Jump to content

Villa managers


_m8

Who has been Villas best manager in the Premiership?  

188 members have voted

  1. 1. Who has been Villas best manager in the Premiership?

    • Ron Atkinson
      52
    • Brian Little
      76
    • John Gregory
      35
    • Graham Taylor
      6
    • David O'Leary
      20


Recommended Posts

The fact that Gregory had a bit more to spend and a bigger squad than DOL may mask the true figures I think!

1) If you listen to some, then Gregory's net spend is about the same as O'Leary's.

2) Its the managers job to build up the squad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFR - Great football in that first year, a team that looked like it could win every match it played. The second season saw Townsend in (good) but Whittingham? And the promising youth players were not pushed on in perhaps the right way. A League Cup win that felt so good - beating Man U and stopping their treble. Third season saw both wingers sold, the promising youth sold or sidelined and money was spent bringing in players that weren't ever going to be good enough - Fashanu anyone?

BL - Looked to have saved us before a run of poor results saw us saved on the last few days of the season. His buys were, initially, solid players - Taylor, Wright, Johnsen and then Draper, Southgate and Milosevic. Great first season - 4th, FA semi final and winning the league cup. Again, spent poor money in the following years and slowly lost his way before a terrible third season - especially with the money spent on Curcic and Collymore.

For that one season, he made us a genuine force - arguably the second best side in the country that year.

JG - Not suiting everyone's tastes, Gregory's time in Villa could be seen as 9 months on, 9 months off, repeat until crowd fall asleep. For all his good work, his spell saw us become 'Just Another premiership Club' - something that ignores the consistent finishes and the spells where we looked unstoppable. Winning the FA Cup would make it easier to argue his position. His alleged poor man-management got the best out of most players - the exceptions, all four of them, have such mitigating factors that you cannot simply blame Gregory and walk on. If he was so bad at motivating, how were we so consistent?

When he left, I genuinely feared for the club - he was onto a winner in 2001-2. Certainly a UEFA Cup spot and possibly a CL place for 2002-3. Seems so odd now, doesn't it? He also did win something, something that is a bit forgotten. OK, its the most minor first team trophy you can get, but it did put a buzz around that last season.

GT - Where will history put this spell? The signs weren't promising - 3 wins from February in a pretty fruitless run in to the end of the season - something JG would have bettered. Money spent on Crouch that looked increasingly like a bad buy. A few key players sidelined with various rumours about why.

In hindsight, its obvious that Taylor started what O'Leary is finishing - but was it necessary? Players like Merson and Stone could have helped us that year while their replacements in Kinsella, Leonhardsen were of a worse standard. Poor tactics, poor performances, poor results. A bitter end to a fruitful spell at the club.

And O'Leary? I think we should wait until he's been here more than 18 months. However, he appears to be taking us back to where we were under Little and Gregory, if not aiming higher. So far his spell has been good, with a few blips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have the figures for how much they all spent, as I can't find them. Would be interesting to compare.

People have mentioned how exciting their teams were. Well here are the goals scored per game ratios:

Big Ron: 118 goals in 98 games = 1.20 goals per game

Brian Little: 158 goals in 120 games = 1.32 goals per game

John Gregory: 195 goals in 148 games = 1.32 goals per game

Graham Taylor: 65 goals in 51 games = 1.27 goals per game

David O'Leary: 71 goals in 60 games = 1.18 goals per game

So according to this, BFR wasn't all that exciting, with Little and JG tied in 1st. DO'L looks the most boring, worse than GT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does the amount of goals scored make a team exciting to watch, or is it the way they play and the amount of shots and possession they have?

In this country, unlike on the continent, goals scored is proportional to excitement. Shouldn't be the case though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the best games i remember under Big Ron was a 0-0 against Blackburn. It was our first game on Monday night football. It was all just great entertainment. Esp with the big Sumos and the Sky Sports cheerleaders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Esp with the big Sumos and the Sky Sports cheerleaders.

Those Sumo's were hilarious.

I remember the 0-0 draw against Spurs that season, Deano hitting the post twice and having one cleared from over the line (as Andy Gray proved with his action replay machine a few years back by Justin Edinburgh). That was another entertaining game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Esp with the big Sumos and the Sky Sports cheerleaders.

Those Sumo's were hilarious.

I remember the 0-0 draw against Spurs that season, Deano hitting the post twice and having one cleared from over the line (as Andy Gray proved with his action replay machine a few years back by Justin Edinburgh). That was another entertaining game

and that Spurs game was the one where I 'met' blandy for the very first time

those Sumo's were actually Risso and his mate trying to find their seats

agree that goals do not necessarily mean excitement just poor defending ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
×
×
  • Create New...
Â