The next manager of Aston Villa

[maqroll]

Been AFK, is it really looking like Gerrard?

[Villan_of_oz]

57 minutes ago, nick76 said:

The problem I have is there are loads of candidates that are better than him and not elite managers who we should be looking at instead.  It’s like when you were a kid and you go into the electrical store and see all the great tvs for sale and your dad buys the crap one.

 

But how do you know it's a crap one? I don't want to be seen as a SG groupie but I see a lot of people who seem to be able to predict the future and are certain he will fail.

I think he could be a solid manager, he's done great things at Rangers. 

I'm happy for the club to make their decision and support their pick. 

 

 

[DaveAV1]

5 minutes ago, ciggiesnbeer said:

I remember that. I was on his side at the time. Looking back I think I still am. We had some wasters of players back then.

Collins, Dunne and Warnock all behaved disgracefully. 

[Kuwabatake Sanjuro]

16 minutes ago, hippo said:

Tim Sherwood is a good analogy. I think SG will get us running around at 100mph. And will probably start his tenure pretty well.

But like Sherwood I can see it unraveling in his 2nd season.

He is nowhere near as naive as Sherwood but when things were not going well for Gerrard in his first 2 seasons at Rangers he would regularly throw his players under the bus rather than accept blame himself. If we are struggling then that could lead to a fairly toxic atmosphere developing.

[Villan_of_oz]

1 hour ago, MCU said:

Nah sorry, got to disagree with you there. Any manager would be rubbing their hands together to have a crack at that Newcastle job right now.

Then how come they ended up with Eddie Howe. Check & mate.

[DaveAV1]

1 minute ago, Villan_of_oz said:

But how do you know it's a crap one? I don't want to be seen as a SG groupie but I see a lot of people who seem to be able to predict the future and are certain he will fail.

I think he could be a solid manager, he's done great things at Rangers. 

I'm happy for the club to make their decision and support their pick. 

 

 

Like

[MCU]

Just now, Villan_of_oz said:

Then how come they ended up with Eddie Howe. Check & mate.

Got me.

[TheEgo]

44 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

@TheEgo just gave you a well-argued reason why that view is most unlikely to be true and you’ve just repeated the original point.

I felt like it needed stressing. This isn't Purslows plaything, he reports to NSWE and we have a whole team of analysts and recruitment specialists. He won't be able to just pull off a job for a mate. It's worth mentioning how short sighted that take is. 

[ciggiesnbeer]

2 minutes ago, maqroll said:

Been AFK, is it really looking like Gerrard?

Yes. Fwiw I was watching the claret and blue FM stream earlier, they were pretty convinced Gerrard is a done deal based on what they know . Allegedly the players have been told the new manager will be in place within a week which all point to Gerrard.

[Zatman]

4 minutes ago, DaveAV1 said:

Collins, Dunne and Warnock all behaved disgracefully. 

Carew somehow gets off easily all the time

[GingerCollins29]

1 minute ago, TheEgo said:

I felt like it needed stressing. This isn't Purslows plaything, he reports to NSWE and we have a whole team of analysts and recruitment specialists. He won't be able to just pull off a job for a mate. It's worth mentioning how short sighted that take is. 

I disagree with you, but respect your opinion.

[jim]

1 hour ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

So has Gerrard checked in to Belfrey or not?

Maybe…

[chrisvilla4]

1 minute ago, Zatman said:

Carew somehow gets off easily all the time

Because he kept banging them in (the goals that is) 

[TrentVilla]

3 hours 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.

 

No, I know your concerns weren't around contract length but I think it was a useful illustration of how the role of 'managers' or 'head coaches' are changing and not just in terms of their titles.

In terms of the philosophy of the leadership I'm not sure I see it the same way neither do I view Smith's exit the same way, I don't think it was done in haste.

These owners and Purslow it seems have genuine ambition and the means to pursue it, ultimately it remains to be seen it they are achievable or they are willing to pay what it would cost to achieve but I think they have very clear objectives. As for philosophy, I'm not quite sure what you mean, surely their philosophy is invest in all parts of the club, in good people are in the pursuit of continuous improvement. 

I get that you and others feel that they may have acted in haste on Smith rather than according to longer term thinking, that they've been unaccepting of bumps in the road. I'm not sure that is true, I don't think the decision to sack him was reached swiftly neither do I think it was done out of panic but I'll come back to that in a moment. Purslow suggested they were ultimately disappointed with the second half of last season and I suspect conversations occurred about Smith then and quite likely in the summer. It is conjecture I accept but I think it is reasonable to assume, I don't think Smith's departure is on the back of the last 5 games or the 11 games of this season. 

So while I can understand your view point I don't agree with the assertion that they've acted in haste or through a lack of acceptance of bumps in the road. I don't think they've over-reacted, I think removing Smith was the right thing to do personally, as unpalatable as that may be to some.

I think they knew who they wanted before Smith was removed from his post, we've seen lots of names linked in the media but it seems like only one has been actively been pursued and that is Gerrard. Now there is a different conversation to be hand on the merits or otherwise of that choice, if it proves to be the choice, but I don't feel it is right to say they don't have a plan to replace Smith, I think he will be replaced in little over a week from Smith's departure.

Returning to the earlier point about not acting out of panic, I don't think Smith's departure is due to any fear of relegation, I don't think they acted because they were "reluctantly forced into it and had no choice" I just don't see that at all. If it was a forced, more defensive move then that would manifest itself in who they sort to step in, I don't think a pursuit of Gerrard fits that narrative. I think even the harshest Smith critic would be hard pressed to argue that circumstances haven't conspired against him but I think even his staunchest support would also have to accept the issues stretch further back than the summer and the form in the absence of Grealish has been consistently poor.

Don't mistake this as a ringing endorsement for Purslow or Gerrard, I've reservations about both, I  just quite strongly disagree with the view that the change is born out of panic and I just see no evidence at all to support that view. 

Anyway, pleasure as always.

[Made In Aston]

1 hour ago, GingerCollins29 said:

When Purslow talked about ambition, then comes up with (his friend/hero) Gerrard, who has zero managerial experience in a top class, competitive league, i am left with the opinion that this appointment is being made with Gerrard first and villa as a secondary consideration. Just my opinion

This. I did state earlier that if Gerrard comes then it clearly is a favour for a mate as he isn't the best candidate. It's 100% on Purslow if he doesn't deliver. 

[Zatman]

1 minute ago, chrisvilla4 said:

Because he kept banging them in (the goals that is) 

Dont think he scored under Houllier and barely ran. Was disgusting 

[ciggiesnbeer]

3 minutes ago, GingerCollins29 said:

I disagree with you, but respect your opinion.

Fwiw I have seen boards operate in both ways in tech corporations (my field).  Some boards are hands off and say "you hire and fire who you want, we hire and fire your role" others demand involvement on every new key hire (usually C level and above).

So yo could both be right!

[DaveAV1]

2 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Carew somehow gets off easily all the time

I didn’t realise he was part of the problem too. I suppose cult status got him a free pass. 

[Zatman]

Just now, DaveAV1 said:

I didn’t realise he was part of the problem too. I suppose cult status got him a free pass. 

They fell out in France then he didnt bother at all when Houllier came. Again our classic ownership at the time who didnt realise that

[hippo]

6 minutes ago, Villan_of_oz said:

But how do you know it's a crap one? I don't want to be seen as a SG groupie but I see a lot of people who seem to be able to predict the future and are certain he will fail.

I think he could be a solid manager, he's done great things at Rangers. 

I'm happy for the club to make their decision and support their pick. 

 

 

We don't know. But basically we are hoping Gerrard comes good at villa.

Our better managerial appointments have already hit those heights or something close to it.

I really thought given the money invested and time to put youth systems etc in place. I hoped know being a PL club we'd gone beyond hoping that a manager comes good at villa.