Jump to content

The next manager of Aston Villa


TrentVilla

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Xela said:

Can someone summarise the last 150 pages please? I must admit I feel a bit disconnected with the club at the minute so haven't read anything in great detail for a couple of days or so

Are we anywhere near appointing anyone? Any strong rumours? I see Gerrard was mentioned on the BBC?

Might be Gerrard, might not., He may or may not be a word removed.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Xela said:

Can someone summarise the last 150 pages please? I must admit I feel a bit disconnected with the club at the minute so haven't read anything in great detail for a couple of days or so

Are we anywhere near appointing anyone? Any strong rumours? I see Gerrard was mentioned on the BBC?

In summary no one really knows anything much but the little bit that they think they know they don't like.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrentVilla said:

I don’t disagree but then given the stat I quoted previously and the rapidly increasing salaries of managers I’d ask does it make sense to appoint managers on 4 or 5 year contracts? I’d argue not and would point at the 18 month deal (with options to extend) Spurs appointed Conte on a few weeks ago.

As you rightly say football management is different to it used to be, it is segmented and I think “head coaches” in ones where clubs are run well are more interchangeable than old school authoritarian managers were.

I think if they appoint Gerrard they are doing so in the knowledge of the spectre of Liverpool but with the belief he still help them get the club where they wish to be. I think that is a fairly pragmatic approach and reflective of what the modern role of a head coach is.

Obviously I’d rather that we appoint someone who gives us continuity over a prolonged period but I’m not really sure that is how football is now.

I get your concern over short termism but would argue they tried to give Bruce time, I think they gave Smith time although accept others think different and would give Gerrard time. That external circumstance may cut that short isn’t a reflection on those running the club or how they are doing so but I accept that in appointing Gerrard they would be accepting that possibility. 

I guess though my point remains, I think all managers are on relatively short term appointments regardless of the length of the contract. 

spot on for me. Give a manager 18 mths to 2 years with the option to extend, performance depending. I guess like players, the incoming guy holds the power to a degree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hippo said:

Interesting if the level of negativity has reached Teal. Then you can bet Purslow and Gerrard himself are aware of it.

I have the sense that he’s on Twitter a fair bit and it sounds like there’s enough negativity on there to prompt that kind of response. 

But then I think Twitter generally amplifies the negative more than the positive.
 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zatman said:

One of the worst tackles I have seen, Boateng leg went in an unnatural position. Amazed it didnt snap

What the picture doesn’t show is that Gerrard actually had a chain saw hidden under his shirt!! Shocking!!!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Xela said:

Can someone summarise the last 150 pages please? I must admit I feel a bit disconnected with the club at the minute so haven't read anything in great detail for a couple of days or so

Are we anywhere near appointing anyone? Any strong rumours? I see Gerrard was mentioned on the BBC?

It’s all rumours. Empty speculation. Media ain’t got a clue. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, blandy said:

Also fair.

I think my comments aren't really about whatever contract length we give a manager, it's about the philosophy of the club's leadership group. I mean they bought the club, including an inherited manager, who they got rid of in October, after the summer takeover. They had an aim of promotion in 2 years and stay up and then push on. That plan was met, arguably ahead of schedule. They've now potted the manager who did that (because results etc.) . That's not something I personally liked, but I understand it.

The reservation is that they've acted in haste rather than according to longer term thinking and an acceptance that there will be bumps in the road. That the money and ambition have rubbed up against a reality in a massively competitive league and they've over-reacted to the real world circumstances as soon as their ambitions and plans started to go awry. It's their right to do that, it's their club, their money, their employees. I'm uneasy around the thinking though, I'm uneasy about the time they have to get a nee man in, or if they even have a plan around replacing Dean in this 2 weeks with someone who genuinely fits their objectives, that led to them sacking Dean.

Maybe they'll feel they were reluctantly forced into it and had no choice. That the evidence around there being a change needed has been gathering for all of this year. Others would maybe say the circumstances around the pre-season and first 10 games are far from all at the feet of Dean Smith, and that while he was struggling to solve the problems caused by those circumstances, he's carried the can for wider issues and a new manager won't fix those underlying issues and getting someone in to do a short term job is the way to lose money and embed instability. Chelsea make that work (at considerable financial cost) , most other clubs don't. I think we need a longer term manager than the next cab off the rank who will be gone in a couple of years, and the process the club goes through to get them needs to be considered and thorough, not a panic move.

 

We often hear of managers needing several teams. Im sure Villa said at some point we needed 3 teams, one to get promoted, one to stabilise us in the premier league and another to push on. I can't see why these can't include a head coach/manager. I feel Smith had a ceiling, I thought it 3 years ago. I said to myself, he will get us up and then we may need someone to take us a little further and so it became to be. I really think we need to view managers like we do players, ie Hourihane, a cracking player but not quite Premier League level, so you move him on and try to get better. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, picicata said:

I'm not sure he'd have to do that brilliant with us. A couple of solid midtable finishes and he would be in the picture to replace Klopp. Nobody but us and our owners feel we should be challenging for Europe, we are grouped by the media and other fans in that lower mid table group and that's why so many of them were aghast when we sacked DS. In reality most managers only last two to three years (or weeks in Watford) anyway so it probably doesn't matter either way.

Aye.   If we're 11-14th over the next two seasons, his cheerleaders in the press will still say he's worked wonders.  Coming in to a struggling 'club like Villa' who were 17th when he arrived and just lost their best player. 

They'll gloss over the squad he inherited and the £ he'll no doubt have available. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Peter Griffin said:

Gerrard. I like his attitude and the drive to win he has

I wouldn't like Lamps because of the immediate and transformational change TT made with the same players at Chelsea. Lamps was clearly not getting the best out of the players nor playing thr right tactics

Tuchel is a world class manager. One of the best out there. Comparing him to a guy with 1.5 years of too flight managerial experience isn't saying much. Tuchel would vastly out perform any manager he would follow up besides a select few. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, GingerCollins29 said:

Gerrard, if appointed, may do gfeat, may be terrible. I'll back him regardless.

The most dissapointing thing is that this whole thing smacks of Purslow helping his mate get an audition for the plop job. I dont think AVFC features as the priority here at all.

Nonsense. Purslow owns shares in Villa (part of the criteria to him being appointed) so I don't see him just doing a favour to a mate. It just doesn't make sense. We need to try and be rational about this 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â