenomenal understanding of the game.

How do we know he won't be similar to what Cruyff, Rijkaard and Guardiola were to Barcelona?

Edit: Perhaps a discussion for the Premier League Thread

I’ve always found this a quite interesting facet of football management. Here in the States, there’s a belief that the best players don’t usually make for the best managers. The thinking goes that the game comes too easily for them and to impart that greatness to lesser players is difficult (‘just do what I did’). Across the most popular leagues, there have been very few great players who made great managers. Larry Bird maybe. Mike Ditka. Forrest Gregg. It’s far more likely to find managers who never reached anywhere near the highest levels as players and if they did, they usually did so as backups or ‘role players’. Bill Belichick, Steve Kerr, Greg Popovich, Sean McVay all fall into this category. So does Dean Smith.

[KMitch]

2 hours ago, A'Villan said:

Let's not forget Chelsea have a lot of talent at their disposal. Lampard's reinvention of Chelsea doesn't have to be replacing personnel.

People who are suggesting he will flop and take Chelsea outside of European placing, what makes you think this?

He is one of the greats, nearly won the Ballon d'Or and has so many accolades to his name. He has a phenomenal understanding of the game.

How do we know he won't be similar to what Cruyff, Rijkaard and Guardiola were to Barcelona?

Edit: Perhaps a discussion for the Premier League Thread

Henry failed spectacularly at Monaco.  He was also one of the greats.  

Lampard is still very much a rookie manager.  He had a decent season at Derby, but to take the reins at Chelsea without a transfer budget, without Hazard, and an extremely bloated squad to sort through is going to take a lot more than what he has proven he has.  I'm not saying he's going to fail in the long run, but he will struggle this season.

[abdulaziz1]

1 hour ago, KMitch said:

Henry failed spectacularly at Monaco.  He was also one of the greats.  

Lampard is still very much a rookie manager.  He had a decent season at Derby, but to take the reins at Chelsea without a transfer budget, without Hazard, and an extremely bloated squad to sort through is going to take a lot more than what he has proven he has.  I'm not saying he's going to fail in the long run, but he will struggle this season.

Not having a transfer budget could go in his favor as the pressure will be less on him. It might be hard for him to start spending high and handle pressure.

[KMitch]

15 minutes ago, abdulaziz1 said:

Not having a transfer budget could go in his favor as the pressure will be less on him. It might be hard for him to start spending high and handle pressure.

TBH, I think this is exactly the reason why Chelsea went with Lampard as their new manager vs anyone else right now.  His club legend status will allow the fans to forgive him far more than any other high profile manager, except for maybe Mourinho (who would never take that job again without a transfer budget).  

[dont_do_it_doug.]

52 minutes ago, abdulaziz1 said:

Not having a transfer budget could go in his favor as the pressure will be less on him. It might be hard for him to start spending high and handle pressure.

Are we sure about that? It may be a different kind of pressure, but this is Chelsea and Abramovich we are talking about. The geezer doesn't really do 'chill'

[KentVillan]

1 hour ago, Thats2 said:

I’ve always found this a quite interesting facet of football management. Here in the States, there’s a belief that the best players don’t usually make for the best managers. The thinking goes that the game comes too easily for them and to impart that greatness to lesser players is difficult (‘just do what I did’). Across the most popular leagues, there have been very few great players who made great managers. Larry Bird maybe. Mike Ditka. Forrest Gregg. It’s far more likely to find managers who never reached anywhere near the highest levels as players and if they did, they usually did so as backups or ‘role players’. Bill Belichick, Steve Kerr, Greg Popovich, Sean McVay all fall into this category. So does Dean Smith.

The problem is we talk about moments of "genius" in football all the time, but often they aren't. They're just brilliant execution of something that anyone could have thought of.

It was no surprise when Shearer turned out to be a crap manager, because his whole game was roughing up defenders, winning headers, and banging the ball very hard into the top corner. Brilliant, brutal simplicity, and made him one of the best players of his generation... but he wasn't exactly delivering a tactical masterclass every time he stepped on the pitch.

Henry was made out to be a genius because he drifted out to the left wing and sidefooted the ball into the net (wow, 4D chess), but his main attributes were blistering pace, amazing ball control, and superb finishing under pressure.

It's usually the slower, physically unremarkable midfielders and defenders, who don't have unbelievable ball skills, who turn out to be good managers. They have to think more about movement and positioning, and how to get the better of more talented players. There's a lovely quote from Klopp where he says he "had a first division brain, and fourth division feet".

On that basis, you'd give Lampard half a chance. He was definitely an overachiever.

The good thing about our setup is we have that mix of a clever football brain (DS) and world class playing career (JT), so the players can learn from both of them.