Dean Smith

[kidlewis]

49 minutes ago, Eastie said:

Liverpool ? We don’t play them until mid April 

Sorry meant Spurs 

[villalad21]

We didn't spend 100+ million to get relegated.

There is no way Smith is still here if he takes us down.

[KentVillan]

1 hour ago, Eastie said:

I thought it would take maybe 10 games to gel and then we’d improve as a team - as it is we’ve got worse rather than better.

I think the problem is that getting say 4-5 new first team players to gel might take 10 games. Getting 7+ to gel perhaps takes longer, especially if most of them are new to the league.

Targett’s lack of fitness hasn’t helped. Be interested to see our comparative record when he starts vs when Taylor starts.

I really thought of all the relegation battlers we had the best squad depth to handle an injury crisis, but it hasn’t quite worked out like that.

Having said that, a few teams around us have started picking up a lot of injuries, and that may come to our rescue. There are enough terrible teams that we can stay up. It just won’t be much fun to watch. And the worse we play, the more likely it is that Jack leaves I think.

If we can give Jack optimism that next season will be better, he might give us one more year.

[DaveAV1]

33 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

3 of the back 4 that day came in over the summer. The other player in Hause was here last season on loan but hardly played. Add to that the goalkeeper came in over the summer. I'd imagine as has been the case on numerous occasions this season that was the first time that back 4 had played together. 

I'd imagine the same went for the midfield that as a unit it had played together no more than a couple of times. Then you go up top and Wesley would have played no more than 15 games at this level with these players.

Whilst we have retained and involved this season some players from the squad Smith inherited (Taylor, Elmo, Lansbury, Hourihane, McGinn, Grealish, Kodjia, El Ghazi, Chester) you'd have to say only 2 or 3 of them are good enough for this level.

The bottom line is we did have to undertake a huge overhaul in the summer and we are still playing back lines/midfields/forward lines that have less than half a dozen games together as a unit. It takes time to build up understandings and that hasn't been helped by having injuries to key players through out the season in Mings, McGinn, Wesley and Heaton.

And Jack. 

[briny_ear]

25 minutes ago, kidlewis said:

Sorry meant Spurs 

Easy to mix the two up.

[Tomaszk]

I'm flip flopping on "blame" a bit right now, think Smith needs to stay for the season, it's too late to do anything managerial wise. Had to be done 1st Jan.

The players he's been given are not good enough. Where was the energy and hunger the other day though? Doesn't bode well for their belief in him which was something you could always say was there at the start of the season.

I think you can stick your house on us going back to 343 which means an even lighter midfield next week. Nakamba and...Drinkwater? I'd stick with Ghazi through the middle, Jack and Trez either side.

Dean....please....Neil Taylor...I can't do it any more. Drop him. We've gone back to not being able to go to one side of the pitch with him in the team.

[Vive_La_Villa]

I think if we need to pick up at least 4 points from the next 3 otherwise the owners could be looking for a new manager. Relegation just isn’t an option. 

[Mic09]

1 hour ago, villalad21 said:

We didn't spend 100+ million to get relegated.

There is no way Smith is still here if he takes us down.

How much weight does this argument have considering;

a) in June we only had about 4 players so we had to spend big money

b) it is clear that Smith is only partially responsible for recruitment

[Zatman]

2 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

How much weight does this argument have considering;

a) in June we only had about 4 players so we had to spend big money

b) it is clear that Smith is only partially responsible for recruitment

that poster wanted Smith gone since November 2018, a vendetta that won't go away. Doesnt post when villa win

[foreveryoung]

44 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

I'm flip flopping on "blame" a bit right now, think Smith needs to stay for the season, it's too late to do anything managerial wise. Had to be done 1st Jan.

The players he's been given are not good enough. Where was the energy and hunger the other day though? Doesn't bode well for their belief in him which was something you could always say was there at the start of the season.

I think you can stick your house on us going back to 343 which means an even lighter midfield next week. Nakamba and...Drinkwater? I'd stick with Ghazi through the middle, Jack and Trez either side.

Dean....please....Neil Taylor...I can't do it any more. Drop him. We've gone back to not being able to go to one side of the pitch with him in the team.

After half the season Smith has to be fully responsible for this, he sent that team out against City with no belief, when probably the team wanted to have a go, defo Grealish would have. It's no good protecting Smith and saying the team is not good enough, we have already seen on many occasions they are capable. In reality though, it must be so hard for Smith to gel the team, when he still don't even know his best system.

Had Smith studied how Wolves, an even Norwich played against City, he would have realised the best way against City is to go at them, not try park the bus old skool style, this gives them time on the ball and lets them play the fantastic pass and move football we have all seen from them. I personally thought it was very amateurish of him to play that system against a team like City who are just brilliant when they have freedom to play.

He still has so much to learn, as I have said before, the PL is no place to learn your trade, an it's showing. Lose the next 2 and the only fans he will have left, will the ones who are happy to go back to the Championship with him, an I'm not one of them.

Edited January 13, 2020 by foreveryoung

[useless]

Anything less than five points would be disappointing from the next three games, if we're to climb out of relegation zone and stay out of it we need to be doing better than that, hoooo!

[LakotaDakota]

2 hours ago, KentVillan said:

Targett’s lack of fitness hasn’t helped. Be interested to see our comparative record when he starts vs when Taylor starts.

Not sure it really means anything but (league games only) :

Targett has started 14 games. We have W4 D2 L8, Burnley, Norwich, Brighton, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle, Man Utd, Chelsea, Leicester, Sheff Utd, Southampton, Norwich, Watford. We conceded 27 in those 14 games.

Taylor has started 8 games. We have W2 D1 L5, Spurs, Bournemouth, Everton, Palace, West Ham, Arsenal, Burnley, Man City We conceded 15 in those 8 games. (up until Sunday it was 9 conceded in 7 games)

The 2 games where Targett went off to be replaced by Taylor are : Burnley 2-2 (We were 1-0 up when Taylor came on) & Wolves 1-2 (We were 1-0 down when Taylor came on)

 

 

[KentVillan]

Just now, LakotaDakota said:

Not sure it really means anything but (league games only) :

Targett has started 14 games. We have W4 D2 L8, Burnley, Norwich, Brighton, Man City, Liverpool, Wolves, Newcastle, Man Utd, Chelsea, Leicester, Sheff Utd, Southampton, Norwich, Watford. We conceded 27 in those 14 games.

Taylor has started 8 games. We have W2 D1 L5, Spurs, Bournemouth, Everton, Palace, West Ham, Arsenal, Burnley, Man City We conceded 15 in those 8 games. (up until Sunday it was 9 conceded in 7 games)

The 2 games where Targett went off to be replaced by Taylor are : Burnley 2-2 (We were 1-0 up when Taylor came on) & Wolves 1-2 (We were 1-0 down when Taylor came on)

Thanks for that!

That's 14 points from 14 starts for Targett, and 7 points from 8 starts for Taylor.

So **** all difference, especially if you count the Palace game as a draw. Ah well, good to test your assumptions 

(I do still think Targett is the better option because he offers so much more in attack, and Taylor's fixture list has been a touch easier. Mings was injured for several of the games Targett started, and you could argue the Burnley game is a W on Targett's ledger, since we were winning when he left the pitch. Really want to see Targett at LWB.)

[LakotaDakota]

The one thing i hadn't added was Targett has 1 goal & 2 assists, Taylor does not. Sure we have won more with Targett starting but it also includes both the Norwich games. Sunday was woeful with Taylor starting against City but Targett played the full 90 in some of  our most dire performances against those around us such as Southampton & 10 man Watford,. Far too many variables to read anything into it really other than it doesn't really seem to matter who is playing LB as we will have a few good games & a lot of shit ones

[ciggiesnbeer]

I am still happily behind Smith and the coaching team. Just look at the crap managers we have had the past what decade now? Its like a "who's who" of losers, chancers and has beens. Dean Smith is wonderful compared to that shower of diaherra. Lets worry about relegation when its here.

[KentVillan]

10 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

The one thing i hadn't added was Targett has 1 goal & 2 assists, Taylor does not. Sure we have won more with Targett starting but it also includes both the Norwich games. Sunday was woeful with Taylor starting against City but Targett played the full 90 in some of  our most dire performances against those around us such as Southampton & 10 man Watford,. Far too many variables to read anything into it really other than it doesn't really seem to matter who is playing LB as we will have a few good games & a lot of shit ones

The stats are inconclusive, but our own eyes tell us that when Taylor plays, nobody marks him and nobody passes him the ball, and he creates nothing.

There might be an argument for Taylor being a better left back than Targett, but a better left wingback? No chance. It is bordering on abuse to push him forward and ask him to be an attacking threat. He just doesn't know how to do it.

[Zatman]

3 minutes ago, KentVillan said:

The stats are inconclusive, but our own eyes tell us that when Taylor plays, nobody marks him and nobody passes him the ball, and he creates nothing.

There might be an argument for Taylor being a better left back than Targett, but a better left wingback? No chance. It is bordering on abuse to push him forward and ask him to be an attacking threat. He just doesn't know how to do it.

Taylor clearly unbalances the team, with wingbacks they need to get forward and be your width. Taylor just doesnt have any credentials to do this. Targett is far from perfect but he makes us balanced

[Keyblade]

On 12/01/2020 at 12:35, Bugzy1991 said:

At the start of the season I would have snap took 17th with the squad that we had. We were going to struggle to finish there at the start of the season. I don't see how we can talk about sacking Smith when were still on target for that after losing 3 of our key players. 

I don't really know what people are expecting? 

 

Pathetic display but Everyone in a relegation battle will get crushed like that once or twice against top teams in a season.

For reference, in the last 18 months alone, these are the times where they have put 5 or more past a team. Every team on this list bar 2 either have not been relegated that season, currently out of the bottom 3 this season or incredibly, CL teams.

Huddersfield 6-1
Cardiff 5-0
Burnley 5-0
Southampton 6-1
Burnley 5-0
Chelsea 6-0
Schalke 7-0
Watford 6-0
West Ham 5-0
Watford 8-0
Atalanta 5-1

[Made In Aston]

7 hours ago, Laughable Chimp said:

Been checking his Walsall managerial record. The man spent 5 years there and aside from his first season(which I'll give him the benefit of the doubt because he started managing mid-season), he's finished 19th, 9th, 13th and 14th with them. The season after he left? They finished 3rd. And Walsall had been finishing 10th place the season before he started managing.

There's an even less nice looking picture looking at his Brentford record. The season before Smith joined, Brentford reached the Playoffs. In the next 3 years of Smith's management, they would continuously fail to reach the playoffs year after year. The year after he leaves? They're looking like reaching the playoffs again.

Now, I know some people like to interpret this as him leaving a great legacy for his successors to inherit. But it doesn't explain why the season prior to him joining, the club were doing better than he would do with them in the future. Ironically, it really seems like Smith is the type of manager based on his previous managerial records to steady the ship when clubs need a quick and easy fix and he can go one better and keep them at a certain level. But he's not a manager who can bring them up beyond their level.

 

 

 

I was thinking the same. He is very similar to martinez. Is praised for more entertaining football, taking influence from the likes of klopp and guardiola. But, ultimately, it is not successful football over the course of a season, because the players are not technically good enough to execute it properly. Smith's style is the equivalent of taking a Ford focus, disguised as an f1 car, to the Monaco gp. 

[ciggiesnbeer]

7 hours ago, Laughable Chimp said:

Been checking his Walsall managerial record. The man spent 5 years there and aside from his first season(which I'll give him the benefit of the doubt because he started managing mid-season), he's finished 19th, 9th, 13th and 14th with them. The season after he left? They finished 3rd. And Walsall had been finishing 10th place the season before he started managing.

There's an even less nice looking picture looking at his Brentford record. The season before Smith joined, Brentford reached the Playoffs. In the next 3 years of Smith's management, they would continuously fail to reach the playoffs year after year. The year after he leaves? They're looking like reaching the playoffs again.

Now, I know some people like to interpret this as him leaving a great legacy for his successors to inherit. But it doesn't explain why the season prior to him joining, the club were doing better than he would do with them in the future. Ironically, it really seems like Smith is the type of manager based on his previous managerial records to steady the ship when clubs need a quick and easy fix and he can go one better and keep them at a certain level. But he's not a manager who can bring them up beyond their level.

I am a "Smith in" fan as you can tell, but this is fair criticism.

My mild counter is for us as we were, Championship Aston Villa. He achieved more than his predecessors and did it by playing some really good football.  

But you bring up some very good points indeed re his previous jobs. Fair play.