Steven Gerrard

[sne]

3 minutes ago, Tommo_b said:

 

Gerrards appointment bought in Digne and Coutinho, that’s huge already. 

Yup, those 2 illustrates the positive things with having a big name as manager. 

Edit: And having very rich ambitious owners...

Edited May 21, 2022 by sne

[Zatman]

7 minutes ago, Tommo_b said:

You could argue that Smith, Lambert, Martin O’Neil, David O’Leary, Remi Garde, Sherwood. McCliesh, John Gregory, Brian Little all has little/varying experience and none of the higher level experience Gerrard has gone through or the managers he has played under… so managerial experienced perhaps plays a part, perhaps it doesn’t. 
 

Gerrards appointment bought in Digne and Coutinho, that’s huge already. 

Really? O'Leary and O'Neill even Alex McLeish 

All played under better managers than Gerrard and as a manager did as much as him

[Tomaszk]

26 minutes ago, nick76 said:

It’s interesting that the final nail in the coffin for Smith was 10 points in his final 11 games.  

If we lose tomorrow, Gerrard’s final 11 games of this season he’ll have 9 points.

I don't think it's interesting. I think it's terrifying.

13 minutes ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

Isn’t that what usually happens when people choose sides on forums, any excuses will do.

It shouldn't be the case, but it is weirdly. Everyone should simply decide by what they see. Being so fantastically wrong about the last manager seems to have bent a few people's minds, so now they MUST praise whoever is not him.

13 minutes ago, VillaParkAvenue said:

I’m still annoyed about the club appointing people with relatively low level qualifications to key roles in a financially huge project. That goes for Smith, Lange and Gerrard.

I think that's fair but I do think we were limited at to who we could attract at 15th in the championship. Smith came in and did an incredible job for the entire time he was here bar the start of this season.

Yesterday I listed about 10 managers we could have appointed ahead of Gerrard, all more qualified and more of a safe bet.

Here's to a great new season and the gaffer making it work.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

3 hours ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Why is that more ridiculous than comparing points achieved with our current, vastly superior squad compared to the one we had our first year back up?

Because we can then include SG's Rangers ppg and it will paint an inaccurate picture.

The squad we had in our first year up, barely scraped survival, so i'm not sure what the relevance of the far superior squad has to do with it.

It then finished 11th after being improved further, however it got serious blows at the beginning of this season.

Also, we had Jack Grealish.

Edited May 21, 2022 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN

[VillaHatesMe]

4 hours ago, DCJonah said:

This doesn't mean shit. 

Compare the squads each manager mainly had to work with. 

Our first year in the prem 17th was our title with the fact we had to rebuild a squad and have them prem ready in a summer. 

This is the problem with select statistics, it doesn't take into account all the variable around it or the actually real life situations. 

 

Why is it the people on here who tell you the statistics you share don't matter never tell you which ones do? What statistic matters more than results? It's fine to have an opinion, but when somebody presents a statistic that doesn't support your opinion, it doesn't necessarily mean the statistic is flawed or "doesn't mean shit." It might just mean your opinion is off.

[nick76]

45 minutes ago, sne said:

Yeah but if you only take the 10 games we've won under him we have 30 points from those 10 games which is great 

But that’s the kind of sarcastic comment I expect because we only allowed to talk about total tenure which is the dishonest part of the pro side of this argument.  I’ve discussed his full tenure, I’ve discussed last 20 games, last 10 games.  I’m not sure how your comment adds to the discussion but mine is talking about form.

[nick76]

50 minutes ago, Zatman said:

For some reason I find Gerrard gets more excuses on here than other managers and I am not sure why except maybe he was a big name player. 

Funny thing is Gerrard has said himself many times he doesn't want excuses

and he’s said it’s been poor! But we aren’t allowed to say the same thing!

[VillaHatesMe]

4 hours ago, nick76 said:

That disingenuous because the squad capability is very different or the various seasons.  The first season back in PL was a much weaker squad and the goal was to survive.  Maybe a season by season ppg would be closer or maybe a rolling average trend.

Here ya go. Average points per match over the last 10 since joining the Premier League. The black line is when Gerrard took over.

[WallisFrizz]

Look, we’ll likely lose tomorrow, probably by a few yet he’ll still be our manager going into next season.

We could just agree to disagree on stats, ppg etc and get behind him for next season (until we have some new stats to argue over) otherwise it’s going to be a really long summer  on this thread.

[sne]

Just now, nick76 said:

But that’s the kind of sarcastic comment I expect because we only allowed to talk about total tenure which is the dishonest part of the pro side of this argument.  I’ve discussed his full tenure, I’ve discussed last 20 games, last 10 games.  I’m not sure how your comment adds to the discussion but mine is talking about form.

Think I'm actually on your side in this as I think it's all been quite underwhelming as a whole.

But I'm gonna take a backseat to this whole thing as Gerrard is here and is gonna be here when the next season start too so what he's done and not done kinda doesn't really matter.

Sorry if you felt I was taking a shot at you.

[VillaHatesMe]

4 hours ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Why is that more ridiculous than comparing points achieved with our current, vastly superior squad compared to the one we had our first year back up?

Well, if we're going to argue that it's not fair to compare results based on squad strength, it's just as fair to say we can't judge Gerrard because he's never had Grealish to work with. So I guess we'll never know! 

[nick76]

1 minute ago, VillaHatesMe said:

Here ya go. Average points per match over the last 10 since joining the Premier League. The black line is when Gerrard took over.

Thanks, it’s very interesting

[nick76]

1 minute ago, sne said:

Think I'm actually on your side in this as I think it's all been quite underwhelming as a whole.

But I'm gonna take a backseat to this whole thing as Gerrard is here and is gonna be here when the next season start too so what he's done and not done kinda doesn't really matter.

Sorry if you felt I was taking a shot at you.

Sorry mate, yeah I understand your point.  I think after Sunday I think the league arguments hopefully take a back seat for a bit and then we move to arguing whether a player we are linked is shit or brilliant, we have no chance of signing or we should never touch for whatever reason and then whether we’ve paid too much, got a bargain or should’ve brought a different position instead.  The joys of being a fan.

[Sam-AVFC]

9 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

Because we can then include SG's Rangers ppg and it will paint an inaccurate picture.

The squad we had in our first year up, barely scraped survival, so i'm not sure what the relevance of the far superior squad has to do with it.

It then finished 11th after being improved further, however it got serious blows at the beginning of this season.

Also, we had Jack Grealish.

No idea what this means.

You don't think an improving squad has any relevance to an improving ppg? Didn't strike me as a controversial opinion tbh.

I'm aware.

So? Now we have Coutinho and our ppg has got worse since he came in.

It was a very simple point based on the fact that with so many variables I don't think ppg is particularly useful, hence my example of a club with a more stable baseline like Burnley. It wasn't a criticism of Gerrard if that's why you felt the need to post whatever point it is you're making.

[Adam2003]

8 minutes ago, sne said:

Think I'm actually on your side in this as I think it's all been quite underwhelming as a whole.

But I'm gonna take a backseat to this whole thing as Gerrard is here and is gonna be here when the next season start too so what he's done and not done kinda doesn't really matter.

Sorry if you felt I was taking a shot at you.

This is where I am as well. He’s done ok, not as well as I hoped but not as badly as I feared. Overall I think we are finishing basically where Smith would have finished. However I am open minded and hopeful that after a summer working with the team and a couple of new faces we will see a style emerge and there have been enough good signs to give it the benefit of the doubt - we will be midtable next season, the hope is it’s upper midtable not lower and that would be continued progress. It is important we get back into the top half.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

40 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Sorry mate, yeah I understand your point.  I think after Sunday I think the league arguments hopefully take a back seat for a bit and then we move to arguing whether a player we are linked is shit or brilliant, we have no chance of signing or we should never touch for whatever reason and then whether we’ve paid too much, got a bargain or should’ve brought a different position instead.  The joys of being a fan.

You can guarantee there is a high likelihood that they will be both.

[DCJonah]

1 hour ago, VillaHatesMe said:

Why is it the people on here who tell you the statistics you share don't matter never tell you which ones do? What statistic matters more than results? It's fine to have an opinion, but when somebody presents a statistic that doesn't support your opinion, it doesn't necessarily mean the statistic is flawed or "doesn't mean shit." It might just mean your opinion is off.

It doesn't mean shit because like I said, it ignores all context and reality. It's just a baseless statistic to suit an agenda. 

 

Edited May 21, 2022 by DCJonah

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

32 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

It doesn't mean shit because like I said, it ignores all context and reality. It's just a baseless statistic to suit an agenda. 

 

If i'm honest mate, I think you'll find that the bold, goes for both sides of the coin.

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 hours ago, WallisFrizz said:

Look, we’ll likely lose tomorrow, probably by a few yet he’ll still be our manager going into next season.

We could just agree to disagree on stats, ppg etc and get behind him for next season (until we have some new stats to argue over) otherwise it’s going to be a really long summer  on this thread.

I’d welcome this. 

[DCJonah]

39 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

If i'm honest mate, I think you'll find that the bold, goes for both sides of the coin.

Agreed. You've got very negative people being selective to suit theirs. You've got the super positive having to try and talk down Smith or use a form table to suit theirs and the hypocrits who did the exact opposite last year but happy to do it now. 

Gerrards done an OK job and deserves time. But 14th is also a disappointment. I don't think it really requires any selective statistics. It seems pretty clear to me anyway.