Football thread 2022/23

[Chindie]

26 minutes ago, feltmonkey said:

I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being Benitez.

 

*R.Budd Dwyer gif*

[Mike1812]

By Sunday Fulham might have ended 2 managers in one week. 

 

Leeds were terrible against Leicester. We can't score and or defence is shit. Junior Firpo is dreadful, Rodrigo is a waste and Bamford looks a shadow of his best. 

 

The crowd weren't directly calling for Marsch out, but singing 'what the fuck is going on' and 'where the fuck is Jesse Marsch' (when he disappeared down the tunnel without thanking the fans) along with the Bielsa chants, it doesn't look good. 

[milko]

6 minutes ago, Loik V credern said:

 

'Steven Gerrard was undermined by results and performances' is such odd phrasing, or odd use of undermined. Apart from results and performances, what else is a manager judged on. 

 

Haha. Like that Moyes quote about needing to improve in a number of areas, including passing, creating chances and defending.

[Chindie]

5 minutes ago, ryodi said:

 

He got Burnley into Europe in 2018 and arguably has never had the budget or players to play more expansive players. You could make the same criticism of Moyes's career which has only really recovered in his second spell at West Ham. 

 

Yes he did. But it's telling that he never was in the running to step up from Burnley. Moyes has a long career in the Prem, successfully (mostly) managing a club of a similar stature to Villa in Everton, has had career wobbles but generally proven to be a good second tier manager in the league. Dyche hasn't done that because he's been so associated with Burnley and that's meant he's never proven his ability to be anything more than a survival man who plays ugly cynical football and has no draw.

 

Who knows, Dyche might be a Champions League winning manager in waiting. I'd rather not find out at Villa if he is.

[Stoppy2000]

11 minutes ago, Loik V credern said:

 

'Steven Gerrard was undermined by results and performances' is such odd phrasing, or odd use of undermined. Apart from results and performances, what else is a manager judged on. 

Oddly enough I think that aside from the results and performances he was also annoying the fans with virtually everything else he did or said. The captaincy thing was odd for a start. 

My Villa supporting mate has been wanting him out for a long time. 

[Loik V credern]

Just now, Mike1812 said:

By Sunday Fulham might have ended 2 managers in one week. 

 

Leeds were terrible against Leicester. We can't score and or defence is shit. Junior Firpo is dreadful, Rodrigo is a waste and Bamford looks a shadow of his best. 

 

The crowd weren't directly calling for Marsch out, but singing 'what the fuck is going on' and 'where the fuck is Jesse Marsch' (when he disappeared down the tunnel without thanking the fans) along with the Bielsa chants, it doesn't look good. 

 

It's so odd to see these turns teams take, especially as a non fan who doesn't watch these teams live and is trying to stay awake watching the highlights on motd. I just sort of saw Leeds start the season well and Rodrigo do well, but like I say I wasn't paying attention. And I think Bamford will come good, last game (or the one before) he got into good positions I thought, his link up and awareness is still class I think. 

[ryodi]

40 minutes ago, Chindie said:

 

Yes he did. But it's telling that he never was in the running to step up from Burnley. Moyes has a long career in the Prem, successfully (mostly) managing a club of a similar stature to Villa in Everton, has had career wobbles but generally proven to be a good second tier manager in the league. Dyche hasn't done that because he's been so associated with Burnley and that's meant he's never proven his ability to be anything more than a survival man who plays ugly cynical football and has no draw.

 

Who knows, Dyche might be a Champions League winning manager in waiting. I'd rather not find out at Villa if he is.

Which would make him a modern Alan Curbishky who failed miserably at West Ham after a decade at Charlton with Dyche not even getting a next step job. I think Villa will pick a former Watford manager to try and keep them up this season and try for someone more permanent in the summer or if they wait long enough Graham Potter will probably be available in 18 months. 

[disperse and recoagulate]

Anyone wanna join Last Man Standing? First round is tomorrow!

 

 

[Plissken]

56 minutes ago, ryodi said:

 

He got Burnley into Europe in 2018 and arguably has never had the budget or players to play more expansive players. You could make the same criticism of Moyes's career which has only really recovered in his second spell at West Ham. 

 

It also ignores the way we played in that season, when we had a fully fit Robbie Brady and Steven Defour.  The 27 pass and score move against Everton, 3-0 in 45 minutes at Stamford Bridge, 2-2 away at Old Trafford when Fergie Time made a reappearance. We even battered Man City for half an hour in 1-1 draw.  Steven Defour... what a wonderful player.

 

In the Championship season, we went 23 unbeaten against teams that were set up to try to stop us.  I would say "doing a Dyche" but everyone does it to an extent. Point is, he had us joint top scoring.

 

He's been unfairly put in a box, and given he got the two best seasons out of Danny Ings in his career, he would absolutely get the best out of some of the players at Villa.  I can imagine how he would use McGinn and improve Mings.

 

[SMD]

1 hour ago, Chindie said:

 

Yes he did. But it's telling that he never was in the running to step up from Burnley. Moyes has a long career in the Prem, successfully (mostly) managing a club of a similar stature to Villa in Everton, has had career wobbles but generally proven to be a good second tier manager in the league. Dyche hasn't done that because he's been so associated with Burnley and that's meant he's never proven his ability to be anything more than a survival man who plays ugly cynical football and has no draw.

 

Who knows, Dyche might be a Champions League winning manager in waiting. I'd rather not find out at Villa if he is.

 

i know you've had a bad season but jfc what is this drivel? everything you said about Dyche could equally apply to Villa as a club, I don't know who you think your level is at but if you're expecting Pochettino, Tuchel and Simeone then you're going to be sorely disappointed...still.

 

Dyche is a really good manager and worm memes aside, he's definitely deserved a shot at a club who need a new tactical outlook and impetous. Would you have turned your nose up at Potter before Brighton? Cos all he had to his name was 6 years in Sweden before the one at Swansea.

[BitterToad]

3 hours ago, Chewylegs said:

Thought the Fulham crowd was very basic too.  Never heard so many "you're shit ahhhh" chants since going to watch Bath City play in the 90s! 

Very little need for this. We sang about beating them at Wembley, we sang about Gerrard getting sacked, we sang that the keepers were shit and they threw the ball out and we all went "wheeeeeeey" because we were right, we sang that Thomas Frank is a sex offender. A perfectly fine mix for a Thursday evening. 

[Chewylegs]

10 minutes ago, BitterToad said:

Very little need for this. We sang about beating them at Wembley, we sang about Gerrard getting sacked, we sang that the keepers were shit and they threw the ball out and we all went "wheeeeeeey" because we were right, we sang that Thomas Frank is a sex offender. A perfectly fine mix for a Thursday evening. 

🤣 ok, that made me chuckle!

 

Really though, the "you're shit" chant was the main one that came through with all the Gerrard chants on TV.  Totally didn't hear the Thomas Frank ones!

[Chindie]

18 minutes ago, SMD said:

 

i know you've had a bad season but jfc what is this drivel? everything you said about Dyche could equally apply to Villa as a club, I don't know who you think your level is at but if you're expecting Pochettino, Tuchel and Simeone then you're going to be sorely disappointed...still.

 

Dyche is a really good manager and worm memes aside, he's definitely deserved a shot at a club who need a new tactical outlook and impetous. Would you have turned your nose up at Potter before Brighton? Cos all he had to his name was 6 years in Sweden before the one at Swansea.

 

Drivel? Thanks.

 

Little old Villa. Should know our place clearly.

 

As for the names there... I'd try to have the conversation with Poch, even if it were a long shot. He's been out of work for a while and has been overlooked for the 'elite' appointments in Europe, and in England it doesn't look like there's going to be an opening for a CL team in the near future, so if he wants back into England now we're the best offer he has. And we can offer him something interesting by all accounts - big wages and transfer kitty, with a decent squad to go with and develop. Tuchel is pure nonsense. As is Simeone, who I don't think is even being seriously discussed.

 

Yes I would have turned down Potter pre-Brighton. And I wasn't completely sold on him at Brighton either. He was very streaky and had as many times where they looked hopeless as they did were they punched above their weight

 

I don't see why Villa can't look higher than Dyche. We absolutely should be. Dyche is a decent manager, but he's a decent manager of a particular stripe by all accounts, and doesn't align with where Villa should be and where our owners want to be.

 

I'm sure your club, whoever that may be, can give him the opportunity though. He could be excellent. He deserves a shot somewhere. Perhaps Wolves. He might have a Portuguese nan.

[BitterToad]

35 minutes ago, Chewylegs said:

🤣 ok, that made me chuckle!

 

Really though, the "you're shit" chant was the main one that came through with all the Gerrard chants on TV.  Totally didn't hear the Thomas Frank ones!

Sound at The Cottage is really weird. The Hammy end tends to be where the "real fans" sit (myself included, obviously) but sound doesn't really travel around the ground that well so it tends to be just two sets of supporters shouting about libraries at each other for 90 minutes. 

 

We're never going to be Boca Juniors but we give it a go, it was especially loud when we smashed Liverpool 2-2 on the opening day. 

[skadupuk]

@Chindie

 

Palace took on Viera after he had an ok spell in the states, and a shit time in France, it's been fucking brilliant.

 

Outside of the big 6 (and Newcastle's oil billions) I don't think it's as much about a "big" manager as finding the right manager that alligns to your club culture and ambition, and Viera and Palace are bought in to each other.

 

I'm realistic that if he keeps doing well we lose him, but I can't think of a 'name' manager that would have worked as well.

 

Not saying you could take Dyche, just that it's worth being open to someone a bit less experienced.

 

 

 

 

 

[Plissken]

 

[Chindie]

@skadupuk that's fair enough, but we just hired someone that's inexperienced and it's been a disaster, to the extent we can't really afford to take a punt on someone still learning. I don't want Villa to be training wheels. The owners appear not to either (and why would they?).

 

And I agree with aligning with ambition. It's just that Dyche would be more a case of the manager realigning the club's ambitions. We intend to be better than Dyche. That's not a slight on Dyche's abilities, it's just that his status, record, standing, whatever, are not in line with a team that wants Europe, and by hiring him you're essentially confirming your ambitions have changed.

[Mike1812]

Thing is, we don't know how far Dyche can go until he gets a job at a club with some ambition other than staying up, no matter what. 

[Chindie]

Agreed. I just don't want Villa to be where we find out where his ceiling is, and I don't think anyone at the club would disagree.

[Naysonymous]

4 hours ago, feltmonkey said:

I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being Benitez.

 

Not while Purslow is at Villa. They have previous. 

[Gabe]

1 hour ago, Chindie said:

I don't see why Villa can't look higher than Dyche. We absolutely should be. Dyche is a decent manager, but he's a decent manager of a particular stripe by all accounts, and doesn't align with where Villa should be and where our owners want to be.

Where 'should' Villa be, and on what basis? I'm looking at league placings and barring a little purple patch under Martin O'Neill around the late 00s, things have generally been mid-table or lower.

 

You can of course go back further to when they were more of a top-half team in the earlier PL years, but even going back to 2010 is pointless, given how much the game has changed.

 

And if you look at more recent history, this is a team that couldn't even get automatically promoted out of the Championship a d relied heavily on a talismanic player to get that 11th place finish under Smith.

 

Gerrard has undoubtedly failed, hard, but I recall seeing his interview with Gary Neville and he spoke about the club and board having longer term goals, but being realistic in where the club is right now - and expecting somebody to come in and get a push for Europe seems fanciful. And I'd say that even if the Gerrard experiment hadn't happened and this was August 2021 and Smith had just come off the back of that 11th place.

 

With all that said, I don't watch them or know the ins and outs of the club, so I genuinely would welcome your comments on that 'should' statement.

 

[JamesTW]

'Top Half Minimum' the problem is theyre probably 'Top Half Maximum' at the same time 

[Chindie]

36 minutes ago, Gabe said:

Where 'should' Villa be, and on what basis? I'm looking at league placings and barring a little purple patch under Martin O'Neill around the late 00s, things have generally been mid-table or lower.

 

You can of course go back further to when they were more of a top-half team in the earlier PL years, but even going back to 2010 is pointless, given how much the game has changed.

 

And if you look at more recent history, this is a team that couldn't even get automatically promoted out of the Championship a d relied heavily on a talismanic player to get that 11th place finish under Smith.

 

Gerrard has undoubtedly failed, hard, but I recall seeing his interview with Gary Neville and he spoke about the club and board having longer term goals, but being realistic in where the club is right now - and expecting somebody to come in and get a push for Europe seems fanciful. And I'd say that even if the Gerrard experiment hadn't happened and this was August 2021 and Smith had just come off the back of that 11th place.

 

With all that said, I don't watch them or know the ins and outs of the club, so I genuinely would welcome your comments on that 'should' statement.

 

 

Villa are one of the biggest and most successful clubs in the league. We've been crap for the past decade, but historically we've been a top half club. It's very easy to draw an arbitrary line and say 'these are the dates that count' (I recall a few years ago arguing with a Spurs fan who looked to contend that the only time that matters aligns rather nicely with their cup winning sides of the 80s...) but the reality is you can only take into account the entire history, honours (7 Leagues, 7 FA Cups, 5 League Cups, and a European Cup - 25 honours in total, 7th highest in England), 'size' etc, at any point. We've obviously been overtaken by some sides, in recent years - Citeh have sadly sportwashed to success - but realistically Villa 'should' be a top half side, competing for Europe, based on the history, the honours, the fanbase, the financial clout (owners worth $11bn for instance), etc. Sadly we've never been particularly 'fashionable' and the past decade has been getting on for some of the worst times in our history (not quite the worst, we ended up the Third Division for a bit on the 60s), but it's pretty undeniable that Villa are a team that 'should' be top 10.

[Shimmyhill]

10 minutes ago, Chindie said:

 

Villa are one of the biggest and most successful clubs in the league. We've been crap for the past decade, but historically we've been a top half club. It's very easy to draw an arbitrary line and say 'these are the dates that count' (I recall a few years ago arguing with a Spurs fan who looked to contend that the only time that matters aligns rather nicely with their cup winning sides of the 80s...) but the reality is you can only take into account the entire history, honours (7 Leagues, 7 FA Cups, 5 League Cups, and a European Cup - 25 honours in total, 7th highest in England), 'size' etc, at any point. We've obviously been overtaken by some sides, in recent years - Citeh have sadly sportwashed to success - but realistically Villa 'should' be a top half side, competing for Europe, based on the history, the honours, the fanbase, the financial clout (owners worth $11bn for instance), etc. Sadly we've never been particularly 'fashionable' and the past decade has been getting on for some of the worst times in our history (not quite the worst, we ended up the Third Division for a bit on the 60s), but it's pretty undeniable that Villa are a team that 'should' be top 10.

 

Arent Villa considered a ‘big club’ due to their pre war record? Pretty sure they were one of the most successful clubs before the WW1 but not so much after that - I only know any of this as there was a big thing about it all this year with Spurs being formed in 1882 and one of the oldest clubs alongside Villa to have a long history of success with ours also not being all that recent 😂

[Chindie]

6 minutes ago, Shimmyhill said:

 

Arent Villa considered a ‘big club’ due to their pre war record? Pretty sure they were one of the most successful clubs before the WW1 but not so much after that - I only know any of this as there was a big thing about it all this year with Spurs being formed in 1882 and one of the oldest clubs alongside Villa to have a long history of success with ours also not being all that recent 😂

Yes, but as said the dates don't really matter. You can only compare the whole thing for everyone.

 

We also are founder members of both the league (which was literally our chairman's idea) and the Premier League, which gives us some weight. And obviously winning the biggest prize there is, the European Cup, carries a lot of weight.

[Shimmyhill]

4 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Yes, but as said the dates don't really matter. You can only compare the whole thing for everyone.

 

We also are founder members of both the league (which was literally our chairman's idea) and the Premier League, which gives us some weight. And obviously winning the biggest prize there is, the European Cup, carries a lot of weight.

 

The only measure that matters is winning the FA Cup as a non league team, anything else has been bought  

 

 

[Gabe]

54 minutes ago, Chindie said:

 

Villa are one of the biggest and most successful clubs in the league. We've been crap for the past decade, but historically we've been a top half club. It's very easy to draw an arbitrary line and say 'these are the dates that count' (I recall a few years ago arguing with a Spurs fan who looked to contend that the only time that matters aligns rather nicely with their cup winning sides of the 80s...) but the reality is you can only take into account the entire history, honours (7 Leagues, 7 FA Cups, 5 League Cups, and a European Cup - 25 honours in total, 7th highest in England), 'size' etc, at any point. We've obviously been overtaken by some sides, in recent years - Citeh have sadly sportwashed to success - but realistically Villa 'should' be a top half side, competing for Europe, based on the history, the honours, the fanbase, the financial clout (owners worth $11bn for instance), etc. Sadly we've never been particularly 'fashionable' and the past decade has been getting on for some of the worst times in our history (not quite the worst, we ended up the Third Division for a bit on the 60s), but it's pretty undeniable that Villa are a team that 'should' be top 10.

See, I wouldn't dispute they are a big club - but at the same time I don't think you can live on glories from 30/40+ years ago to say they 'deserve' to be top-half in the here and now. I mean, that's actually quite a ridiculous statement if you sit and think about it, what does winning a European Cup in 1982 have to do with their PL performances now? 

 

And I specifically only went back to 2010 because firstly that was the last time you were top-half and, as I say, even going back that far the game was different (not just because of money) so it doesn't bear much relevance to today.

 

You can certainly argue that based on the resources of the club and the fanbase that the club should be doing better, and I would agree with you there - but unless you are trying to say that the fact you've won trophies decades ago makes players now somehow play 'better', then I don't think you 'should' be anywhere other than a club currently needing to re-establish themselves as PL regulars.

[StumpyJohn]

5 of Villa's League championships were in the 19th century as were a few of their FA Cup wins.  They've won nothing for a generation.

 

I love the 'big club' argument.  There are at least 3 times as many sets of fans that consider their team to be 'big' than actual big teams currently or recently.  This applies to loads of other teams as well as to Villa. 

 

[Gabe]

17 minutes ago, StumpyJohn said:

5 of Villa's League championships were in the 19th century as were a few of their FA Cup wins.  They've won nothing for a generation.

 

I love the 'big club' argument.  There are at least 3 times as many sets of fans that consider their team to be 'big' than actual big teams currently or recently.  This applies to loads of other teams as well as to Villa. 

 

Yeah, there are different ways to slice the whole 'big club' argument, is it based on history, recent success (and then how recent is recent?), size of fanbase, a combination of some or all those things etc.

[Chindie]

15 minutes ago, Gabe said:

See, I wouldn't dispute they are a big club - but at the same time I don't think you can live on glories from 30/40+ years ago to say they 'deserve' to be top-half in the here and now. I mean, that's actually quite a ridiculous statement if you sit and think about it, what does winning a European Cup in 1982 have to do with their PL performances now? 

 

And I specifically only went back to 2010 because firstly that was the last time you were top-half and, as I say, even going back that far the game was different (not just because of money) so it doesn't bear much relevance to today.

 

You can certainly argue that based on the resources of the club and the fanbase that the club should be doing better, and I would agree with you there - but unless you are trying to say that the fact you've won trophies decades ago makes players now somehow play 'better', then I don't think you 'should' be anywhere other than a club currently needing to re-establish themselves as PL regulars.

 

There's a difference, IMO, between deserve and 'should'. We deserve what we have now. We've been crap for the past year to 18 months. As a result we're down the table. But we historically are better than this. The 'club' should be better, the team deserves what it has right now.

 

We're never going to agree that history is meaningless. Clubs have stature and prestige that is built on more than just the form of the immediate past. Arsenal didn't stop being a big club when they went to pot in recent history. Citeh historically haven't been a big club but their oil ridden nation state money has given them a decade of success, they've become a big club. Spurs having a good decade has increased their status. Manchester United going to pot for a number of years has taken the sheen off things but they'll need to go out of business to not be big, sadly. Leeds are a big club based largely on a single period of success and their single club in a decent sized city status, like Newcastle (though they've basically traded on being a single club city who had an exciting team for a bit, as they've got no success to speak of otherwise). And so on. There's a few big clubs. A small number build lasting success.

 

Villa should be doing better than we are. We've had a tough decade, and the 20 years before had a few years where we struggled before bouncing back, but generally throughout our history we're a to half team, and we 'should' get back to that and aim to do so. Maybe in the longer term we can build to more. I doubt it, the games broken, I'll be dead before we win a league again but that's also true for most of the league. It doesn't take away from the stature of the club.