Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: dave.woodhall on May 01, 2022, 04:22:22 PM
-
Dave Collett writes about the story of the season, so far.
https://heroesandvillains.info/2022/05/01/the-undermining-of-dean-smith/
-
Very good. Agree with every word.
-
Done.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
-
Good read. Spot on
-
The timing of the loss of his two assistants is still baffling.
-
The timing of the loss of his two assistants is still baffling.
We crucified Martin O'Neill for similar timing, yet these pair leaving barely raised an eyebrow.
-
The timing of the loss of his two assistants is still baffling.
I was hoping this might shine some light on that.
We will have to wait for Smiths memoirs I guess.
-
A very good read, thanks Dave
-
Thanks for this, glad to have read it. It's been a difficult year and not a lot has gone our way. I still feel like we were premature in sacking Smith - "credit in the bank" means nothing it would seem. Also the wider implication of seemingly changing direction in terms of "head coaches" who play roughly the same way to ensure continuity. Smith was probably my favourite manager since Gregory so it still rankles that he was fired. We had great days for what felt like the first time in years.
-
A cracking read. Thanks for posting.
-
The timing of the loss of his two assistants is still baffling.
We crucified Martin O'Neill for similar timing, yet these pair leaving barely raised an eyebrow.
The rumour is they were asked to leave by Sawiris.
Grealish has asked Terry what he should do about the Citeh offer and he said you've got to take the opportunity. Sawiris heard this, was non to happy and told Terry to do one. ROK complained, and he was told he could do one n'all.
Terry was prob at a stage where he felt he was ready for a management gig anyroad (though doesn't seem like clubs of any real standing agree).
-
Losing to Wolves was the turning point.None of our substitutions worked.Young ,Ramsey and Nakamba, for Cash,Luiz and Buendia ,completely lost the midfield when we were totally in control.Tuanzebe also proved to be weak at last ditch defending.
-
Great article, by the way.
-
Losing to Wolves was the turning point.None of our substitutions worked.Young ,Ramsey and Nakamba, for Cash,Luiz and Buendia ,completely lost the midfield when we were totally in control.Tuanzebe also proved to be weak at last ditch defending.
Tuanzebe?
-
Losing to Wolves was the turning point.None of our substitutions worked.Young ,Ramsey and Nakamba, for Cash,Luiz and Buendia ,completely lost the midfield when we were totally in control.Tuanzebe also proved to be weak at last ditch defending.
Tuanzebe?
The October game.
-
Great article.
Big sliding doors moment this summer - when our first choice plan went out the window with Joe.
As long as I live will thinkDean was given an impossible hand - shit summer with a bunch of half fit players.
My biggest hope is that we can better what Dean and Joe achieved - some amazing memories and personally would rather be mid table with dean and the romantic hope, then mid table with someone else
But would rather qualify for Europe or win a cup - so I guess that’s where I stand now that dreams dead
-
A good read.
I hadn’t really followed Deans career that closely, but remember feeling strangely emotional when he walked on the pitch pre his first match as our manager against Swansea. It felt like after the years of tosh under the likes of Mcleish, Lambert, Sherwood, Garde, Di Matteo, and Bruce, we finally had a proper Villa man at the helm.
There were some very dodgy times in that first season, when we couldn’t buy a win in January and February 2019. But the 10 game run, the momentum and sheer excitement of that, will live with me forever. There were very dodgy times in the first season back, combined with the excitement of getting to a first cup final in a few years, its debatable whether Dean would of got the tin tac if the pandemic hadn’t come along. Last season pre xmas was some of the best football I’ve seen down the villa since Big Rons days, with Grealish pulling all sorts of strings.
For me, the coaching staff going was significant as the article alludes to, maybe one day we’ll find out what went on. But Grealish going was Deans ultimate un doing though and i don’t think we as a club or the first team at least have recovered from it. Ive been watching the villa since the early 80s and he is one of the best I’ve seen down there. Not just that but him and Dean together as two villa fans represented everything that was good about the club from the promotion year onwards. Those days are sadly gone now, probably never to return, we just have to remember the good times and move on and hope bright times are ahead.
-
A good read.
I hadn’t really followed Deans career that closely, but remember feeling strangely emotional when he walked on the pitch pre his first match as our manager against Swansea. It felt like after the years of tosh under the likes of Mcleish, Lambert, Sherwood, Garde, Di Matteo, and Bruce, we finally had a proper Villa man at the helm.
There were some very dodgy times in that first season, when we couldn’t buy a win in January and February 2019. But the 10 game run, the momentum and sheer excitement of that, will live with me forever. There were very dodgy times in the first season back, combined with the excitement of getting to a first cup final in a few years, its debatable whether Dean would of got the tin tac if the pandemic hadn’t come along. Last season pre xmas was some of the best football I’ve seen down the villa since Big Rons days, with Grealish pulling all sorts of strings.
For me, the coaching staff going was significant as the article alludes to, maybe one day we’ll find out what went on. But Grealish going was Deans ultimate un doing though and i don’t think we as a club or the first team at least have recovered from it. Ive been watching the villa since the early 80s and he is one of the best I’ve seen down there. Not just that but him and Dean together as two villa fans represented everything that was good about the club from the promotion year onwards. Those days are sadly gone now, probably never to return, we just have to remember the good times and move on and hope bright times are ahead.
Good post mate.
-
I’m not sure there was anything more to O’Kelly going than was reported at the time, Dean wanted to freshen things up and bring in someone else and move him to the u23s, he didn’t fancy it, helped us out for a bit, then decided to retire.
-
Brilliant read. I agree with earlier posters pointing to the Wolves game as a turning point - I remember the sense of inevitability when they equalised across social media and so it proved. It was like watching the tank finally empty.
The coaching team exodus was almost exactly the opposite of the feeling when Shakespeare came in. At that time I thought, 'wow, that's a brilliant move' and so it proved to be, in its own limited mid-table way. When O'Kelly left, it was with a sense of creeping unease.
-
I think the timing of his departure was right for all concerned. Given this is shaping up to be a bit of anomalous season in terms of points needed to stay up I think we'd have been right in the relegation mix had he stayed longer. Leaving when he did enabled him to retain the goodwill of the fans (as rightly seen on Saturday) and walk into another job at a another relatively stable club where by all accounts he'll be given next season to build and try and come back up. If the board had waited till Jan and the slump continued then his managerial stock would be lower and his departure may well have been more acrimonious. Thanks for the memories Deano but no regrets/what ifs for me.
-
That’s a great read.
Life without Grealish had already been a thorn in Smith’s side, not surprising really as he was that good for us. Adding that situation to the rest of our doomed summer preparations really didn’t help Smith and the squad to prepare. This season does feel like we’ve never really got ourselves into any kind of shape or form.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Buendia was obviously his signing, he said as much.
Wanted Smith Rowe for the other side and Ward Prowse, we'll never know how realistic either were but ultimately we spent time bidding for both.
Bailey was probably pushed by Lange but felt logical at the time given we wanted to improve on likes of Trez and AEG as credible counter attack options.
Ings was the odd one out I suspect. Signing came out of nowhere and in the early weeks you could see DS not really having a clue how to get him into the team with Watkins.
Get the feeling DS would've been happy going into the season with just a younger understudy to Ollie who could also play out wide so would imagine he was overruled there.
With the coaches going certainly odd timing to both. If O'Kelly was leaving you'd have thought straight after last game in May 2021. Terry was always going to move on sooner or later in fairness.
-
A good read.
I hadn’t really followed Deans career that closely, but remember feeling strangely emotional when he walked on the pitch pre his first match as our manager against Swansea. It felt like after the years of tosh under the likes of Mcleish, Lambert, Sherwood, Garde, Di Matteo, and Bruce, we finally had a proper Villa man at the helm.
There were some very dodgy times in that first season, when we couldn’t buy a win in January and February 2019. But the 10 game run, the momentum and sheer excitement of that, will live with me forever. There were very dodgy times in the first season back, combined with the excitement of getting to a first cup final in a few years, its debatable whether Dean would of got the tin tac if the pandemic hadn’t come along. Last season pre xmas was some of the best football I’ve seen down the villa since Big Rons days, with Grealish pulling all sorts of strings.
For me, the coaching staff going was significant as the article alludes to, maybe one day we’ll find out what went on. But Grealish going was Deans ultimate un doing though and i don’t think we as a club or the first team at least have recovered from it. Ive been watching the villa since the early 80s and he is one of the best I’ve seen down there. Not just that but him and Dean together as two villa fans represented everything that was good about the club from the promotion year onwards. Those days are sadly gone now, probably never to return, we just have to remember the good times and move on and hope bright times are ahead.
Great post
-
The timing of the loss of his two assistants is still baffling.
We crucified Martin O'Neill for similar timing, yet these pair leaving barely raised an eyebrow.
The rumour is they were asked to leave by Sawiris.
Grealish has asked Terry what he should do about the Citeh offer and he said you've got to take the opportunity. Sawiris heard this, was non to happy and told Terry to do one. ROK complained, and he was told he could do one n'all.
Terry was prob at a stage where he felt he was ready for a management gig anyroad (though doesn't seem like clubs of any real standing agree).
I think I'd heard what Terry had said to Grealish about City, but not the rest.
-
Interesting if true. You tell 'em, Nas!
-
I think the timing of his departure was right for all concerned. Given this is shaping up to be a bit of anomalous season in terms of points needed to stay up I think we'd have been right in the relegation mix had he stayed longer. Leaving when he did enabled him to retain the goodwill of the fans (as rightly seen on Saturday) and walk into another job at a another relatively stable club where by all accounts he'll be given next season to build and try and come back up. If the board had waited till Jan and the slump continued then his managerial stock would be lower and his departure may well have been more acrimonious. Thanks for the memories Deano but no regrets/what ifs for me.
I think you are right Gary. On the journey home from Southampton away I felt he should have another couple of games to turn things aorund as the team were visibly busting a gut for him, but a couple of mates were saying it was time for him to go before he faced the horror of being booed at Vila Park. Our formation in the last 15 minutes at Southampton reminded me of the semi final at home to Bradford and was desperate.
Saturday was a great day of appreciation for his efforts and both Deano and fans seemed genuinely pleased to see each other,so all told I am glad it ended how it did.
Since Grealish and Deano have gone I don't feel the team and squad has the same soul any more though. That genuine, deep connection with the fans isn't quite there.
-
On reading the thread title, I keep thinking it's a sequel to The Taking of Pelham 123.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Buendia was obviously his signing, he said as much.
Wanted Smith Rowe for the other side and Ward Prowse, we'll never know how realistic either were but ultimately we spent time bidding for both.
Bailey was probably pushed by Lange but felt logical at the time given we wanted to improve on likes of Trez and AEG as credible counter attack options.
Ings was the odd one out I suspect. Signing came out of nowhere and in the early weeks you could see DS not really having a clue how to get him into the team with Watkins.
Get the feeling DS would've been happy going into the season with just a younger understudy to Ollie who could also play out wide so would imagine he was overruled there.
With the coaches going certainly odd timing to both. If O'Kelly was leaving you'd have thought straight after last game in May 2021. Terry was always going to move on sooner or later in fairness.
Yeah, I think Buendia makes perfect sense as a right-sided complement to Joe. I'd be inclined to think that maybe we still held up some hope of keeping him at that stage.
Bailey seems like a player who'd have been on our (Lange's?) radar, as you'd said he'd offer a tangible upgrade on Trez/AEG. Maybe Jack leaving was the catalyst for the move, but he does/did seem a logical signing.
Ings I think was a panic buy. We'd put so much in to Grealish as the front man of AVFC that losing him was akin to losing the club's identity (to the outside world). He was a bit like Michael Jordan, where even people with no interest in basketball would recognise him, and therefore buy various tat (trainers, shirts, basketballs, whatever) with his name on.
We went out and got the highest profile signing available, which was Danny Ings, in an attempt to "replace" Jack as the face of the club.
I'm also convinced (maybe incorrectly) that it's also a big factor in Gerrard coming to the club - he's a recognisable face and will, whether we like the idea or not, raise the profile of the club outside of our traditional catchment area. Coutinho fits in the same bracket, he'll reach people who have a less 'tribal' interest in football than we do.
-
I'm convinced Gerrard's profile was the biggest factor in him getting the job.
-
On reading the thread title, I keep thinking it's a sequel to The Taking of Pelham 123.
Gezundheit!
-
The timing of the loss of his two assistants is still baffling.
I was hoping this might shine some light on that.
We will have to wait for Smiths memoirs I guess.
He’s to nice a bloke to start that.
I know the rumours going around at the time were saying Terry and O’Kelly encouraged Jack to leave, the owners were well p*ssed off and got rid.
-
O'Kelly was given the U23s coaching role, he didn't want it so walked.
-
I'm convinced Gerrard's profile was the biggest factor in him getting the job.
Absolutely. Once again as in business world presentation won over substance.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Buendia was obviously his signing, he said as much.
Wanted Smith Rowe for the other side and Ward Prowse, we'll never know how realistic either were but ultimately we spent time bidding for both.
Bailey was probably pushed by Lange but felt logical at the time given we wanted to improve on likes of Trez and AEG as credible counter attack options.
Ings was the odd one out I suspect. Signing came out of nowhere and in the early weeks you could see DS not really having a clue how to get him into the team with Watkins.
Get the feeling DS would've been happy going into the season with just a younger understudy to Ollie who could also play out wide so would imagine he was overruled there.
With the coaches going certainly odd timing to both. If O'Kelly was leaving you'd have thought straight after last game in May 2021. Terry was always going to move on sooner or later in fairness.
Yeah, I think Buendia makes perfect sense as a right-sided complement to Joe. I'd be inclined to think that maybe we still held up some hope of keeping him at that stage.
Bailey seems like a player who'd have been on our (Lange's?) radar, as you'd said he'd offer a tangible upgrade on Trez/AEG. Maybe Jack leaving was the catalyst for the move, but he does/did seem a logical signing.
Ings I think was a panic buy. We'd put so much in to Grealish as the front man of AVFC that losing him was akin to losing the club's identity (to the outside world). He was a bit like Michael Jordan, where even people with no interest in basketball would recognise him, and therefore buy various tat (trainers, shirts, basketballs, whatever) with his name on.
We went out and got the highest profile signing available, which was Danny Ings, in an attempt to "replace" Jack as the face of the club.
I'm also convinced (maybe incorrectly) that it's also a big factor in Gerrard coming to the club - he's a recognisable face and will, whether we like the idea or not, raise the profile of the club outside of our traditional catchment area. Coutinho fits in the same bracket, he'll reach people who have a less 'tribal' interest in football than we do.
Yeah I think commercially being Steven Gerrards Aston Villa works. Like wise with Ohil - the club is clearly hugely ambitious - It’s not though the same as there is no story behind it.
-
I'm convinced Gerrard's profile was the biggest factor in him getting the job.
It's difficult to think of anything else it could have been.
-
Brilliant read. I agree with earlier posters pointing to the Wolves game as a turning point - I remember the sense of inevitability when they equalised across social media and so it proved. It was like watching the tank finally empty.
The coaching team exodus was almost exactly the opposite of the feeling when Shakespeare came in. At that time I thought, 'wow, that's a brilliant move' and so it proved to be, in its own limited mid-table way. When O'Kelly left, it was with a sense of creeping unease.
Yeah agree - everything about this summer had a sense of being a bit rushed. Think there is more to what happened this summer and maybe one we’ll know
-
Interesting if true. You tell 'em, Nas!
But if he was made to leave wouldn’t we sack him rather than him leaving with best wishes?
-
I'm convinced Gerrard's profile was the biggest factor in him getting the job.
I’m sure it had a lot to do with it. And as we all probably concede players like Coutinho aren’t rolling in without someone of that level of reputation and connection. But it’s not make it like Gerrard did a Dwight Yorke; simply wanted a job based on who he was. He had coached at Liverpool and managed at Rangers and stepped up to a mid table PL team. Not the wildest of leaps. Not like we appointed him as a side top 6 and consistently in European competition.
-
I'm convinced Gerrard's profile was the biggest factor in him getting the job.
I’m sure it had a lot to do with it. And as we all probably concede players like Coutinho aren’t rolling in without someone of that level of reputation and connection. But it’s not make it like Gerrard did a Dwight Yorke; simply wanted a job based on who he was. He had coached at Liverpool and managed at Rangers and stepped up to a mid table PL team. Not the wildest of leaps. Not like we appointed him as a side top 6 and consistently in European competition.
Yeah exactly is was a calculated gamble and it with that come greater risks and reward
TBF The risk he’s handled ok- I don’t think he’ll get us relegated this season or next and he is attracting players we wouldn’t have otherwise
-
I'm convinced Gerrard's profile was the biggest factor in him getting the job.
I’m sure it had a lot to do with it. And as we all probably concede players like Coutinho aren’t rolling in without someone of that level of reputation and connection. But it’s not make it like Gerrard did a Dwight Yorke; simply wanted a job based on who he was. He had coached at Liverpool and managed at Rangers and stepped up to a mid table PL team. Not the wildest of leaps. Not like we appointed him as a side top 6 and consistently in European competition.
His coaching team would have also played a big part in him getting the job though until now I'm struggling to see where their reputation comes from. The same can be said of Shakespeare, Craig. At the time I was really excited with the recruitment but as the season progressed I forgot about him.
-
I'm convinced Gerrard's profile was the biggest factor in him getting the job.
I’m sure it had a lot to do with it. And as we all probably concede players like Coutinho aren’t rolling in without someone of that level of reputation and connection. But it’s not make it like Gerrard did a Dwight Yorke; simply wanted a job based on who he was. He had coached at Liverpool and managed at Rangers and stepped up to a mid table PL team. Not the wildest of leaps. Not like we appointed him as a side top 6 and consistently in European competition.
His coaching team would have also played a big part in him getting the job though until now I'm struggling to see where their reputation comes from. The same can be said of Shakespeare, Craig. At the time I was really excited with the recruitment but as the season progressed I forgot about him.
To be fair last season I thought we saw some real improvements - even on the bad runs we managers to grind out results against Leeds for example - and players like Targett and AEG seemed much improved - Matt in particular was excellent last season
-
It was a crazy season, the first part you started to really dream as we were a joy to watch. Then January arrived and we looked half the team we were. You mentioned the away win at Leeds but a few days later in early March we lost to Sheff Utd to record their first win of the season.
Agree about Targett, he was pure class all season, AEG takes a mean penalty I'll give him that and yes we improved on the previous season but that wasn't difficult to do considering how poor we were after a great start. A lot has been said by Dean's former clubs and his 'feast or famine' and they're mainly right. Still love him though.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Dean Smith.
-
The truth around Terry i imagine would be well known in football circles and would be taken into consideration by any future employer, could be why he hasn't got a gig anywhere.
Deans downfall began when he couldn't field a successful side whenever Grealish was out, other clubs had missed their best player and still won games but Dean failed whenever he was out and when it dragged into many weeks the losses mounted up.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Dean Smith.
I think the faults are at multiple doors brontebilly. The manager being part of the equation.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Dean Smith.
I think the faults are at multiple doors brontebilly. The manager being part of the equation.
I would be more inclined to blame Purslow, the dicking around at the Lensbury Club, the absence of any leadership during the Jack saga, followed by the panic buys.
-
The bids we put in for Smith-Rowe and Ward-Prowse were seen as insultingly low - would it have been Lange who decided that sort of thing? I agree we didn't really have a cutting edge without Grealish but we were only in our first season up. With some time Smith could potentially have re-shaped and bolstered the squad. That's easy to say in retrospect, I know, but we didn't give it any time to develop either way. Conversely, I think we were promoted ahead of schedule and the extra transfer windows may have been a help in terms of shaping the squad. As it was, we came up a touch undercooked.
I really miss the talk of having a plan and a pathway for each player, be they youth graduate or incoming signing. It felt for a time like we could finally think about getting the 'Prepared' banner back on the badge.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Dean Smith.
I think the faults are at multiple doors brontebilly. The manager being part of the equation.
Deano always said he had the final say on all signings, including Ings. He, and no one else, was fully responsible for the shambles of a pre season. At best the situation with the coaching staff was mismanaged but I think too much is made of Terry/ROK leaving but the timing was very odd. Grealish leaving, Purslow said the club were well prepared for given that he nearly went the previous summer. The reality is Smith struggled in two divisions to form any kind of identity in the team without Grealish, that's undeniable. What worried me at the time really was Spurs away last season when Grealish came back from injury. Playing on one leg he was very good but likes of McGinn and Watkins were transformed from playing terribly for weeks to stars. Sure Grealish was/is a top player but how can one player drastically change that level of performance in others? How come Smith couldn't get a tune out of them at all without Grealish?
It's funny as I think our best performance of this season was when Smith played a scratch team at Chelsea in the cup. Everyone played well, Archer, Sanson etc Winning at Old Trafford, though as the season showed against an average Man United team, was another seemingly big step forward post Grealish. It's amazing how quickly it fell apart soon after. Wolves was a killer defeat but the Arsenal performance and Smith's reaction afterwards suggested his role was in jeopardy. The first half at Southampton worse again. Smith lost the plot really trying to accommodate Ings with a bench full of wingers and those damn long throws...
Gerrard has stabilised things a bit but we are still struggling for that post Grealish identity for me.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Dean Smith.
I think the faults are at multiple doors brontebilly. The manager being part of the equation.
Deano always said he had the final say on all signings, including Ings. He, and no one else, was fully responsible for the shambles of a pre season. At best the situation with the coaching staff was mismanaged but I think too much is made of Terry/ROK leaving but the timing was very odd. Grealish leaving, Purslow said the club were well prepared for given that he nearly went the previous summer. The reality is Smith struggled in two divisions to form any kind of identity in the team without Grealish, that's undeniable. What worried me at the time really was Spurs away last season when Grealish came back from injury. Playing on one leg he was very good but likes of McGinn and Watkins were transformed from playing terribly for weeks to stars. Sure Grealish was/is a top player but how can one player drastically change that level of performance in others? How come Smith couldn't get a tune out of them at all without Grealish?
It's funny as I think our best performance of this season was when Smith played a scratch team at Chelsea in the cup. Everyone played well, Archer, Sanson etc Winning at Old Trafford, though as the season showed against an average Man United team, was another seemingly big step forward post Grealish. It's amazing how quickly it fell apart soon after. Wolves was a killer defeat but the Arsenal performance and Smith's reaction afterwards suggested his role was in jeopardy. The first half at Southampton worse again. Smith lost the plot really trying to accommodate Ings with a bench full of wingers and those damn long throws...
Gerrard has stabilised things a bit but we are still struggling for that post Grealish identity for me.
Pre-season last summer was disrupted by:
* Covid impacting friendlies, including cancellations by other clubs on Villa last minute.
* The Joe saga, including the deadline set by the club to match the release clause – a deal which concluded early August.
* It’s subsequent impact on potentially rushed replacements for him – players which would not have been part of Villa’s disrupted pre-season until late.
* Some players returning from international duty after playing tournament football (Martinez, Mings, Joe, McGinn, D.Luiz – all starters for Villa). 4 of these were fairly late for obvious reasons.
* ROK and Terry leaving fairly last minute before the season started.
The only element of the above that could be remotely laid at Smith’s door is on ROK and Terry leaving at his behest or on their own accord after being side-lined by Smith. Terry was added to his coaching staff by the club in the first place. ROK had worked with Smith since 2012. Other theories are available as to why both left. So to say Smith was solely responsible for the disrupted pre-season is unjustified.
Smith’s position at Villa was Head Coach working with a Director of Football (Suso followed by Lange). Recruitment within this structure is not as transparent as in the distant past where the manager was all controlling. It's now data driven. So Smith’s responsibilities/involvement are not clear here. For a successful model of this kind, the manager is supposed to be superfluous- players are signed that are right for the club and its’ working model – not what the manager or Head Coach at the time necessarily wants, although as we’ve seen with Coutinho, this was clearly someone Gerrard wanted and could help with signing. Sanson under Smith, perhaps less so. For Smith to say he didn’t have final say on all players recruited would be to undermine himself and offer hostages to fortune -even if it was a potential reality.
Tactically, did Smith change the system this season from what he’s broadly used previously because 2 of his 3 wingers (Bailey and Traore) were not fit/injured for the majority of his time at the club this season? It may also have been a method to try and force the other players to take more responsibility. We’ve seen that the side has struggled without Joe but this has largely continued post Smith apart from a few sparks. And Smith didn’t have Coutinho to use. I thought that Watkins & Ings couldn’t work but the last couple of months has shown that isn’t true.
With regard Joe, the focus is almost always on how he was good for Villa – less so on how good Villa were for him. Smith got the best out of him. Last time I checked, he’s had 1 goal and 1 assist in the league for a side who have scored 84 league goals this season so far. He didn’t even start the recent vital games against Liverpool, A.Madrid or Real Madrid.
So I do think that fault lies beyond just Smith -just as our recent successes (10 game winning run, cup final, promotion, staying up, first half of last season) aren't solely his alone. It's also why there’s been no major upward trajectory thus far since he left. It's the classic case of 'Success has many fathers but failure is an orphan.'
-
Good post Leon, I’d have made similar general points, but you’ve backed it up with the details. Smith was unlucky with how the pre-season panned out, I think. But you and others are correct, he had no plan B when Grealish wasn’t playing or after he was sold. Not an easy problem to fix though and Gerrard has still struggled with it also, for some of the same reasons as Deano did.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Dean Smith.
I think the faults are at multiple doors brontebilly. The manager being part of the equation.
Deano always said he had the final say on all signings, including Ings. He, and no one else, was fully responsible for the shambles of a pre season. At best the situation with the coaching staff was mismanaged but I think too much is made of Terry/ROK leaving but the timing was very odd. Grealish leaving, Purslow said the club were well prepared for given that he nearly went the previous summer. The reality is Smith struggled in two divisions to form any kind of identity in the team without Grealish, that's undeniable. What worried me at the time really was Spurs away last season when Grealish came back from injury. Playing on one leg he was very good but likes of McGinn and Watkins were transformed from playing terribly for weeks to stars. Sure Grealish was/is a top player but how can one player drastically change that level of performance in others? How come Smith couldn't get a tune out of them at all without Grealish?
It's funny as I think our best performance of this season was when Smith played a scratch team at Chelsea in the cup. Everyone played well, Archer, Sanson etc Winning at Old Trafford, though as the season showed against an average Man United team, was another seemingly big step forward post Grealish. It's amazing how quickly it fell apart soon after. Wolves was a killer defeat but the Arsenal performance and Smith's reaction afterwards suggested his role was in jeopardy. The first half at Southampton worse again. Smith lost the plot really trying to accommodate Ings with a bench full of wingers and those damn long throws...
Gerrard has stabilised things a bit but we are still struggling for that post Grealish identity for me.
Pre-season last summer was disrupted by:
* Covid impacting friendlies, including cancellations by other clubs on Villa last minute.
* The Joe saga, including the deadline set by the club to match the release clause – a deal which concluded early August.
* It’s subsequent impact on potentially rushed replacements for him – players which would not have been part of Villa’s disrupted pre-season until late.
* Some players returning from international duty after playing tournament football (Martinez, Mings, Joe, McGinn, D.Luiz – all starters for Villa). 4 of these were fairly late for obvious reasons.
* ROK and Terry leaving fairly last minute before the season started.
The only element of the above that could be remotely laid at Smith’s door is on ROK and Terry leaving at his behest or on their own accord after being side-lined by Smith. Terry was added to his coaching staff by the club in the first place. ROK had worked with Smith since 2012. Other theories are available as to why both left. So to say Smith was solely responsible for the disrupted pre-season is unjustified.
Smith’s position at Villa was Head Coach working with a Director of Football (Suso followed by Lange). Recruitment within this structure is not as transparent as in the distant past where the manager was all controlling. It's now data driven. So Smith’s responsibilities/involvement are not clear here. For a successful model of this kind, the manager is supposed to be superfluous- players are signed that are right for the club and its’ working model – not what the manager or Head Coach at the time necessarily wants, although as we’ve seen with Coutinho, this was clearly someone Gerrard wanted and could help with signing. Sanson under Smith, perhaps less so. For Smith to say he didn’t have final say on all players recruited would be to undermine himself and offer hostages to fortune -even if it was a potential reality.
Tactically, did Smith change the system this season from what he’s broadly used previously because 2 of his 3 wingers (Bailey and Traore) were not fit/injured for the majority of his time at the club this season? It may also have been a method to try and force the other players to take more responsibility. We’ve seen that the side has struggled without Joe but this has largely continued post Smith apart from a few sparks. And Smith didn’t have Coutinho to use. I thought that Watkins & Ings couldn’t work but the last couple of months has shown that isn’t true.
With regard Joe, the focus is almost always on how he was good for Villa – less so on how good Villa were for him. Smith got the best out of him. Last time I checked, he’s had 1 goal and 1 assist in the league for a side who have scored 84 league goals this season so far. He didn’t even start the recent vital games against Liverpool, A.Madrid or Real Madrid.
So I do think that fault lies beyond just Smith -just as our recent successes (10 game winning run, cup final, promotion, staying up, first half of last season) aren't solely his alone. It's also why there’s been no major upward trajectory thus far since he left. It's the classic case of 'Success has many fathers but failure is an orphan.'
Excellent post Leon
-
Some good points there, and one touches on something I've long thought. For all the talk that Smith couldn't do anything without Ratboy, nobody seems to say the reverse. Until Smiffy arrived, the comparisons were with Lee Hendrie. Twelve months later it was Gordon Cowans.
-
Exactly. If bench boy was all that how come it took us 3 seasons to get out of the Championship. He contributed of course, but Smith unlike his predecessors also contributed hugely as did Mings, Tammy etc.
-
Some good points there, and one touches on something I've long thought. For all the talk that Smith couldn't do anything without Ratboy, nobody seems to say the reverse. Until Smiffy arrived, the comparisons were with Lee Hendrie. Twelve months later it was Gordon Cowans.
It's Steve Hodge now.
-
What mostly pisses me off is the idea that without him we'd be bottom half of the Championship. Top goalscorer was Tammy Abraham, player of the year John McGinn, man of the match in the final McGinn.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Dean Smith.
I think the faults are at multiple doors brontebilly. The manager being part of the equation.
Deano always said he had the final say on all signings, including Ings. He, and no one else, was fully responsible for the shambles of a pre season. At best the situation with the coaching staff was mismanaged but I think too much is made of Terry/ROK leaving but the timing was very odd. Grealish leaving, Purslow said the club were well prepared for given that he nearly went the previous summer. The reality is Smith struggled in two divisions to form any kind of identity in the team without Grealish, that's undeniable. What worried me at the time really was Spurs away last season when Grealish came back from injury. Playing on one leg he was very good but likes of McGinn and Watkins were transformed from playing terribly for weeks to stars. Sure Grealish was/is a top player but how can one player drastically change that level of performance in others? How come Smith couldn't get a tune out of them at all without Grealish?
It's funny as I think our best performance of this season was when Smith played a scratch team at Chelsea in the cup. Everyone played well, Archer, Sanson etc Winning at Old Trafford, though as the season showed against an average Man United team, was another seemingly big step forward post Grealish. It's amazing how quickly it fell apart soon after. Wolves was a killer defeat but the Arsenal performance and Smith's reaction afterwards suggested his role was in jeopardy. The first half at Southampton worse again. Smith lost the plot really trying to accommodate Ings with a bench full of wingers and those damn long throws...
Gerrard has stabilised things a bit but we are still struggling for that post Grealish identity for me.
Pre-season last summer was disrupted by:
* Covid impacting friendlies, including cancellations by other clubs on Villa last minute.
* The Joe saga, including the deadline set by the club to match the release clause – a deal which concluded early August.
* It’s subsequent impact on potentially rushed replacements for him – players which would not have been part of Villa’s disrupted pre-season until late.
* Some players returning from international duty after playing tournament football (Martinez, Mings, Joe, McGinn, D.Luiz – all starters for Villa). 4 of these were fairly late for obvious reasons.
* ROK and Terry leaving fairly last minute before the season started.
The only element of the above that could be remotely laid at Smith’s door is on ROK and Terry leaving at his behest or on their own accord after being side-lined by Smith. Terry was added to his coaching staff by the club in the first place. ROK had worked with Smith since 2012. Other theories are available as to why both left. So to say Smith was solely responsible for the disrupted pre-season is unjustified.
Smith’s position at Villa was Head Coach working with a Director of Football (Suso followed by Lange). Recruitment within this structure is not as transparent as in the distant past where the manager was all controlling. It's now data driven. So Smith’s responsibilities/involvement are not clear here. For a successful model of this kind, the manager is supposed to be superfluous- players are signed that are right for the club and its’ working model – not what the manager or Head Coach at the time necessarily wants, although as we’ve seen with Coutinho, this was clearly someone Gerrard wanted and could help with signing. Sanson under Smith, perhaps less so. For Smith to say he didn’t have final say on all players recruited would be to undermine himself and offer hostages to fortune -even if it was a potential reality.
Tactically, did Smith change the system this season from what he’s broadly used previously because 2 of his 3 wingers (Bailey and Traore) were not fit/injured for the majority of his time at the club this season? It may also have been a method to try and force the other players to take more responsibility. We’ve seen that the side has struggled without Joe but this has largely continued post Smith apart from a few sparks. And Smith didn’t have Coutinho to use. I thought that Watkins & Ings couldn’t work but the last couple of months has shown that isn’t true.
With regard Joe, the focus is almost always on how he was good for Villa – less so on how good Villa were for him. Smith got the best out of him. Last time I checked, he’s had 1 goal and 1 assist in the league for a side who have scored 84 league goals this season so far. He didn’t even start the recent vital games against Liverpool, A.Madrid or Real Madrid.
So I do think that fault lies beyond just Smith -just as our recent successes (10 game winning run, cup final, promotion, staying up, first half of last season) aren't solely his alone. It's also why there’s been no major upward trajectory thus far since he left. It's the classic case of 'Success has many fathers but failure is an orphan.'
Agreed that Smith did a superb job with Grealish. Giving him the captaincy was a master stroke and maybe more importantly moving him to the left wing when both the team and Grealish were struggling when we first came up. Deano deserves a lot of credit for the club banking 100m last summer.
I don't see any sign that Ings/Watkins can work really. We aren't lucky enough to play Norwich every week. Both good players in their own right but it was just a poor signing and displayed muddled thinking in trying to replace Grealish. I'll be stunned if Ings is still with us starting next season.
-
We still do not know who was responsible for the shit show of a summer for which Smith ultimately paid the price with his job.
Dean Smith.
I think the faults are at multiple doors brontebilly. The manager being part of the equation.
Deano always said he had the final say on all signings, including Ings. He, and no one else, was fully responsible for the shambles of a pre season. At best the situation with the coaching staff was mismanaged but I think too much is made of Terry/ROK leaving but the timing was very odd. Grealish leaving, Purslow said the club were well prepared for given that he nearly went the previous summer. The reality is Smith struggled in two divisions to form any kind of identity in the team without Grealish, that's undeniable. What worried me at the time really was Spurs away last season when Grealish came back from injury. Playing on one leg he was very good but likes of McGinn and Watkins were transformed from playing terribly for weeks to stars. Sure Grealish was/is a top player but how can one player drastically change that level of performance in others? How come Smith couldn't get a tune out of them at all without Grealish?
It's funny as I think our best performance of this season was when Smith played a scratch team at Chelsea in the cup. Everyone played well, Archer, Sanson etc Winning at Old Trafford, though as the season showed against an average Man United team, was another seemingly big step forward post Grealish. It's amazing how quickly it fell apart soon after. Wolves was a killer defeat but the Arsenal performance and Smith's reaction afterwards suggested his role was in jeopardy. The first half at Southampton worse again. Smith lost the plot really trying to accommodate Ings with a bench full of wingers and those damn long throws...
Gerrard has stabilised things a bit but we are still struggling for that post Grealish identity for me.
Pre-season last summer was disrupted by:
* Covid impacting friendlies, including cancellations by other clubs on Villa last minute.
* The Joe saga, including the deadline set by the club to match the release clause – a deal which concluded early August.
* It’s subsequent impact on potentially rushed replacements for him – players which would not have been part of Villa’s disrupted pre-season until late.
* Some players returning from international duty after playing tournament football (Martinez, Mings, Joe, McGinn, D.Luiz – all starters for Villa). 4 of these were fairly late for obvious reasons.
* ROK and Terry leaving fairly last minute before the season started.
The only element of the above that could be remotely laid at Smith’s door is on ROK and Terry leaving at his behest or on their own accord after being side-lined by Smith. Terry was added to his coaching staff by the club in the first place. ROK had worked with Smith since 2012. Other theories are available as to why both left. So to say Smith was solely responsible for the disrupted pre-season is unjustified.
Smith’s position at Villa was Head Coach working with a Director of Football (Suso followed by Lange). Recruitment within this structure is not as transparent as in the distant past where the manager was all controlling. It's now data driven. So Smith’s responsibilities/involvement are not clear here. For a successful model of this kind, the manager is supposed to be superfluous- players are signed that are right for the club and its’ working model – not what the manager or Head Coach at the time necessarily wants, although as we’ve seen with Coutinho, this was clearly someone Gerrard wanted and could help with signing. Sanson under Smith, perhaps less so. For Smith to say he didn’t have final say on all players recruited would be to undermine himself and offer hostages to fortune -even if it was a potential reality.
Tactically, did Smith change the system this season from what he’s broadly used previously because 2 of his 3 wingers (Bailey and Traore) were not fit/injured for the majority of his time at the club this season? It may also have been a method to try and force the other players to take more responsibility. We’ve seen that the side has struggled without Joe but this has largely continued post Smith apart from a few sparks. And Smith didn’t have Coutinho to use. I thought that Watkins & Ings couldn’t work but the last couple of months has shown that isn’t true.
With regard Joe, the focus is almost always on how he was good for Villa – less so on how good Villa were for him. Smith got the best out of him. Last time I checked, he’s had 1 goal and 1 assist in the league for a side who have scored 84 league goals this season so far. He didn’t even start the recent vital games against Liverpool, A.Madrid or Real Madrid.
So I do think that fault lies beyond just Smith -just as our recent successes (10 game winning run, cup final, promotion, staying up, first half of last season) aren't solely his alone. It's also why there’s been no major upward trajectory thus far since he left. It's the classic case of 'Success has many fathers but failure is an orphan.'
Agreed that Smith did a superb job with Grealish. Giving him the captaincy was a master stroke and maybe more importantly moving him to the left wing when both the team and Grealish were struggling when we first came up. Deano deserves a lot of credit for the club banking 100m last summer.
I don't see any sign that Ings/Watkins can work really. We aren't lucky enough to play Norwich every week. Both good players in their own right but it was just a poor signing and displayed muddled thinking in trying to replace Grealish. I'll be stunned if Ings is still with us starting next season.
The games against Leeds and Southampton also gave some glimpses of a partnership. I like Ings link up play and I think Coutinho quite likes playing with him. Ollie is trying to improve this aspect of his game which is needed in a partnership but he does have that tendency of getting his head down, doing a step over and shooting against someone's legs when there are better options available if he got his head up. 12 goal contributions from Ings (6 goals, 6 assists) could be better, especially for the money but I think he's only started 19 games and so it isn't the worst by any means. As we're not going to get much by way of a fee back for him, he's probably worth keeping. He's been playing with the other guys now for a while so they should have better understanding of each other. Here's hoping.
-
Thanks Dave, great article, tackled all the key issues, as the subsequent lively debate shows. Not unusually for the Villa, the jury is still out on if there are any winners in all of this. Another summer of big changes is just around the corner now too.
-
Re Targett - his coaching under Smith/Terry/ROK/Shakespeare etc. made a hitherto passive, physically weak full back who lived up to his name as being targeted by the opposition in every game (diagonals from the opposition to his side always made me wince) into a fit, strong and positionally excellent full-back after project restart.
Fair enough Gerrard doesn't rate him but there's no doubt the coaching Matt has received at Villa has added to his value enormously.
I can't fathom the reports that a pre-agreed fee with Newcastle is for less than/on a par with what we paid Southampton. He's still far off 30 so can't be an age thing. We should be pushing for £20m+ especially if it's from their laden pockets.
-
Re Targett - his coaching under Smith/Terry/ROK/Shakespeare etc. made a hitherto passive, physically weak full back who lived up to his name as being targeted by the opposition in every game (diagonals from the opposition to his side always made me wince) into a fit, strong and positionally excellent full-back after project restart.
Fair enough Gerrard doesn't rate him but there's no doubt the coaching Matt has received at Villa has added to his value enormously.
I can't fathom the reports that a pre-agreed fee with Newcastle is for less than/on a par with what we paid Southampton. He's still far off 30 so can't be an age thing. We should be pushing for £20m+ especially if it's from their laden pockets.
I agree, but I think the problem with selling players that clearly arent in your plans is you need to take the money when its there.
For example, AEG was probably worth 15m last summer, now well be giving him away
-
Re Targett - his coaching under Smith/Terry/ROK/Shakespeare etc. made a hitherto passive, physically weak full back who lived up to his name as being targeted by the opposition in every game (diagonals from the opposition to his side always made me wince) into a fit, strong and positionally excellent full-back after project restart.
Fair enough Gerrard doesn't rate him but there's no doubt the coaching Matt has received at Villa has added to his value enormously.
I can't fathom the reports that a pre-agreed fee with Newcastle is for less than/on a par with what we paid Southampton. He's still far off 30 so can't be an age thing. We should be pushing for £20m+ especially if it's from their laden pockets.
I agree, but I think the problem with selling players that clearly arent in your plans is you need to take the money when its there.
For example, AEG was probably worth 15m last summer, now well be giving him away
This is the downside of loan deals for precisely that reason. If the club had agreed a set fee for Targett prior to his loan that would seem short sighted. Look at how Bournemouth got a major fee for Mings following his loan to us.