The next manager of Aston Villa

[Jareth]

I'd like a manager change in 2.5 years anyway, gets a bit stale having continuity, no drama.

[Mic09]

Just now, PieFacE said:

Don't really understand why people care about the length of contract. It's far more likely we'll sack him before he sees out his contract, that's just the nature of football these days.

Hence, the shorter the better. 

[nick76]

4 minutes ago, hippo said:

As @TrentVilla has said it's pretty much irrelevant.

It gives him 2 full seasons. If we like him and he likes us we can offer him an extension.

if he bombs we don't have to pay out on a 4 year contact.

if we put him on a 10 year deal. He would still go if Liverpool came calling.

don't see the downside of a shorter deal esp as most prem managers don't make the 3 year mark 

Just a bad look though.  I generally don’t care about perceptions but this just feels like slapping us in the face with the obvious without caring.

[tonyh29]

If it’s true Re Gerrards imminent   appointment ,  I’d love to know what made the board look around at all the current managers available , weigh up their careers , their training methods , what they’ve won  , what they can do for the club and it’s players to improve them  … and come to the conclusion Steven Gerrard is the best candidate … I’m not necessarily saying he isn’t , I’d just be curious to know , as the suspicion is that this was a done deal some time ago and nobody else was even interviewed .

time will tell if they’ve got it right … or wrong … 

[HKP90]

Wonder if it’s got a relegation release clause?

[WallisFrizz]

1 minute ago, It's Your Round said:

2.5 years seems odd but really it’s nothing to worry about. If he does well then he could earn a new deal from Villa, it’s less risk for us if he doesn’t do well. If he wants to **** off to the scousers then he will do that regardless. 

I suppose it allows us to plan rather than be shafted at short notice like we did to Rangers.

[El Zen]

Contract length is an even smaller concern than compo fee. It doesn’t matter. 

I guess it’s welcome onboard, Steve Gerrard.

It’s going to take some time getting used to, but hey, I’m willing to give him a chance, and can find reasons to be cautiously optimistic about this. 

[villa4europe]

2 minutes ago, villatillidie1980 said:

If we’re in a position where Liverpool want him to take over from Klopp in 2.5 years, surely we’ll be in a far better position than we are now? 

theoretically yes

but in terms of the youth infrastructure we've put in place maybe no

made comparisons before with Bruce buying jedinak and whelan in an attempt to get promotion, when we did finally get promotion they're of no use to us, the risk for me is that gerrard gets us up the table with players that he brings in on 4 year deals who are say 28 or older and we have no use for them after and it comes at the expense of chuk or ramsey or kesler or barry

time will tell but to me if he wants "success" within 2 years i'll be seriously impressed with him if he achieves it whilst bringing the kids through at the same time

[HKP90]

1 minute ago, Jareth said:

I'd like a manager change in 2.5 years anyway, gets a bit stale having continuity, no drama.

That’s why we dont win owt

[Mic09]

Just now, nick76 said:

Just a bad look though.  I generally don’t care about perceptions but this just feels like slapping us in the face with the obvious without caring.

If we produce a manager that Liverpool to take from us, I will be a happy man. 

If Liverpool take him in 2.5 years time, we will have a much better managers lining up to interview for the job.

[osmark86]

1 minute ago, nick76 said:

Just a bad look though.  I generally don’t care about perceptions but this just feels like slapping us in the face with the obvious without caring.

only if you're looking at it from that perspective. I think it's just a deal like any other deal and no ulterior motives. plus it's still a two party negotiation at the end of the day.

[villalad21]

18 minutes ago, Villastine said:

With all due respect Pochettino was highly rated and had done a great job in La Liga with a broke club. His tactical approach and emphasis on developing youth players (through necessity really as they kept selling his best players) had got the attention of media and clubs alike. 

Cortese appointed him because he perfectly fitted what they wanted to do at Southampton. Sell star players, develop youth team players etc. 

Gerrards not had to do that and when Rangers (approaching bankruptcy) tightened the purse strings he threw his toys out the pram. 

How many youth team players has he brought through in 3 years in a league where many games are won at half time? 

Gerrard is also highly rated. Like it or not.

Fact is Poch didn't have a whole lot of experience when taking charge of the Saints.

That's where the comparisons lie.

[villarule123]

Bit of a coincidence that the last 2/3 contracts Gerrard and Klopp have signed have been in alignment of each other.

Edited November 11, 2021 by villarule123

[nick76]

5 minutes ago, WallisFrizz said:

And then do we wave goodbye to a couple of our best players when they want to go with him.  Is that going to be the selling point to any new players we want to sign? Come to a Villa and then I’ll take you to Liverpool in a couple of years? They could have made it a little less obvious.

Exactly.  I know I’m probably being more conspiracy than reality but jeez it’s taking the edge off the positivity I’m trying to attain about this appointment.  Really trying to get onboard with this appointment but they are making it hard.

Think positive Nick, think positive!

[HKP90]

2 minutes ago, useless said:

I think people are being very naive with Gerrard and the idea that he's going to manage Liverpool, it's highly unlikely that it will ever happen, their aim is to challenge for titles and European Cups, so are going to want a world class manager to help them achieve that, and given that they probably won't have a budget to match some of their rivals then it's more important for them to have one of the best managers in the world to help them make up the difference...

Unless Gerrard has us playing the Champions League and maybe has won a trophy he probably won't even be considered for the Liverpool job.

Also Klopp's contract will probably be extended anyway.

Man it would be funny if he did well here and Scouse red got someone else

[Jareth]

Just now, HKP90 said:

That’s why we dont win owt

Who wants such things? Give me the Villa rollercoaster any day of the week.

[osmark86]

Just now, villarule123 said:

But of a coincidence that the last 2/3 contracts Gerrard and Klopp have signed have been in alignment of each other.

yes, probably just a coincidence. not even a super-unlikely one since contracts tend to span over seasons. I'm sure we could find a ton of similar coincidences that mean nothing.

[Jareth]

Gerrard and Klopp's periods are in sync too, I heard.

[It's Your Round]

3 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

If we produce a manager that Liverpool to take from us, I will be a happy man. 

If Liverpool take him in 2.5 years time, we will have a much better managers lining up to interview for the job.

Exactly. He’ll have done an outstanding job at Villa if he’s given the Liverpool job 2.5 years from now. We will likely be in Europe, safe from the threat of relegation and have a squad of quality that’s starting to reach their peak. We will be looking for a much higher calibre of manager than we’re used to.

[ferguson1]

2.5 year contact is just smart thinking. Should he fail, it’s minimal pay off and should he be successful, he can sign an extension or we’ll be in a much healthier place to hire someone else. So for me, no issue with this contract length at all.

I’m actually excited for him to get going now and what he brings to this current team?  He’s definitely a marmite person/manager/coach etc, but I felt the same when Terry joined and I grew to like him.