Steven Gerrard

[david-avfc]

40 minutes ago, Tommo_b said:

If the season started when Gerrard took charge we would be sitting 10th, one win off of being 8th. About what we would’ve been aiming for at the start of the season.

But who knows if Gerrard would have got more points out of the opening games of the season than under Smith?

We were in complete disarray at the start of the season following the chaotic summer, and as the last 4 results have shown we are no less prone to losing streaks under Gerrard than we were under Smith. 

[nick76]

9 minutes ago, TRO said:

We have no quality midfield and yet we are expecting a young manager, learning his trade, to turn that around, to beat teams better than us.......sure we was all hoping for better, but maybe its just not possible to do it without personnel changes.

Have you, bothered to consider, it needs new faces, and they can't do what he is asking.

My issue is that we did it at the beginning of last season for half a season.  Dean was sacked because he stop getting it out of them for various reasons but he did get it out of them for a consistent run and it cant be just because of Jack because I watched those games and Jack didnt play in CM or DM.  We certainly need a DM but this squad of players who have been added to with quality has shown consistent great football so they can do what he's asking, they either dont want to, he's not getting it right with them for whatever reason or something else but these players have played fantastic football before and they were all playing it and not just Jack, he was just the star.  Watkins was brilliant, unstoppable and everywhere at that time....where is that now.  Konsa was unbeatable, the next top England defender, where is that now.  

Maybe Gerrard is the man to turn it around and just needs time but watching us worries me.  We all agree that the first half against Spurs we saw some fight, great....we lost 4-0...what am I supposed to take from that?  Hope? the positives?  Just didnt feel any of that after that or even now.

[nick76]

7 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

I'm not even looking at the results. We're just not a better team than the one that started the season, despite the squad being much healthier and adding Lucas Digne and Philippe **** Coutinho on top of it. 

I thought the point of hiring a new manager was to improve the existing team? If he needs 100's of million + time, then what was the point? You could have given the previous guy 100's of million + time.

I mean, I agree with what you're saying here but I just think it's funny that all this nuance is coming out now, when start of the season it was Europe or bust (not you in particular).

Spot on!  It's why I'm more detached from the Villa than I have been for a long time.  Fortunately I go away this week down the coast and can unplug for a bit because it's so frustrating.

[DCJonah]

17 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

I'm not even looking at the results. We're just not a better team than the one that started the season, despite the squad being much healthier and adding Lucas Digne and Philippe **** Coutinho on top of it. 

I thought the point of hiring a new manager was to improve the existing team? If he needs 100's of million + time, then what was the point? You could have given the previous guy 100's of million + time.

I mean, I agree with what you're saying here but I just think it's funny that all this nuance is coming out now, when start of the season it was Europe or bust (not you in particular).

Absolutely this. What's the point of Gerrard or what's so special about him, if we still need to spend big on a few positions. That would still have been the case under Smith. 

[DCJonah]

I'll say this, I don't think for one second that when purslow jumped at the chance to swap Smith for Gerrard, he thought it would take another huge summer of investment to get challenging in the top half. 

[Keyblade]

3 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Absolutely this. What's the point of Gerrard or what's so special about him, if we still need to spend big on a few positions. That would still have been the case under Smith. 

And I know people are going to be weird and make this about a Smith vs Gerrard thing as a copout. I'm over that. All I know is that we changed manager and the team looks just as disjointed and inconsistent 20 games in and people who were antsy about us being disjointed and inconsistent before the change (and cited it as a reason for the change) are suddenly totally cool with it. We just need to chuck more money at it apparently. Makes browsing On Topic really annoying. 

[abdulaziz1]

I don’t mind giving Gerrard time, I just hate the fact that he isn’t giving our players (especially youngsters) their chances. That’s our bright part, we need to start producing players. We have one of the best academies. Our board have a great vision. Why would we lose Chuck just for Gerrard want whats called ready players? We’ll waste our last run of the season with bad results and without giving chances? Same as Smith last season. I’d take 16th instead of 12th if it meant giving our players chances and have a better view who’s ready and who’s not. Rather than same week in week out.

I just question that part, and the longer term vision. Other than that I think he isn’t the worst appointment and could give us some success. But the board needs to have a proper word for him. We need to use the next couple of games and maximize the benefit.

 

[nick76]

10 minutes ago, Rustibrooks said:

A question(which has probably been asked already)for those who feel anti towards Gerrard… I’m going to assume you guys want him sacked regardless of how we end the season… So realistically who would you want to come in?

I'm not in that category of wanting Gerrard sacked at the end of the season. 

If he did get sacked it would be interesting to see who is available then in the summer or somebody that we could go after. 

I was never a fan of the calls for Potter or Hasenhuttl, so I would be interested in the names people say. 

I never thought sacking Smith that there was a manager out there that would improve us better than him who would come but I also appreciated people saying that we are substantial club, in one of the best leagues in the world, with great infrastructure and rich/invested owners so our pool of possible managers is wider than I thought. 

I also dont know the foreign markets very well to be honest either so there maybe gems out there. 

I never thought we'd go for a rookie manager who main claim was his football playing name with limited resume as a manager.

So while I am critical of Gerrard I dont think he should be sacked whatever but I am intrigued on who realistically would be on our radar, even just for fun because I'm bored of the current conversation going on for the next two weeks.

[Anything11]

4 hours ago, DCJonah said:

Absolutely this. What's the point of Gerrard or what's so special about him, if we still need to spend big on a few positions. That would still have been the case under Smith. 

Because Smith had been here for years with plenty of money spent on his team.

Also by your logic what is so special about Klopp when he needed to spend big on Van Dijk and others when he came in? Or Pep and the millions spent there?

 

[hippo]

7 hours ago, abdulaziz1 said:

I don’t mind giving Gerrard time, I just hate the fact that he isn’t giving our players (especially youngsters) their chances. That’s our bright part, we need to start producing players. We have one of the best academies. Our board have a great vision. Why would we lose Chuck just for Gerrard want whats called ready players? We’ll waste our last run of the season with bad results and without giving chances? Same as Smith last season. I’d take 16th instead of 12th if it meant giving our players chances and have a better view who’s ready and who’s not. Rather than same week in week out.

I just question that part, and the longer term vision. Other than that I think he isn’t the worst appointment and could give us some success. But the board needs to have a proper word for him. We need to use the next couple of games and maximize the benefit.

 

Perhaps he feels if he gives the youngsters time - we would go on long winless streaks. ......maybe even loosing 4 in a row  

 

[thunderball]

Gerrard won’t be sacked and deserves a full season after the Summer pre-season. Only then can we take a view, anything less is reckless impatience unless we are threatened with relegation.

Disappointed a little after a promising start, but it’s clear to see that we have too many players not performing or getting found out and an unfortunate stop/start season of injuries and unavailability which is most of our problem. The Ings signing still baffles me too, that for me was an unnecessary distraction to our system that still confuses the club.

Edited April 12, 2022 by thunderball

[hippo]

7 hours ago, nick76 said:

I'm not in that category of wanting Gerrard sacked at the end of the season. 

If he did get sacked it would be interesting to see who is available then in the summer or somebody that we could go after. 

I was never a fan of the calls for Potter or Hasenhuttl, so I would be interested in the names people say. 

I never thought sacking Smith that there was a manager out there that would improve us better than him who would come but I also appreciated people saying that we are substantial club, in one of the best leagues in the world, with great infrastructure and rich/invested owners so our pool of possible managers is wider than I thought. 

I also dont know the foreign markets very well to be honest either so there maybe gems out there. 

I never thought we'd go for a rookie manager who main claim was his football playing name with limited resume as a manager.

So while I am critical of Gerrard I dont think he should be sacked whatever but I am intrigued on who realistically would be on our radar, even just for fun because I'm bored of the current conversation going on for the next two weeks.

It's one for the club to consider. It goes to the heart of how we operate and what we aspire to.

Smith or Gerarrd are minnows in terms of managerial clout compared to Klopp, Tuchel. And TBF those managers are probably beyond our grasp.

Could we stretch to Rodgers, Lage, Hassentual or someone of that calibre ?

If we don't then we stuck - gambling on lesser managers who we hope come into there prime at villa. In 50 years of watching villa imo only Saunders, Taylor and Smith have left villa with there stock higher than when we come in.

IMO we really have to up our game recruiting the next manager I think we have reached a ceiling of well funding managers with only a nominal track record elsewhere.

 

 

 

Edited April 12, 2022 by hippo

[jacketspuds]

It’s a silly notion, but maybe it takes a little bit of time to get up to speed in a new job.

Arsenal fans were calling for Arteta, who had less experience than Gerrard, to be sacked when things weren’t going well at the start of his tenure.

Now he has had the opportunity to bring in his own players, weed out the ones that can’t do what he wants them to do, and progress.

We need to give Gerrard the chance to do the same thing.

Saying that, it will be interesting to see what happens to him if we lose something like 4 or 5 of our remaining games though.

 

[hippo]

4 minutes ago, jacketspuds said:

It’s a silly notion, but maybe it takes a little bit of time to get up to speed in a new job.

Arsenal fans were calling for Arteta, who had less experience than Gerrard, to be sacked when things weren’t going well at the start of his tenure.

Now he has had the opportunity to bring in his own players, weed out the ones that can’t do what he wants them to do, and progress.

We need to give Gerrard the chance to do the same thing.

Saying that, it will be interiromoted esting to see what happens to him if we lose something like 4 or 5 of our remaining games though.

 

Couple of differences with Arteta though.

He has promoted several youth prospects to first team duties. With a view to the longer term.

He is probably already at his dream job. He doesn't have his eye on the next move upwards.

 

 

[HKP90]

5 hours ago, Anything11 said:

Because Smith had been here for years with plenty of money spent on his team.

Also by your logic what is so special about Klopp when he needed to spend big on Van Dijk and others when he came in? Or Pep and the millions spent there?

 

And he achieved promotion at the first time of asking and kept us up twice.

[pacbuddies]

4 defeats on the spin and he's almost in Smith territory without the goodwill of fans following a promotion.

[hippo]

23 minutes ago, duke313 said:

Don't be bringing stuff like that up.  The Gerrard haters want him out.

Maybe so.

But you have to ask yourself with so many fans openly not on board with Stevie G - that's never a great place for a club to be.?

And given his nominal track record - why appoint a guy so divisive ?

It's a mess of our own making.

[duke313]

2 minutes ago, hippo said:

Maybe so.

But you have to ask yourself with so many fans openly not on board with Stevie G - that's never a great place for a club to be.?

And given his nominal track record - why appoint a guy so divisive ?

It's a mess of our own making.

Would be interesting to know how many fans are actually not on board with SG being manager, rather than a few people commenting on an Aston Villa fan forum?

[Zatman]

46 minutes ago, pacbuddies said:

4 defeats on the spin and he's almost in Smith territory without the goodwill of fans following a promotion.

The honeymoon period is well and truly over

[WakefieldVillan]

Although I never wanted to get rid of Smith, I was quite happy with the appointment of Gerrard.  I thought he did a good job at Rangers and although it was a gamble (aren't all new managers) I think his winning mentality was maybe what this club needs, he comes across well with the media and his "profile" meant we were able to sign a world class player in Coutinho. 

I am disappointed with recent results, I am a little concerned with the one formation he wants us to play - with what appears to be no plan B, I don't think our squad is suited for this style of play.  I have been disappointed with Digne (but that's maybe for another thread - but it's a Gerrard signing), I would like to see more game time for Chuk and Tim. I think a few of the players should have been dropped but haven't (McGinn, Luiz, Watkins) and some have been unlucky to be dropped (Chambers, Buendia, Sanson). I think losing Nakamba when he was having his best spell at the club was a huge loss to how we play in this system. 

We have Norwich, Palace and Burnley at VP and I really want and expect us to get 9 points from them games. But unless we have a complete disaster end to the season I think we need to give him till next December. Give him a pre-season, let him bring in the players he wants and turf out the ones he doesn't. I know it's a results industry but I think it's absolutely ridiculous that people are even thinking of sacking him at this stage.